Posted on 06/28/2018 8:23:52 AM PDT by SpeedyInTexas
Note the weasel-phrase.
He will oppose the pick for reasons OTHER than tariffs, like "The nominee wants to follow the Constitution too closely" or "The nominee believes in the Second Amendment" or "The nominee believes in national borders."
rubbish - he will indeed stick Trump every chance he gets
Max Tani
Max Tani
@maxwelltani
Jeff Flake was absent for a series of senate votes on Monday. Instead, he was in New York meeting privately with the heads of MSNBC and (on Tuesday) CNN.
Jeff Flake Shopping Around for a Possible Post-Senate Cable News Gig
thedailybeast.com
10:42 AM · Jun 28, 2018
238
Retweets
225
Likes
Max Tani
Max Tani
@maxwelltani
·
55m
Replying to @maxwelltani
When @desiderioDC asked Flake if he was meeting with the network heads about a cable news gig, Flake laughed and said “That’s down the road—that’s six months.”
Jeff Flake Shopping Around for a Possible Post-Senate Cable News Gig
thedailybeast.com
Manchin is feeling it. He needs Trump’s help to win. Manchin is a fella that’s likely asking himself what it was again the Democrat party ever did for him (beside union support, which is trumped (no pun intended) by actual mining jobs.
Also note, all three of the Democrats who voted for Gorsuch have released statements suggesting they are not on board with Schumer’s “Biden Rule” idea.
bookmark
Murkowski owes a BIG favor because the Rs opened Anwar. If she opposes her constituents will not be happy.
“I don’t know how this man fooled the Arizonans into voting for him.”
He’s a Mormon, there is a substantial Mormon population in AZ, and they all turn out and vote. Particularly when the candidate “is one of them!” Ditto in Utah, Nevada, and Idaho. Las Vegas may be an “adult entertainment center,” but it was originally a Mormon settlement.
I don’t trust him.
SC pick is too historically important, GOP will vote together.
That’s not what he said. He won’t oppose the pick based on his opposition to the tariffs. He’ll oppose it because he’s still auditioning for a gig on MSNBC.
Then they must be positive that their constituents would vote against abortion in their states. Because correct me if I’m wrong, if the the Supreme Court revisited and struck down Roe vs Wade, it would then go to each state to determine legality of abortion in it. A states right issue, as it should have been to begin with.
By saying one thing, then doing another?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.