Patrick ‘Leaky Leahy’, Democrat Senator and ranking
member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, predicted this past weekend that if
Republicans block Barry “Almighty’s” nomination to replace the late Supreme
Court Justice Antonin Scalia, voters will give Democrats a majority in the
Senate in the next election. I hate to
be the one to spoil it for anyone, but the Republicans are going to lose the
Senate regardless of whether or not they hold firm against a Barry
nomination. However, the size of their
loss does still hang in the balance.
‘Leaky’ made his comment the day after the death of
Scalia during an appearance with Dana Bash on CNN’s “State of the Union”
show. He said, “I think what we ought to
do is nominate somebody.” Of course he
does, but I have a difficult time believing that if we had a Republican in the
White House his position on the matter would be quite different. I reference the position his Senate
colleague, Chuckie Schumer, took in 2007 when it was George W. Bush who was
then sitting in the Oval Office. And I
think by now we’ve all seen that video!
‘Leaky’ went on to say, “If the Republican
leadership refuses to even hold a hearing, I think that is going to guarantee
they lose control of the Senate, because I don't think the American people will
stand for that.” And he went on to say, “They want us to do our job.” And then added, “They can see us doing
recess after recess, time off all year long.”
‘Leaky’ said, “Tell us to come back, cancel one of those recesses, come
back and have the hearing and have a vote.”
Adding, “That's what the American people expect the Senate to do.”
In a statement posted on his Facebook page on
Saturday, our current Senate Majority Leader, Mitch ‘No Spine’ McConnell, said
the next president should be the one to pick Scalia’s replacement. He went on
to say, “The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next
Supreme Court Justice.” McConnell said,
“Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new
President.” Now, am I confident that
McConnell will have the backbone to stand firm again the onslaught that is
surely headed his way? No, not really.
And
just for grins I have decided to include here that which is but a brief
overview of ‘Leaky’ Leahy’s questionable history as a U.S. Senator as some may
be unaware of his bizarre penchant for divulging state secrets, which earned
for him the accurate moniker of ‘Leaky’:
1)
Senator Leahy was annoyed with the Reagan administration's war on terrorism in
the 1980s. At the time he was vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence
Committee. Therefore, "Leaky" threatened to sabotage classified
strategies he didn't like.
2)
Leahy "inadvertently" disclosed a top-secret communications intercept
during a 1985 television interview. The intercept had made possible the capture
of the Arab terrorists who had hijacked the cruise ship Achille Lauro and
murdered American citizen. But Leahy's leak cost the life of at least one Egyptian
"asset" involved in the operation.
3)
In July 1987, it was reported that Leahy leaked secret information about a 1986
covert operation planned by the Reagan administration to topple Libya's Moammar
Gaddhafi. US intelligence officials stated that Leahy sent a written threat to
expose the operation directly to then-CIA Director William Casey. Weeks later,
news of the secret plan turned up in the Washington Post, causing it to be
aborted.
4) A year later, as the Senate was preparing to
hold hearings on the Iran-Contra scandal, Leahy had to resign his Intelligence
Committee post after he was caught leaking secret information to a reporter.
The Vermont Democrat's Iran-Contra leak was considered to be one of the most
serious breaches of secrecy in the committee's 28-year history. After Leahy's
resignation, the Senate Intelligence Committee decided to restrict access to
committee documents to a security-enhanced meeting room.
5)
And lastly, ‘Leaky’ isn’t exactly what you could call a very honest man either.
When ‘Little Dick’ Durbin compared US military personnel to Nazis, Leahy said
that Durbin made no such comment. Then when told Durbin indeed made the
statement on the floor of the US Senate, Leahy amended his own statement
claiming Durbin's comments were taken out of context. When the Durbin tirade
was shown to Leahy, he began to denigrate Bush by saying he hurt the Iraqis as
much as did Saddam Hussein.
So there you have it, just a little insight to the
75 year old man who the people of Vermont have seen fit to repeatedly send back
to Washington since first electing him to the Senate in 1974. Of course when you stop and consider the fact
that it’s these very same dim-bulbs who are also, in their infinite wisdom,
responsible for first electing, then continuing to re-electing, the only
self-described socialist in Congress, then I guess we shouldn’t be at all
surprised by the fact that they are also responsible to keeping old ‘Leaky’
around.
No comments:
Post a Comment