‘This is outrageous’: Pentagon officials furious over Tuberville holds after top Marine hospitalized
‘This is outrageous’: Pentagon officials furious over Tuberville holds after top Marine hospitalized
“I cannot help but think [that the vacancies have] added a level of complexity and danger to an already bad situation,” one DOD official said.
Pentagon officials have been frustrated for months over an Alabama senator’s blockade of more than 300 senior military nominations. But after the Marine Corps chief was hospitalized over the weekend, that frustration is turning into rage.
Gen. Eric Smith had been filling both the No. 1 and No. 2 Marine Corps posts from July until he was finally confirmed as commandant in September. He, along with more than 300 other senior officers, was swept up in the promotions blockade put in place by GOP Sen. Tommy Tuberville in protest of the Pentagon’s abortion travel policy.
In an interview Wednesday, Tuberville brushed off the comments from the DOD officials.
“They’re looking for someone to blame it on, other than themselves,” he said. “We could have all these people confirmed if they’d have just gone by the Constitution.
“I don’t listen to these people,” he added. “They’re just looking for any possible way to get themselves out of a jam.”
Permanently Deleted
47Yeah, they should do nothing more than approve these nominations as tubbyville wants instead of doing THEIR ACTUAL JOBS legislating.
Man, this take is dumb as a box of bricks.
10What legislating? With the House in the other Party's control the Senate isn't going to be doing much other than voting against bullshit.
-2
Everything about how the US government functions is based entirely on the idea that everyone acts in good faith. There is no real mechanism for dealing with those who abuse the system. Sadly, over 250 years, nobody has tried to fix this. Our system is broken but working just as designed.
9There are actually plenty of ways the majority party of both houses of congress can deal with "bad faith" actors. For one, the majority party could just say that the minority party doesn't get to vote on anything, or conduct any congressional business at all. Straight up denying the minority party any influence whatsoever. This would be 100% constitutional and since both houses of congress define their own rules for how they run themselves, any collection of people that have 50+1 votes is free to do this.
However you are correct that the system is working as designed. Capitalism doesn't care if you vote red or blue, as long as they get to choose the candidates and that's why things like this that have obvious legal answers somehow can't ever get done. Yet billions for the defense industry, or the oil industry can be passed with hardly a debate.
-3
I agree. Schumer as much as admitted that he refused to bring the promotions to the floor because the Dems was to apply political ressure to Tuberville. They want the Republicans to look bad, and get tagged as opposing our armed forced. They let the Tommy Tumor grow and fester and now it's unmanageable. They could have been bypassing him for months.
-22
Okay, so, first off, I want to remind everyone that Tuberville is a Christian Nationalist who believes that God sent Trump to save America. He objected to Biden's win in January 6th, and still says that Trump won.
With that in mind, no matter what happens with the military promotions, Tuberville will always be happy. Right now (and even if he eventually loses), he can claim that he's owning the libs. He likes that, and he'll ride that forever - in his mind, this is a good outcome and he's not going to stop. This is now his signature, defining issue.
Until the next Senate gets sworn in, there are three ways this can go. First off, the Senate caves and Tuberville gets to start pushing his religious ideology onto the US military - huge win for him!
But the other ways it can go (either everything remains blocked, or only a limited number make it past him) also have a less obvious win: he's holding up promotions. Which seems obvious, but keep in mind that this is the exact same bullshit McConnell did to Obama on federal judges - and that as soon as Trump took office, they took off the brakes and rammed the judges through as fast as they could.
That's exactly what's going to happen the next time the Republicans get control of the Senate - they're going to speed-promote every right-wing officer they see, and slow-walk anyone they're not sure of.
When the next insurrection comes - and you can be sure that it will - the military is going to have a proto-fascist core.
34There is one other thing that could be done...but won't be.
Qui tacet consentire videtur ubi loqui debuit ac potuit. "He who is silent, when he ought to have spoken and was able to, is taken to agree."
If they simply decided to adopt a silence gives consent rule for the Senate's role of advice and consent for all appointments, they would no longer be able to obstruct by simply holding off on things. The senate could still deny consent by voting against a candidate and explicitly not confirming them, but doing nothing would automatically become consent and pass unopposed.
This is what Obama should have done with Merrick Garland, not to mention all those other federal judge appointments. Simply go 'okay, you're not voting on it, which means you're silent, which means you consent. All appointments approved!'
Edit: Although truthfully the idea that the Senate needs to confirm every military promotion is so insanely stupid that I can't understand how it's ever become the standard. The only reason Tuberville can do this is because these promotions are usually passed behind the scenes with unanimous consent - he can't actually block them...he can just make them be voted on. And yet, the volume of promotions means that simply voting on them would take up all of the Senate's time. The Senate really should only need to confirm the highest levels, not every single promotion in the entire military.
12Jfc let me off this ride
4
They love the troops until they don't.
32They love that saying they love the troops gets them support.
They don't care about the troops either way
13Hint: they never do, they just use them in their campaign ads.
10
“They’re looking for someone to blame it on, other than themselves,” he said.
The pot calling the kettle black.
Any single senator could do this kind of hold up for anything that goes by unanimous consent.24https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_hold
The original intent of these sections was to protect a senator's right to be consulted on legislation that affected the senator's state or in which a senator had a great interest. The ability to place a hold would allow that senator an opportunity to study the legislation and to reflect on its implications before moving forward with further debate and voting.
Holds, like filibusters, can be defeated through a successful cloture motion. However, the time required to bring around a cloture vote often allows fewer than 40 senators to block unimportant legislation when the majority is not willing to force the vote.
So yes, Senator Tuberville is filibustering, but the real story is that the majority of the senate doesn't care enough about the military nominations to cloture it.
19How is he filibustering? I honestly don't know how he is able to do this and am trying to learn.
These aren't even being brought up, right? So, there's nothing to filibuster.
1I just learned about it today. From the wiki, a Senate hold basically means you do not provide your consent to bring the matter before the Senate. Senate has bylaws, saying that all matters brought before the Senate must be unanimously agreed upon to be brought forward. To provide all senators time to be acquainted with the matter, do research, timeliness etc.
So this senator is withholding their consent for this matter to come before the Senate, effectively infinitely delaying it.
The Senate can, with a majority vote, bring the matter to the Senate anyway through the second method, but that requires more coordination and agreement...
So net net, it's a kind of filibuster, and you can bust it but you need a majority
3This was a rule that Republicans put through. You no longer have to actually filibuster. You only need to say that you are filibustering and the Senate just assumes that you did and moves on.
2
At what point do they admit it's a national security issue and do something about it?
17That's fascism bro. The reasons for Tuberville's blocking are shit, but the fact that he can do that is working as intended. If the dems wanted to do something about it, they could act like a real political party for once and remove Tuberville from the armed forces chair, or equivalent that is allowing him to block the nominations.
If you just want "the military" to do "something" about the problematic senator then you are a piece of shit.
-30The Democrats, by themselves, can't bypass the block. Any senator, regardless of which committees they're on, can put a hold on legislation. It's called a senatorial hold and it's difficult to bypass, because while the majority leader can call the vote anyway, the holding senator can just filibuster, which requires a 2/3 majority to break, and then nothing will get done.
The good news is that even other Republican senators are getting tired of his shit:
When we rant and rave about things we don't understand, we accomplish nothing but to appear foolish.
7
Based
2The paths of power have many blocks. If I were from Tuberville's state, I would be looking at how retaliation against Tuberville affects my state. Remember when Christie blocked a highway to a neighboring state, with a pretend maintenance? Oopsie, it was his underlings that did it.
/$
1I, for one, support Tommy Tubman in his efforts to destroy the US military. Why the fuck do y'all want any of these nominations to pass?
Tommy even put a marine in the hospital! Based.
-1I support it too, but I dont' like cowardly democrats supporting it via inaction. They should be active and vocal in their opposition of the US Military.
-4