Probably everybody knows this, but I want to post this just in case one person might see it and not have known this
McConnell tried to use Joe Biden to support the new precedent that Moscow Mitch started in 2016, but it’s pure bullshit. Joe Biden only said that he didn’t support nominating a justice while the campaign season is in full swing because that tends to politicize the process. He didn’t say that it couldn’t be done after the election and before the new president takes office. There is nothing in Biden’s comments to suggest that he would have opposed a nomination and confirmation of a new justice before the new president took office because the cause of Biden’s concerns would have already passed, the campaigning would be over.
Based on Biden's words, it appears he would not have objected to Bush nominating someone the day after election day. It would have given the Senate more than two and a half months to vote on confirmation.
That’s from politifact. That destroys any claim by McConnell to rely upon this. Biden’s goal was to eliminate the politicization of this process, but McConnell’s egregious hypocrisy shows that McConnell’s move is political and is about power even if there is no justification for his new precedent. That makes it different. There was no nominee to consider, no vacancy open. It was the end of June when Biden said this, not in February. Biden was one senator, not the majority leader with the backing of his entire caucus. Biden’s opposition was to the nomination, but it is not clear that if a vacancy had occurred and a nomination had been made at that time that the nomination would not have been considered, especially if a centrist were chosen. He only said that the Senate should consider not holding hearings if a judge were nominated to become a Justice of the Supreme Court. He did not rule it out entirely. He was not even in a position to do so. Biden was right that it would tend to get political if done during the campaign season.
The differences, then, are myriad. First, McConnell refused to have a hearing after the election and before the new president took office and Biden never said that he opposed nominating somebody and having a hearing after the election . Second, Biden didn’t rule out having hearings if somebody was nominated . Third, there was no actual vacancy that occurred. Biden was only speaking hypothetically. McConnell acted in a real situation. Fourth, Biden only spoke for himself. He was not with an entire party collaborating together to make consideration of a nominee impossible. For this to be similar Biden would have had to gather around him enough votes to try to stop the nominee if it were in a real situation. Fifth, Biden’s motive was to avoid making the Supreme Court political. McConnell’s egregious hypocrisy shows that he was making it political, an exercise of pure political power even if it revealed he had no integrity or consistency. Sixth, at most, Biden was offering one possible opinion.
Therefore, Biden’s speech in no way promoted what McConnell did or justified it. What McConnell did had no precedent and no justification. Biden didn’t support in his speech doing what McConnell did ; what Biden said in his speech and what McConnell actually did are two completely different things. McConnell was dishonest when he lied and said that Biden’s speech justified his (McConnell’s) actions.