Proving to be a Democratic Party court jester and not the political “referee” he claims to be, NBC political director Chuck Todd spent part of Sunday’s Meet the Press yelling and making faces at Republican Senator John Barrasso (WY).
According to Todd, his guest and Senate Republicans were “hypocrites” for following decades of precedent and filling a vacant Supreme Court seat in an election year, and ignored how Senate Democrats were suddenly against it.
At the top of the program, Todd described the death of Justice Ginsburg and a “political crisis” and went on the attack after the Senator shared his kind words about her. Reading Barrasso’s own words from the 2016 fight over Obama’s nomination of Judge Merrick Garland, Todd accused him of not want to give Americans a voice in the process.
“You would add on a different times, ‘I want to get the American people a voice in this.’ Um. Why don't you want to give the American people a voice this time,” he sneered.
Barrasso shot back with the accurate counterpoint that if the roles were reversed, the Democrats (and by extension, the media) would have no qualms about filling the seat. And proving just how much of a hack he was, Todd tried to argue against it, yelling at his guest:
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO (R-WY): Well, first, let's be very clear. If the shoe were on the other foot, and the Democrats had the White House and Senate, they would right now be trying to confirm another member of the Supreme Court.
TODD: You don’t know that!
BARRASSO: What we’re proposing is completely consistent, completely consistent with the precedent.
The Senator recalled that Republicans were following the Biden Rule in 2016. When the White House and the Senate are controlled by two different parties, then a nomination cannot be heard. Further citing precedent, Barrasso point to the “29 times, Chuck, there have been a vacancy in the year of a presidential election. And if both the White House and the Senate are of the same party, they go forward with the confirmation.”
Ignoring those hard facts, Todd processed to again quote the Senator to himself and accuse the Republicans of a “power grab, pure and simple” (Click “expand”):
TODD: So, you know, I scoured, I scoured all of these 2016 notes looking for these footnotes that have been added now. You guys have this new explanation. Never once, on the Senate floor, “when an election is months away,” in 2016 you said, “the people should be allowed to consider possible Supreme Court nominees as one factor in deciding who they’ll support for president. This shouldn't really be controversial.” Then you said, “This is not about the person, it's about the principle involved. And I want to give the American people a voice in this. Republicans have said there should not be a bitter political fight. We called on the president to spare the country this fight. The best way to avoid the fight is to agree to let the people decide.”
Senator, these are your words. Not once did you say, “Oh, it depends on what party the Senate holds versus the party the president.” This just sounds like a power grab, pure and simple.
After Barrasso mentioned the Biden Rule for a second time, Todd tried to shout down his guest by falsely declaring, “What are you-- there is no Biden Rule!” A total fail on the part of the self-appointed keeper of the political rules.
Growing increasingly irate, Todd struggled to find the words amidst his rage. “Senator, I guess the question is, should viewers -- when should -- should viewers just not believe anything you're saying today because whatever you're saying today will change depending on the politics of the moment,” he demanded to know.
Hey Chuck, how about you apply that standard to the Democrats who were against filling SCOTUS seats in election years before they were for it and before they were against it again. He refused to bring this up earlier in the program when he interviewed his former tenant, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN).
Despite those facts and proving he wasn’t listening to what his guest was saying, Todd continued to berate Barrasso for a being a supposed hypocrite:
TODD: Why is it that this principle only matters when a Democrat is in the White House?
BARRASSO: It's not that at all, Chuck. If we did something different now, we would be breaking with the precedent that has long been established. That if the president and Senate are of the party--
TODD: What precedent?!
BARRASSO: -- move along with confirmation.
As he was wrapping up his contentious interview, Todd suggested he understood what “the average American” thought and again accused Senate Republicans of being “hypocrites” with “caveats.” And again, he refused to apply that standard to Democrats who were suddenly against filling a SCOTUS seat in an election year.
Todd also had nothing to say when Barrasso pointed out how Democrats were going against Ginsburg’s advice and threatening to pack the court. “They’ve talked about raising the number of those on the Supreme Court even though Ruth Bader Ginsburg said it was a bad idea. She said it would politicize the court. And she said nine is the right number,” the Senator expertly countered.
Chuck Todd’s yelling and other outbursts were made possible because of lucrative sponsorships from Walmart, and Verizon. Their contact information is linked so you can tell them about the biased news they’re funding.
The transcript is below, click "expand" to read:
NBC’s Meet the Press
September 20, 2020
10:46:44 a.m. Eastern(…)
CHUCK TODD: Senator, I want to get into the politics. Four years ago you were emphatic on various ways – You said it. You heard it in that list of clips. You would add on a different times, “I want to get the American people a voice in this.” Um. Why don't you want to give the American people a voice this time?
SEN. JOHN BARRASSO (R-WY): Well, first, let's be very clear. If the shoe were on the other foot, and the Democrats had the White House and Senate, they would right now be trying to confirm another member of the Supreme Court.
TODD: You don’t know that!
BARRASSO: What we’re proposing is completely consistent, completely consistent with the precedent.
What happened in 2016. Let's go back. We were following the Joe Biden Rule. Joe Biden was clearly -- was clear when he was chairman of the Judiciary Committee. And he said when there is a Senate of one party and White House of other, he said this to George Herbert Walker Bush, he said if there is a vacancy in the final year, we will not confirm. And that’s what we did with Merrick Garland.
TODD: Senator!
BARRASSO: But 29 times, Chuck, there have been vacancy in the year of a presidential election. And if both the White House and the Senate are of the same party, they go forward with the confirmation.
TODD: So, you know, I scoured, I scoured all of these 2016 notes looking for these footnotes that have been added now. You guys have this new explanation. Never once, on the Senate floor, “when an election is months away,” in 2016 you said, “the people should be allowed to consider possible Supreme Court nominees as one factor in deciding who they’ll support for president. This shouldn't really be controversial.” Then you said, “This is not about the person, it's about the principle involved. And I want to give the American people a voice in this. Republicans have said there should not be a bitter political fight. We called on the president to spare the country this fight. The best way to avoid the fight is to agree to let the people decide.”
Senator, these are your words. Not once did you say, “Oh, it depends on what party the Senate holds versus the party the president.” This just sounds like a power grab, pure and simple.
BARRASSO: Well, it is the Biden Rule. And this is the way—this is the precedent of the country.
TODD: What are you-- there is no Biden Rule!
BARRASSO: You haven't had since 1888 when a party of the Senate and the White House were of different parties than anyone was confirmed and that was the situation.
(…)
TODD: Senator, I guess the question is, should viewers -- when should -- should viewers just not believe anything you're saying today because whatever you're saying today will change depending on the politics of the moment?
(…)
TODD: Senator, I want to just quote you back to yourself one more time. “We have called on the President to spare the country the fight. The best way to avoid this fight to agree to let the people decide. Give the people a voice.”
Why is it that this principle only matters when a Democrat is in the White House?
BARRASSO: It's not that at all, Chuck. If we did something different now, we would be breaking with the precedent that has long been established. That if the president and Senate are of the party--
TODD: What precedent?!
BARRASSO: -- move along with confirmation.
But Chuck, just let me say this one thing, because you brought this up with Amy and Chuck Schumer last night. Chuck Schumer has been very clear, the Democrats have been very clear. If they win the White House and the Senate, all bets are off. They are going to blow up the filibuster. They are going to use the nuclear option. They are going to stack the Supreme Court. They’ve talked about raising
TODD: Do you believe that?
BARRASSO: -- the number of those on the Supreme Court even though Ruth Bader Ginsburg said it was a bad idea. She said it would politicize the court. And she said nine is the right number
(…)
TODD: Yeah. But you have no regrets that Senate Republicans are going to look like hypocrites 44 days before the election for just a complete flip-flop to the average American? I mean, I know you're trying to come up with the caveats. Nothing about it makes any sort of sense to the average person.
(…)
