Publisher's note: This informational nugget was sent to me by Ben Shapiro, who represents the Daily Wire, and since this is one of the most topical news events, it should be published on BCN.
The author of this post is Hank Berrien.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AL), the same senator who voted against the confirmation of Justice Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, saying that he was a "good man" but "I believe we are dealing with issues right now that are bigger than a nominee,"
now is offering another histrionic display of her moral conscience, asserting that she is "disturbed" that Senate Mitch McConnell has stated he will work in "total coordination with the White House counsel's office and the people who are representing the president as well as the Senate"
as he deals with the House's impeachment of President Trump.
McConnell had stated, "I'm coordinating with the White House counsel. There will be no difference between the president's position and our position as to how to handle this, to the extent that we can."
He added, "We don't have the kind of ball control on this that a typical issue, for example, comes over from the House; if I don't like it, we don't take it up. We have no choice but to take it up, but we'll be working through this process, hopefully in a fairly short period of time in total coordination with White House counsel's office and the people who are representing the President in the well of the Senate,"
according to USA Today
On Tuesday, Murkowski said, according to KTUU
, "How we will deal with witnesses remains to be seen,"
then continued, "I think it is fair to say right now that there is so much uncertainty ... " She said that the House rushed through the impeachment, saying, "Speaker Pelosi was very clear, very direct that her goal was to get this done before Christmas."
Murkowski apparently theorized that the Senate was being asked to keep acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney and former national security advisor John Bolton from testifying, saying, "If the House truly believed they had information, that was going to be important. They subpoenaed him, and if they ignore the subpoena, as they did, at the direction of the White House, then that next step (for the House) is to go to the courts."
Responding to McConnell's remarks, Murkowski said, "And in fairness, when I heard that I was disturbed. To me it means that we have to take that step back from being hand in glove with the defense, and so I heard what leader McConnell had said, I happened to think that that has further confused the process."
Murkowski asserted, "For me to prejudge and say there's nothing there or on the other hand, he should be impeached yesterday, that's wrong. In my view, that's wrong."
Murkowski continued dramatically, "If it means that I am viewed as one who looks openly and critically at every issue in front of me rather than acting as a rubber stamp for my party or my president, I'm totally good with that. I'm totally, totally good with that."
When Murkowski announced she would vote against Kavanaugh, she contended that she had been "wrestling" with the decision, the "most difficult" she had ever had to make as a senator, as The Hill
reported. She said, "I believe we are dealing with issues right now that are bigger than a nominee and how we ensure that our institutions, not only the legislative branch but our judicial branch, continue to be respected. This is what I've been wrestling with,"
adding that the nation's institutions needed to be "viewed as fair." Apparently referring to the women who had testified against Kavanaugh, she complained, "But if people who are victims, people who feel that they're is no fairness in our system of government, particularly within our courts, we've gone down a path that is not good and right for this country."