On Thursday, defending the plan he has sponsored to pack the Supreme Court with additional justices so that the Democrats have control over the Court, Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-NY) insisted, “Some people say we’re packing the Court. We’re not packing the Court; we’re unpacking it.”
Jerry Nadler: "We're not packing the Supreme Court, we're unpacking it"
— America Rising (@AmericaRising) April 15, 2021
On Wednesday, Nadler refused to answer a question from Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) as to whether he planned to introduce legislation to expand the Supreme Court.
Jordan stated, “Just a question on an issue that concerns the Committee: It’s being reported by the DC Bureau chief of The Intercept, the gentleman, Ryan Grim — I understand that it is not only wise to believe what is said on Twitter — but he is reporting that the Democrats will be introducing legislation to expand the Supreme Court from 9 members to 13 members and that you and two of our members on this committee will be sponsoring that legislation, is that accurate?”
“That is not the subject of the markup,” Nadler deflected.
Jordan fired back, “Extending the Supreme Court, a report that the chairman is going to be sponsoring legislation is not something to be talked about on the House Judiciary Committee? I waited until the bill was over to ask the Chairman a question, if you don’t think it’s important about Democrats trying to extend the size of the Supreme Court — I think that’s a pretty important issue.”
Sounds like the Democrats are running away from the bill before it’s even introduced! https://t.co/v6PQN3XivS
— House Judiciary GOP (@JudiciaryGOP) April 15, 2021
Nadler’s partisanship has been in evidence for decades. In March 2019, appearing on MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow Show, Nadler said of the investigation of former President Trump, “Our job is to protect the rule of law in this country.”
In 1998, Nadler protected former President Bill Clinton after he was found lying regarding his affair with Monica Lewinsky. Nadler stated that the attempt to impeach Clinton was “clearly a partisan railroad job.” He asserted:
Perjury is a serious crime and if provable should be prosecuted in a court of law. But it may or may not involve the president’s duties and performance in office. Perjury on a private matter, perjury regarding sex, is not a great and dangerous offense against the nation. It is not an abuse of uniquely presidential power. It does not threaten our form of government. It is not an impeachable offense.
The effect of impeachment is to overturn the popular will of the voters. We must not overturn an election and remove a president from office except to defend our system of government or our constitutional liberties against a dire threat. And we must not do so without an overwhelming consensus of the American people. There must never be a narrowly voted impeachment, when impeachment is supported by one of our major political parties and opposed by the other. Such an impeachment will produce divisiveness and bitterness in our politics for years to come and will call into question the very legitimacy of our political institutions.
The American people have heard the allegations against the president and they overwhelmingly oppose impeaching him. They elected President Clinton. They still support him. We have no right to overturn the considered judgment of the American people. . . . [T]his is clearly a partisan railroad job. . . . This partisan coup d’etat will go down in infamy in the history of this nation.
In June 2019, Nadler ignored Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s protestations that he had no interest in testifying before Congress, instead threatening to summon Mueller before Congress anyway, saying, “We will have Mr. Mueller’s testimony.”
In a radio interview with WNYC, Nadler stated, “We will have Mr. Mueller’s testimony. I think it’s very important that he testify before the American people, even if he doesn’t say anything beyond what he said there. The attorney general and the president and others are lying all the time about what was in the report and it’s very important that he, to the TV audience and to the American people … answer questions about it, even if there is no new information. … Most people are not going to read the 448-page report.”
In June 2020, Nadler slammed GOP members of the House, stating, “They couldn’t utter the phrase ‘black lives matter’ and could barely [broach] the subject of police reform. Instead, their amendments, I’ve given you about half of them, just listed here, were arrant nonsense, off-topic, dealing with imaginary things like Antifa and completely negating the entire purpose of the bill.”
Jim Jordan, the ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee, infuriated, responded to Nadler, “They’re not imaginary, they’re real … To have the chair of the Judiciary Committee, on the House floor, say … these words … ‘imaginary things like Antifa.’ They are far from imaginary. And there are people in every major city in this country who know that and yet the chair of the Judiciary Committee just made that statement. That is scary.”