Our democracy's rapid transformation into a dystopian hellscape would be right at home in a young-adult novel about a plucky vampire who has to rise up against an oppressive regime. The latest double shot of awful? Senate Republicans have reached the "literally silencing your opponents" phase of their fascism to-do list. (Next on the list: S&M-inspired military uniforms.) During last night's debate over the qualifications of Trump attorney general pick Jeff Sessions, Elizabeth Warren was in the middle of giving a speech opposing Sessions's nomination when Mitch McConnell decided she had gone too far in her criticism. Her crime? Reading from a letter written in the 1980s by Martin Luther King Jr.'s widow, the late Coretta Scott King.

King wrote the letter to oppose Jeff Sessions's appointment to the federal bench, and it was very persuasive, helping his nomination get defeated in committee.

McConnell was able to do this by claiming that Warren had "impugned the motives and conduct of our colleague from Alabama," in violation of a rule that forbids senators from questioning the character of their colleagues. Now, this is, on its face, absurd. Sessions is a senator, but in this context he's Trump's nominee for the AG job. If you literally make it AGAINST THE RULES to say something negative about a nominee you are supposed to be debating, then what kind of debate is that? And not only that, but by silencing Warren, McConnell was saying that he didn't feel that Coretta Scott King's words were worthy of the Senate, which is especially galling when you consider that one of the major problems with Sessions is his history of racism and civil rights violations. Hmmm, I would have thought that being a civil rights leader and the wife of Martin Luther King Jr. would qualify someone to be an expert on questions of civil rights abuses, but what do I know? I'm just a guy who has a brain and a basic grasp of human decency.

The moment has to be seen to be believed:

What I find most galling about this (aside from, y'know, EVERYTHING) is that Senate Republicans have the votes to confirm Sessions. No matter what the Democrats do or say, Sessions will almost certainly be the next attorney general. The only downside to letting Elizabeth Warren not just make her point but do her job, which is to get in there and debate issues, would be that she might just convince someone of something. Senate Republicans couldn't just be happy winning, they also had to make sure people couldn't even really debate or hear another side to the issue. What happened last night was the Senate majority used a procedural parlor trick to get out of having to participate in our democracy. This is what you do when your actions are indefensible.


That's not just craven. It's shameful. Elizabeth Warren then read the letter in full outside the chamber:

And here in full, Coretta Scott King's letter to the Senate in 1986.

Re: Nomination of Jefferson B. Sessions U.S. Judge, southern/District of Alabama Hearing, March 13, 1986

Dear Senator Thurmond:






Coretta Scott King


You should also read her accompanying statement arguing against Sessions in depth. At least, you should try to, before the Senate Republicans figure out a way to shut down the Internet, lest people actually think about ideas.

The 50 Craziest Things Trump Has Done as President: