Senate panel narrowly endorses Mike Pompeo for secretary of state after Trump intervenes

[former9thward]

Source: Washington Post

BREAKING: The president persuaded a committed GOP naysayer to back Pompeo, securing the backing of the majority of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee after the vote, if not Pompeo’s ultimate confirmation, seemed in jeopardy only hours earlier. Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) agreed to vote present, procedurally making it possible to send Pompeo’s nomination to the floor.

The vote was 11 in favor, 9 opposed and 1 voting present. Only 10 of the 11 senators who backed Pompeo were present in the committee room, making Coons’s switch — from opposed to simply present — necessary to clear the nomination.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), who had pledged to oppose Pompeo, tweeted about Trump’s outreach and his newfound support for Pompeo just moments before the committee’s vote began. Pompeo had been expected to fail the panel vote but secure the support of the full Senate later this week. Paul’s change of heart came after two Democrats facing challenging reelection contests this year announced they would vote for Pompeo even if the committee did not endorse him.

Read more: https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/pompeo-likely-to-fail-committee-vote-but-is-all-but-assured-senate-confirmation/2018/04/23/f4dd0a28-470b-11e8-9072-f6d4bc32f223_story.html?utm_term=.d9f714a23b58

[left-of-center2012]

1. We have Trump's word ...

Pompeo's a nice guy.

[Atticus]

4. "Trump's word.". There was a man like Trump in my little home town. Daddy said he had

to have his neighbor call his dog for him because the poor mutt wouldn't believe him either.

[shirleye]

2. So Coons announced he was opposed and basically was the reason he passed out of committee

At least Rand is a republican what Coon's excuse

[oberliner]

5. After Coons Demonstrates Comity, Pompeo Avoids Dubious Distinction

It initially seemed the old Senate tradition of “pairing” votes for and against, a practice that allows the will of all senators to be reflected whether or not they are physically present, would not happen Monday. But Coons then spoke up from his spot on the dais.

There are few senators on opposite sides of the aisle who must work more closely than Isakson and Coons, and perhaps none with more sensitivity.

As the chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the Ethics Committee, they must work in secret to investigate alleged misdeeds of fellow senators (including, yes, Menendez, under review even after the government dropped its corruption case against him).

“Having heard early this afternoon a request from my dear friend, Sen. Isakson, this was not the fact-pattern we had expected. Given the public statements by a number of the members of this committee, we had expected to be in a different fact-pattern,” Coons said. “I am recorded as voting against Mike Pompeo for secretary of State, but I will vote present.”

That meant the effective tally was 11-9, with Coons voting “present” and Isakson a “yes” by proxy.

https://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/coons-demonstrates-comity-pompeo-avoids-dubious-honor

[Raven123]

3. Rand Paul did his usual dance to get attention. Nothing new or unexpected.

[Va Lefty]

6. THIS!

[SylviaD]

7. Damn Rand Paul. Damn him nt

[Crutchez_CuiBono]

8. See that little Rand Paul Bait and Switch Sucker Move? Hope so.

So it does'nt happen again.
Paul is the bait-car. He starts out all stoic, comes out all negative...gets the needed Democrats to swing...then they bunt the ball and Pompeos on first base. Happens all the time.

[C Moon]

9. He's not the president. I hate seeing that. He's a hack.

[Rhiannon12866]

10. Damn!

[DarthDem]

11. More of the Same

Coons is a very reliable vote on pretty much everything important - well, except for banking matters - but he gets way too caught up in the "Senate comity" nonsense for my liking. That stuff only ever flows in one direction, so what's the point of Democrats doing it? Perhaps there are behind-the-scenes benefits to which we're not privy.

Speaking of "what's the point," I haven't studied Senate confirmation procedure in a while, but if the committee vote is irrelevant as the article implies, and Pompeous was going to the full Senate anyway, then . . . why the ForRel vote at all? And of course, if it was indeed meaningless, then what Coons did is immaterial.