Thread by @JCNSeverino

Because Democratic senators have no legitimate argument against the confirmation of Judge Barrett, they have made lame arguments attempting to delay the nomination process. /1

foxnews.com/opinion/amy-co…

The latest is complaining that Barrett’s confirmation hearing can’t happen because of COVID-19. All 10 @JudiciaryDems say that to allow virtual attendance at a hearing remotely “is not an adequate substitute.”

But their actions throughout the pandemic contradict their words. /2

Since May, at least 21 hearings have been held in a format that included remote participation by senators, witnesses, or both.

Senators on the committee opted to attend virtually 17 times.

Six of the committee’s 10 Democrats chose to participate in hearings this way. /3

At the first hearing held in that format, @amyklobuchar told Chairman @LindseyGrahamSC:

“Thank you for being willing to do a hybrid hearing like we’re seeing today. Senator [Roy] Blunt and I in the Rules Committee worked hard to get this done . . . .” /4

Of course, the full Senate has continued to do business during the pandemic, passing legislation and confirming 26 judges since May.

This follows tradition. Historically, Congress has been in session during far greater challenges. /5

During the War of 1812, the British burned the Capitol, the White House, & nearly all of Washington’s major public buildings while Congress was in recess.

Congress met in a hotel less than four weeks afterward, proceeding with a session that saw the passage of over 100 laws. /6

Soon after the Civil War broke out, Congress convened in an emergency session on July 4, 1861, despite reports that Confederate forces stood only a day’s march away.

In a session lasting under five weeks, Congress passed 67 bills. /7

Congress was in session for almost the entirety of the period spanning the Spanish influenza pandemic’s first wave in spring 1918, its particularly deadly second wave in fall 1918, and much of the third wave in winter 1919.

Congress passed hundreds of bills during that time. /8

The hearings for Barrett will start 16 days after her nomination was announced, which is longer than it took for eight justices since 1962 to have their first hearing. Her nomination does not require anywhere near the paperwork of most other recent nominations. /9

While Democrats argue for delay, they have shown rocket speed in drawing their own conclusions about Judge Barrett.

So if they are going to vote against Barrett’s confirmation they should go ahead and just do so, and stop playing games with their excuses about the process. /10