Flake Has No Intention Of Saving America From Fascism... Just Forget It

Did you watch Lawrence O'Donnell on MSNBC last night? No? The segment you should have seen to make you feel better is above. Might as well not bother, unless you want some historical context if you were hoping that Jeff Flake was going to stall Trump's Supreme Court nominee. Early this morning, Ronald Hansen at the Arizona Republican brought us all back down to earth. Flake, as always, is-- first and foremost -- a right-wing bag of hot air. Don't look towards him for anything other than disappointment... ever.

First the background: Flake was on TV Sunday-- 4 days ago-- where he boasted to George Stephanopoulos that he and what he called a "number of senators" are serious about blocking Trump's lousy judicial nominees if his headlong rush into a trade war, among other things, isn't stopped. Flake: "I do think that unless we can actually exercise something other than just approving the President's executive calendar, his nominees, judges, that we have no reason to be there. So I think myself and a number of Senators, at least a few of us, will stand up and say let's not move any more judges until we get a vote, for example, on tariffs." That was then. This is now:

The outgoing Arizona Republican and member of the Senate Judiciary Committee said he will evaluate the person nominated to replace the retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy separately. Flake's apparent cooperation would seemingly leave Senate Democrats still searching for at least one GOP ally to block a nomination to the high court sometime later this year.

Flake has recently stalled at least some federal appeals court nominations by withholding his support on the Judiciary Committee in an effort to pressure the Senate to vote on President Donald Trump's tariff changes, which Flake opposes.

"There are lots of folks out there who assume because I've not been in line with lots of the president's policies, and certainly haven't condoned his behavior, that I should oppose everything, every one of the president's nominees or whatever. I've never taken that position," Flake said in an interview.

"My goal here is not to block judges. My goal is to get a vote on tariffs, and I have all the leverage I need with circuit court nominees," he said. The Supreme Court "is unaffected. I have all the leverage I need. I certainly wasn't anticipating a Supreme Court vacancy, but it's unaffected."

Flake also said his standards for judicial nominations isn't changing, either.

"This is important in its own right. I want someone who will interpret the Constitution and not legislate from the bench; it's what I've always said in terms of how I would view any nominee," Flake said. "It's what I did with (Supreme Court Justice Neil) Gorsuch and I thought he passed the test. It's what I'll do with this one."

Flake's support could prove crucial for any nominee to replace Kennedy. Republicans hold a 51-49 advantage over Democrats in the Senate. But that includes U.S. Sen. John McCain, the veteran Arizona Republican who is battling brain cancer and hasn't been to Washington since December. Flake has been one of the rare Republicans willing to lock horns with the administration on other issues.

Kennedy is a conservative justice who occasionally voted with the court's four more-liberal justices. His departure, and the expectation that Trump will pick someone more reliably conservative, could define the Supreme Court's dominant legal ideology for a generation.

...Flake has slowed the chamber on appeals court nominations in recent weeks because he wants the Senate to vote on an amendment that would limit Trump’s ability to impose new taxes on foreign goods.

"My goal has been to force a vote on tariffs," Flake said. "I just think it's unconscionable for Congress not to speak on this, so a couple of weeks ago I let the chairman on the Judiciary Committee know that I would vote 'No' on circuit court nominees until I was assured of some kind of vote coming up. ... At the same time, I've voted 'Yes' on district court nominees, and those have passed through. This was only with circuit court nominees."