neither of these individuals knew the president but certainly tried to profit or trying to profit off their time here in the white house, flat out lies. thank you general kellogg for setting the record straight. >> follow-up questions. >> the senate is in recess for the weekly caucus meetings. they return at 2:15 p.m. eastern for votes on equal implement opportunity commission members. live senate coverage here on c-span2. this morning a number of senators came to the floor to talk about the supreme court vacancy created following the death of justice ruth bader ginsburg. >> madam president. >> majority leader. >> i explained yesterday how moving ahead with the vote on the forthcoming supreme courtmi nomination will be consistent with both history and precedent. when an election year nomination

to fill a election year vacancy occurs in divided government with the senate and a president of different parties, the historical norm is that nominations are not confirmed. the time this happened after the machen people have elected the senate majority to work alongside a same party president every such nominee has been confirmed, save one bizarre exception of a nominee who had corrupt financial dealings. so, let me say that again. except for justice ava fordyce and his ethical scandals every single nomination and american history made during our president circumstances has ended in a confirmation, seven out of eight. that is the thing about facts and history, madam president.

angry rhetoric is not change them. partisan finger-pointing does not alter them. facts simply exist. they are there for everyone to see. history and precedent on this senate majority side in 2016 and they are overwhelmingly on our side now. if we go on to confirm this nomination after careful process both in 2016 and in 2020 this senate will simply have provided the typical normal outcome in each scenario. think about that. weigh it against the outcry and hysteria that is already erupting on the floor far left.

yesterday the democratic leader announced on the floor that if the senate holds a vote on the forthcoming nomination it would quote, spell the end of this supposedly great deliberative body. spell the end of this supposedly great deliberative body? that is what he said. it would be the death of the senate. it would if a duly elected majority of the u.s. senate exercises its consent power as it sees fit that is what the senate is to do. it is our job description. presidents make nominations as they see fit and senate majority will provide or withhold advice and consent as we see fit. but now our democratic colleagues tell us that the senate doing normal senatorial things would spell the end of this institution, whatever that

may mean. the democratic leader is not alone in these pronouncements. chairman jerry nadler of house judiciary committee hashe alreay announced that if the senate majority dares to act like the senate majority teacher democrats should immediately expand the supreme court. from another colleague if they hold a vote in 2020 we will pack the court in 2021. it is that simple. speaker pelosi intimidated on television last weekend that she made consider launching a new frivolous impeachment, simply to tie up the senate's time. she said we have our options. junior senator from massachusetts said democrats must abolish the filibuster and expand the supreme court. junior senator for hawaii said all these matters will be on the

agenda and the senior senator for connecticut says nothing is off the table and just yesterday former vice president biden himself refused to rule out that he might seek to pack the supreme court. bear in mind none of them assert this majority would be breaking any senate rule by holding this vote and it's just that our democrat friends worry they might not like the outcome and for some reason they cannot bear to see republicans governing within the rules as are publicans during exactly what americans elected us to do. so they threaten to make up the senate if they lose a vote and direct the structure of the court if confirmed whom they oppose. it has been interesting to watch our colleagues try to recast

their disturbing threats as somehow ties to the supreme court vacancy. no one should fall for this trick. democrats have already be threatening these actions for months and this is not anything new. our colleagues now say nothing would be off the table if a new justice were to be confirmed. they want badly for people to believe these are new threats that the democrats would take off the table if republicans would just help them sink president trump's nominee. let me say that again. they want badly for people to believe these new threats that democrats would take off the table if republicans would just help them sink president trump nominee. let me read another quotation. this is the junior senator for california speaking.

our distinguished colleague is now running for vice president. quote, we are on the verge of a crisis of confidence in the supreme court. we have to take this challenge head on and everything is on the table to do that. does that sound familiar? of course, it does. madam president our colleague made that remark in march of 2019. in march of 2019. these threats are not new and they have nothing to do with this new legislator. democrats have always been playing this game for more than a year and a half and it was more c than one year ago that several senate democrats threatened the supreme court in a written brief and they said quote, the court is now, not well. the court is not well and

perhaps the court can heal itself before the public demands it be restructured. it was more than one year ago that democrats competing for their party's presidential nomination made court packing a central element in their platform. it was more than six months ago that the democratic leader appeared outside the court t, across the street outside the court, and threatened specific justices if they did not rule his way. for goodness sake, the junior senator from maryland came out and admitted this yesterday and some asked if he would support these acts of institutional vandalism if anomaly is confirmed this year. he helpfully pointed out i've always said i'm open even before this seat opened and those

possibilities were on the table before we got to this point thereby proving my point. these threats are not new. they have nothing to do with this vacancy. our friends the junior senator for delaware said on television this sunday he wants to persuade republicans to forgo filling this vacancy. but all the way back in june, long before five days ago, he himself notably refused to rule out breaking the senate's rules to kill the filibuster. there is no degree to which rewarding these threats would buy the nation any relief from them.er there is nothing you could give them to stop all the threats. there is no deal that would stop these dangerous tactics and

giving into political blackmail when not do a thing to secure our institutions. so, madam president you do not put a stop to irresponsible hostagetaking by making hostagetaking a winning strate strategy. i will tell you what could threaten our system of government? it is not senate republicans doing legitimate things squarely within the senate rules and within the constitution that democrats happen to dislike but cno. no. really threaten our system is if one of our two major parties continues to pretend the whole system is automatically illegitimate whenever they lose. if they continue to act like, for their side of the aisle, a legitimate defeat is an oxymoron

that is the danger to our democracy. everyone of these attacks on our institutions are only underscored by how important they are and every threat to turn our courts into a political tug-of-war only reinforces while the senate is charged with protecting our independent judiciary and while this majority work with president trump on this path is so crucial. the presidents plans to use the power the voters gave him to make a nomination. senators will use the power the voters gave us to either provide or withhold consent as we see fit. the only ones responsible for those threats is the people making them.