As expected, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) returned to her seat on the Senate Judiciary Committee (SJC) Thursday after creating a whirlwind of confusion Tuesday among her Democratic colleagues, many of who including Committee Chairman Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) had not been expecting her to arrive until later in the week and who were unaware that she was already there.
Feinstein, who in a statement said she is on a “lighter schedule” under the order of her doctors, had been out of the Senate for over two months battling health complications from shingles, a situation that caused much wailing and infighting among Democrats who were furious that they were unable to ram Joe Biden’s most radical judicial nominees through the Judiciary Committee thanks to the tie vote scenario her absence created.
But on Thursday, SJC Democrats wasted no time getting Feinstein, who arrived an hour late, to do what they publicly shamed her into coming back and doing, casting the tie-breaking votes on a handful of troubling nominees that Republicans would not allow to pass through the committee while Feinstein was at home in California recovering:
Michael Delaney (First Circuit Court of Appeals), another nominee Democrats had been trying to push through, didn’t get a vote, presumably due to pressure from far-left activist groups who think Delaney is not left-wing enough or something.
The problems with the “qualifications” of the three who did advance included not being able to remember certain Articles from the Constitution, not knowing what a Brady Motion was, and seeming to have sympathy for sex offenders:
The three advanced with only Democratic support as all had earned unanimous GOP opposition on the panel. Bjelkengren stumbled during her confirmation hearing when asked what Article 5 of the Constitution is, Gaston was grilled during her hearing over her past writings about sex offenders, and Crews was unable to define what a Brady Motion is.
Though RedState detailed some of those issues here and here, SJC member Ted Cruz (R-Texas) laid out the most troublesome in a Twitter thread Thursday:
The Biden Admin and Senate Democrats are supporting a nominee who advocates for convicted child molestors to be able to live next door to day care centers.
That’s not exaggeration, that’s not hyperbole.
Here’s what Marian Gaston said:
“Children are not safer because registered sex offenders are prohibited from residing near schools, parks, day care centers and other places where children tend to gather.”
“The conclusions and recommendations are that – difficult as it might be – laws that regulate where sex offenders may not live should be repealed or substantially modified in the interest of public safety.”
Is there anyone too radical for the Democrat Party?
… and during the Thursday SJC session:
Joe Biden is going to have to defend his most controversial choices during the course of his reelection campaign. No matter who the GOP nominee is, they are going to call him out on it – especially on Gaston, considering that directly relates to the safety of America’s children at a time when Democrats are on record as saying that parents shouldn’t have a say in their child’s education, including when it comes to sexually explicit classroom lessons and library books.
Simply put, Feinstein’s return is not the “win” Democrats have been making it out to be, and that’s something that they may not figure out until, politically speaking, it’s too late for them to change course.