FEINSTEIN: Hun, it’s time for you to retire!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It was beyond ridiculous when Strom Thurmond was wheeled around the Senate like a weekend at bernie's skit, and the current situation with Feinstein is equally ridiculous. The woman is not capable of fulfilling her duties and she hasn't been for some time. It is ridiculous of Schumer and the others to act otherwise.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It was beyond ridiculous when Strom Thurmond was wheeled around the Senate like a weekend at bernie's skit, and the current situation with Feinstein is equally ridiculous. The woman is not capable of fulfilling her duties and she hasn't been for some time. It is ridiculous of Schumer and the others to act otherwise.

Having the aged Schumer greet the very aged Feinstein alone yesterday afternoon was an optics flub. If Schumer was hell bent on a public arrival, his office should have forced some of the "younger" Members to get outside and greet her as well like Ossoff, Murphy -- even Gillibrand. Of course, those members probably want her gone.

[Anonymous]

Good Lord.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., told a reporter that she hasn't been gone following a three-month absence while she recovered from the shingles virus, according to a report.

The comment was captured during a recent exchange with reporters after the senator voted against legislation that would invalidate some of the recent crime bills passed by the Washington D.C. council, according to the Los Angeles Times.

Feinstein, according to the report, told reporters about an issue with her leg but said overall she was feeling better, then a separate reporter asked about the messages she received from other Senators after returning last week.

"What have I heard about what?" Feinstein asked.

"About your return," the reporter said.

"I haven’t been gone," Feinstein said. "You should ... I haven’t been gone. I’ve been working."

"You’ve been working from home is what you’re saying?" the reporter responded.

"No, I’ve been here. I’ve been voting. Please, either know or don’t know," Feinstein allegedly said back.

Feinstein then went by in her wheelchair and didn't answer further questions.

[Anonymous]

At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.

Regretfully, I have to agree with this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.

Yes the republicans have the majority so the dems have to suffer through this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.

Yes the republicans have the majority so the dems have to suffer through this.

The Republicans do not have the majority now, but they will be back to even on committees if she resigns.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.

Yes the republicans have the majority so the dems have to suffer through this.

The Republicans do not have the majority now, but they will be back to even on committees if she resigns.

No if the dems had a majority they would just appoint another dem to the committee. Why would the minority party have a say in who the majority party appoints to a committee? Why would the majority who controls the senate give the other party a veto over anything?
Surely the base of the Democratic Party would demand the senate act instead of just excepting the rules made by the majority?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.

Yes the republicans have the majority so the dems have to suffer through this.

The Republicans do not have the majority now, but they will be back to even on committees if she resigns.

No if the dems had a majority they would just appoint another dem to the committee. Why would the minority party have a say in who the majority party appoints to a committee? Why would the majority who controls the senate give the other party a veto over anything?
Surely the base of the Democratic Party would demand the senate act instead of just excepting the rules made by the majority?

It’s the filibuster. If Feinstein resigns, any replacement for her on the judiciary and her other committees would need either unanimous consent or 60 votes. Multiple Republican senators have indicated that they are not inclined to vote to replace her on the judiciary committee, because without her Democrats will have trouble confirming judges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.

Regretfully, I have to agree with this.

They are basically holding an old and sick woman hostage because of politics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.

Yes the republicans have the majority so the dems have to suffer through this.

The Republicans do not have the majority now, but they will be back to even on committees if she resigns.

No if the dems had a majority they would just appoint another dem to the committee. Why would the minority party have a say in who the majority party appoints to a committee? Why would the majority who controls the senate give the other party a veto over anything?
Surely the base of the Democratic Party would demand the senate act instead of just excepting the rules made by the majority?

Committee membership requires a full Senate vote that is subject to the filibuster. Republicans could theoretically have blocked any committee assignments at the beginning of the term, but didn't because the Dems could have turned around and blocked their assignments. Really the only feasible way for Feinstein to be replaced on that committee is if a Republican (Grassley?) needs to be replaced at the same time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.

Regretfully, I have to agree with this.

Unfortunately, republicans are going to keep her propped up like Weekend at Bernie's.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.

Regretfully, I have to agree with this.

They are basically holding an old and sick woman hostage because of politics.

She asked for it when she ran again, despite being in the throes of dementia.

Others who endorsed Senator Feinstein back in 2018: Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Chuck Schumer and the CA Democratic Party. The state could have nominated Wile E Coyote as it's nominee and the canine would have won. After seeing the disgrace of Senator Thurmond's last several years in office, shame on California and national Dems for not pushing Feinstein out in 2018. This is what we get.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:At this point the Republicans have said that they won’t vote for a replacement for her on committees, so she needs to stay as far as I’m concerned.

Regretfully, I have to agree with this.

They are basically holding an old and sick woman hostage because of politics.

She asked for it when she ran again, despite being in the throes of dementia.

Others who endorsed Senator Feinstein back in 2018: Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Chuck Schumer and the CA Democratic Party. The state could have nominated Wile E Coyote as it's nominee and the canine would have won. After seeing the disgrace of Senator Thurmond's last several years in office, shame on California and national Dems for not pushing Feinstein out in 2018. This is what we get.

A Democrat did challenge her in 2018 and ended up on the general election ballot because of how California’s jungle primary works. It was one of the guys on the LA City Council who got in trouble last year for racism. He still lost.

[Anonymous]

Happy 90th Birthday, Dianne!

Now retire.