On the day of the vote I want to see you in the front row. Keep your eye on the doorkeeper. If I don’t need your vote, Fishbait Miller will give you the sign and you’ll be free to vote your district.”…
…when Leo took his seat in the front row, he looked around and saw thirteen other guys that Sam had in his pocket in case he needed them. It wasn’t just Leo. The entire front row was sitting there and waiting for the nod from Fishbait Miller.Tip O’Neill Man of the House 1988
Today is the day that Amy Coney Barrett will likely become Justice Barrett and the surest sign of this is the announcement that Susan Collins will be a “no” vote on the nomination:
Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, took a veiled shot at her party’s leadership in the Senate on Sunday when she announced that she would be voting against the confirmation of Judge Amy Coney Barrett to the Supreme Court.
“Prior to Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s death, I stated that, should a vacancy on the Supreme Court arise, the Senate should follow the precedent set four years ago and not vote on a nominee prior to the presidential election.,” Collins said in a statement.
She added: “Because this vote is occurring prior to the election, I will vote against the nomination of Judge Amy Coney Barrett.”
Collins you will remember was the key vote that put Justice Brett Kavanaugh on the court to the great outrage of the left and as the last national Republican left in New England has a huge target on her back.
So it’s quite Natural that Mitch McConnell having Mitt Romney as the 51st vote and knowing that her election may decide control of the Senate and wanting to give her whatever edge she can get gave her the high sign that her vote was not needed.
One of the reasons it’s not needed is that Lisa Murkowski while voting NO on the motion to end debate and bring Judge Barrett’s nomination to the floor announced that she will be a “Yes” on her confirmation once it gets there.
Today, Murkowski stated on the Senate floor that she will vote to confirm Barrett. She reiterated that, in her view, Republicans should not be holding a vote on Barrett before the presidential election. For this reason, she explained, she will oppose ending debate on the nomination — i.e., oppose having a vote on confirmation.
But once the vote occurs, Murkowski will vote in favor of confirming Barrett because the nominee is well qualified, and it’s not her fault that the process (in Murkowski’s view) is flawed.
This is a reversal from what she has said before and even acknowledes such:
Murkowski had initially said that she opposed voting on a nominee before the November election. Her vote in favor of Barrett all but ends any long shot hopes Democrats had of convincing some moderate and vulnerable Republicans to side against Barrett’s confirmation.
“I believe that the only way to put us back on the path of appropriate consideration of judicial nominees is to evaluate Judge Barrett as we would want to be judged: on the merits of her qualifications,” Murkowski said on the Senate floor Saturday afternoon.
One might wonder why Murkowski who voted against Kavanaugh would suddenly decide to vote for Barrett when her vote is not needed? The answer in two words: Sarah Palin:
“Walk back what you have already committed yourself to. You better backtrack. You know, you have already put yourself in this box saying no matter who it is, you’re not going to support the person, not until you have a chance to appoint a judicial nominee under another president instead of this one,” Palin said. “You’re hoping, what, that this president doesn’t win? Otherwise, you’d be cooperating with the president. Really, what it is is cooperating with the majority of Americans who know that it’s now or never for America.”
“So much hinges on the Supreme Court. You know the reason, you know why it’s so important, and that’s why you’re thinking you’re going to go rogue. You know, there’s a time and a place to go rogue. This isn’t the time, this isn’t the place. We sure hope you have it within you to do the right thing this time. So you should walk back,” Palin says, adding in a reference to her 2009 book “Going Rogue.”
“We’ll forgive you. Wait … we’ve done this how many times before, though? And we kept saying we’d forgive this? If you can’t do that, remember my house. I can see a lot of things from my house. … Lisa, I can see 2022 from my house,” Palin concluded, referring to the year Murkowski is up for reelection.
Palin suggested she didn’t want to run for the Senate but would do so if Murkowski voted against Barrett. As Sean Davis put it:
The names and faces may change but the Fishbait Miller rules of Politics remain the same.