McConnell: Blocking Garland Was ‘Most Consequential Decision I Ever Made’

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., checks out the stage during preparation for the Republican National Convention inside Quicken Loans Arena, Sunday, July 17, 2016, in Cleveland. (AP Photo/Matt Rourke)
Start your day with TPM.
Sign up for the Morning Memo newsletter

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell took a victory lap during a Politco Playbook interview on Wednesday, calling his decision to block President Barack Obama from filling the vacant Supreme Court seat during his tenure as the “single most consequential decision I ever made.”

“I felt very confident that if the shoe was on the other foot, a Democratic Senate would not have confirmed a Republican president’s nominee during an election,” he said. “I was confident that the complaints would be rank hypocrisy knowing full well that they would do the same thing in the middle of an election.”

McConnell touted getting Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch on the bench, along with his record rate of getting circuit judges appointed, as one of his most significant accomplishments in the time of Trump.

Overall, he said that this has been “the best year and a half” for those wanting America taken in a “right of center” direction.

Latest Livewire

Notable Replies

  1. And most criminal and unethical.

  2. Avatar for jep07 jep07 says:

    "the “single most consequential decision I ever made.”

    …which led to our first ever FAKE JUSTICE, named Gorsuch.

    Laugh while you can, Mitch.

  3. If “consequential” means destructive and harmful to America…

    Mitch - don’t forget standing firm against exposing the extent of Russian meddling in the elections back in 2016 so there wouldn’t be “bias” against Trump. Don’t forget recruiting Cantor and Boehner to join your anti-Obama all obstruction all the time club either. You are despicable - I hope you enjoy the rest of Trump’s presidency and your sorry place in American history.

  4. Avatar for vonq vonq says:

    Actually the Dems would have followed the Constitution. They may have voted against the nominee, but at least the nominee would have had hearings. (It’ll be nice if there’s a loophole that disqualifies Gorsuch and throws out any decisions he participated in.)

  5. Certainly was historical.

    But not in the way he figured it would be.

Continue the discussion at forums.talkingpointsmemo.com

78 more replies

Participants

Avatar for jep07 Avatar for 1gg Avatar for cervantes Avatar for becca656 Avatar for boscobrown Avatar for Lacuna-Synecdoche Avatar for sniffit Avatar for thebigragu Avatar for sickneffintired Avatar for longtimeobserver Avatar for maxaroo Avatar for zrx1100 Avatar for jhand Avatar for tena Avatar for muddylee Avatar for lizzymom Avatar for susanintheoc Avatar for jreitzes Avatar for pauldownard Avatar for eisenst Avatar for seamus42 Avatar for tgp Avatar for atldrew Avatar for captain_america

Continue Discussion
Masthead Masthead
Founder & Editor-in-Chief:
Executive Editor:
Managing Editor:
Deputy Editor:
Editor at Large:
General Counsel:
Publisher:
Head of Product:
Director of Technology:
Associate Publisher:
Front End Developer:
Senior Designer: