Last night, Sen. Murkowski spoke at an AMAC seniors meeting held at the Wasilla Senior Center.
A number of seniors raised the issue of why Lisa opposed the confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh. They explained that if Lisa is simply going to oppose any nominee the Left attacks, then what she is really saying is that, going forward, she will never vote for a Supreme Court justice nominated by President Trump.
In reply, Murkowski declared: “…he [Kavanaugh] had more political bias than I was willing to endorse.”
In short, it wasn’t the accusation that Kavanaugh committed sexual assault.
It wasn’t the accusation that he was a gang rapist.
It wasn’t the accusation that he was a drunk.
It wasn’t the accusation that he abused women or that he was irreverent in his high school yearbook or that he was indignant when he and his family were being attacked during his confirmation hearings.
The reason Murkowski could not support President Trump’s nominee is because she believed he was a conservative.
You see, the one thing the Left cannot abide is a conservative U.S. Supreme Court. Such a reality is as intolerable to them as President Donald Trump in the White House.
You can be as far left as Obama’s Supreme Court appointees Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan and rest easy in the fact that Lisa Murkowski will not filibuster your nomination.*
But if your presence on the Supreme Court will influence the Court in a conservative direction—that fact alone constitutes a political bias that disqualifies the president from appointing you to the Supreme Court—at least in the eyes of Murkowski.
And watch where this leads next:
Because conservative judges are inherently disqualified, it is the self-imposed moral duty of the Left to expose their “lack of qualifications” to the American people. The fact that Kavanaugh was confirmed isn’t proof of his qualification, but simply proof that the Left did not work hard enough in their campaign to keep him out of office.
Murkowski’s Democrat colleague, Sen. Cory Booker, was more candid when he publicly declared that those who do not oppose Judge Kavanaugh are “Complicit” in “evil”. Even neutrality on the confirmation of Judge Kavanaugh is “evil”. And this, mind you, is from a speech Booker made back in July (two months before the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings even began).
- The 65 women who attended high school with Kavanaugh and wrote a letter in his defense. These women were complicit in evil.
- The 34 former law clerks of Justice Kavanaugh who all signed a letter of support. Evil.
- Kavanaugh’s own family members. Evil, and therefore legitimate targets to attack.
When the Left can’t come up with the votes to keep someone like Kavanaugh from holding higher office, it is their self-imposed moral duty to do whatever is necessary; to attack, to berate, to accuse, to provoke—in short, to be sufficiently uncivil—in order to expose the “evil” they believe lies within all conservatives (at least the conservatives who did not oppose Kavanaugh).
As a former First Lady explained recently: “…if we [Democrats] are fortunate enough to win back the House and/or the Senate, that’s when civility can start again. But until then, the only thing that the Republicans seem to recognize and respect is strength.”
And there you have it. When the Left is once again in power it will be acceptable for the Left to once more be civil. Until then, as they see it, resistance and provocation is the moral duty of every American.
The concern raised by the seniors in Wasilla is that Murkowski has joined her Democrat colleagues in stacking the deck against conservative nominees; that she is now beginning to talk like her colleagues Senator Bernie Sanders and Senator Van Hollen who openly attacked and voted against Trump Nominee Russell Vought last year simply because he was a Christian.
As I wrote previously, Russ is a friend. Russ and I were classmates, along with Anchorage Senator Mia Costello, in the Claremont Lincoln Fellowship Program. Before working for Mike Pence, Russell’s wife grew up in the Mat-Su.
As a conservative Alaska legislator, I have a somewhat unique vantage point in observing the attacks against Kavanaugh, Vought and others, as I have personally been the target of some very similar attacks for things I, too, could not possibly have done, even if I had wanted to.
Twice now, I have been attacked and publicly censured by Democrat legislators who control the Alaska State House (and even a few Republicans), in each case without a single hearing or even the most rudimentary due process. What due process I have been able to obtain since that time has only come due to the exertions of my lawyer, and at a financial cost to me and to my family.
Just in time for the election, the State House Ethics Committee will be meeting tomorrow to retroactively determine and then announce to the world that I am disqualified from being able to serve on that committee.
How do I know the outcome of the vote even before it takes place? Because prior to the vote the committee has already declared my disqualification twice through press releases published in January and again in July.
I am an outspoken conservative legislator. To the Left, I am inherently disqualified on that basis alone.
Even so, rather than take the vote publicly when all members of the committee were physically assembled in Anchorage in July, they decided that it would be better to simply declare my guilt publicly, and wait to actually vote on my guilt or innocence until the week of the election in November. Waiting until November means an opportunity for a third day of headlines reminding voters how the committee wants them to vote on Election Day.
Only if you are known for being a conservative leader. And I’m hardly the only one.
Actually, I feel as though I am in very good company right now. Lest we forget, another of Murkowski’s notable Democrat colleagues, Sen. Chuck Schumer, had already publicly announced that he would oppose any Trump nominee and would do his “best to keep the seat open” even before he knew who Kavanaugh was! In fact, he made that announcement even before President Trump himself had been inaugurated president!
It’s time for Murkowski to protect Alaskans from the political bias of the Left, and declare that she will no longer be party to it. When Trump’s nominees are “politically biased”, and Obama’s nominees are considered “neutral”—you know you’ve been spending too much time in DC, Lisa.
Rep. David Eastman has served in the Alaska State House representing the Mat-Su since 2017; He ran on a platform of fighting for genuine conservative reform, fiscally and socially, and remains committed to delivering on that promise.
Note: You can find a longer video of the exchange at the Wasilla Senior Center here.
*Voting History: Sen. Murkowski did not attempt to filibuster the confirmation of either Justice Kagan or Justice Sotomayor. She did vote to filibuster the nomination of Justice Kavanaugh, but was outvoted by all of her Republican colleagues and Sen. Manchin (D-WV), 51-49.