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.