Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Biden’s Pledge To Appoint Black Woman To SCOTUS Was Quid Pro Quo For James Clyburn’s Endorsement

Biden’s Pledge To Appoint Black Woman To SCOTUS Was Quid Pro Quo For James Clyburn’s Endorsement

A promise Biden now portrays as high-minded in fact was a trade for an endorsement.

During the 2020 Democrat primaries, Joe Biden made a promise on stage during a debate that he only would consider Black women for the first U.S. Supreme Court vacancy if Biden were elected. It was a promise Biden repeated many times during the campaign and after election.

As we covered last week, with Justice Stephen Breyer’s planned retirement, Biden again promised to fill the spot only with a Black woman to the exclusion of considering any other people. That Biden posture is overwhelmingly unpopular, including with “nonwhite” people, as we covered in a separate post tonight, ABC Poll: Only 28% of “Nonwhite Americans” Agree That Biden Should Only Consider A Black Woman For SCOTUS.

In the course of my research, I learned more details about Biden’s pledge to appoint a Black woman to SCOTUS. It was not some “racial justice” or “equity” or “diversity” or similar move. It was not high-minded, ideological or philosophical at all. It was a quid pro quo for South Carolina Rep. James Clyburn’s campaign endorsement, which proved crucial to Biden winning the nomination.

ABC News reports:

At President Joe Biden’s lowest moment in the 2020 campaign, South Carolina Rep. Jim Clyburn came to him with a suggestion: He should pledge to put the first Black woman on the Supreme Court.

After some cajoling, Biden made the promise at a Democratic debate, a move Clyburn credits with turning out the Black support that helped Biden score a resounding victory in the South Carolina primary and ultimately win the White House.

The NY Times adds more details:

Mr. Biden made the promise at a debate in February 2020, just days before facing his Democratic rivals in the South Carolina primary, where Black people make up a large portion of the party’s voters. At the time, his campaign was struggling amid losses in two of the early presidential contests.

“I’m looking forward to making sure there’s a Black woman on the Supreme Court to make sure we in fact get everyone represented,” Mr. Biden said that night.

The promise helped Mr. Biden secure the support of Representative James Clyburn, a veteran Black Democrat from South Carolina, just days ahead of the party’s contest in that state. Last year, Mr. Clyburn confirmed a report in the book “Peril,” by Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, that he had urged Mr. Biden to make the promise during the debate.”

Bloomberg reports:

U.S. Representative James Clyburn said he talked to Joe Biden about nominating a Black woman to the Supreme Court before the South Carolina Democrat made his pivotal endorsement during the 2020 presidential primary.

Speaking on Bloomberg TV’s “Balance of Power with David Westin,” Clyburn confirmed reports he had pressed Biden on the issue in advance of the Feb. 25, 2020 South Carolina Democratic debate, when the candidate used his closing statement to promise he would nominate the court’s first Black female justice.

“I have three daughters,” said Clyburn, who is Black. “I think I would be less than a good dad if I did not say to the president-to-be, this is an issue that is simmering in the African-American community that Black women think they have as much right to sit on the Supreme Court as any other women, and up to that point none had been considered.”

According to the new book “Peril,” by journalists Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, Clyburn made his endorsement conditional on Biden’s commitment to nominating a Black woman. The book says that during a break in the debate, Clyburn pushed Biden to reveal his intentions that night. Biden went on to win the primary and cement himself as the front-runner for the nomination.

Michael Isakoff at Yahoo News goes even deeper into that debate night:

It was Feb. 25, 2020, the night of a crucial Democratic presidential debate in South Carolina — and Biden’s campaign was on the ropes, in serious danger of being knocked out of the race. The former vice president had been trounced in the Iowa caucuses (where he finished fourth) and the New Hampshire primary (where he came in fifth). South Carolina was his firewall, and Biden was counting on a promised endorsement from the most powerful figure in the state’s Democratic politics, House Majority Whip James Clyburn, the former chair of the Congressional Black Caucus, to revive his campaign.

But Clyburn was extracting a firm promise from Biden: that he would name an African American woman to the Supreme Court….

Clyburn raised the issue with Biden on the night before the debate, and he expected that Biden would make the commitment during the debate. But as the debate unfolded at Charleston’s Gaillard Center concert hall, Clyburn “grew more and more frustrated,” according to an account presented by the journalists Jonathan Allen and Amie Parnes in their book “Lucky.” “Why won’t he say it?” Clyburn asked himself.

At that point, the authors add, Clyburn — during a break in the debate — took the matter into his own hands and headed backstage to confront Biden.

“So Clyburn gets up from his seat in the debate hall in the audience, and he makes a beeline for the exit,” Allen said during an appearance on the Yahoo News Skullduggery podcast last March. When he found Biden, he unloaded, Allen added. “He says, ‘Look, I told you that I wanted you to say that you were going to name a Black woman to the Supreme Court. You haven’t done it yet. You’ve had a bunch of opportunities. Don’t you dare leave this stage without doing it.’”

Biden took the message — or warning — from his most important political backer to heart. When the debate resumed, Biden delivered. “Everyone should be represented,” he said when asked about his personal motto and the biggest misconception about him. “The fact is, what we should be doing — we talked about the Supreme Court. I’m looking forward to making sure there’s a Black woman on the Supreme Court, to make sure we in fact get every representation.” And then he added: “Not a joke.”

Clyburn officially endorsed Biden the next morning — and Biden went on to a resounding triumph in the South Carolina primary, putting him back on the path to the nomination.

Joe Biden has been a political self-serving manipulator his entire career, particularly on matters of race. The promise to appoint a Black woman to the Supreme Court was just another Biden manipulation, making a promise he now portrays as high-minded but in fact was a trade for an endorsement.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

What de facto President Soros wants, de facto President Soros gets.

Of course it will be just another Marxists hack but that’s another matter.
Hey Roberts there are political judges, see your 3 comrades on the Covid rulings proves it.

I’d still laugh myself silly if somebody slips the name of Janice Rogers Brown into his teleprompter before the news conference.

Watch the SC native get tapped…..or is it Kamala getting tapped?

Clyburn: “Black women think they have as much right to sit on the Supreme Court as any other women”

Rights? Rights? Where the hell is that “right” spelled out?

Balderdash!

    AnAdultInDiapers in reply to tiger66. | January 31, 2022 at 3:34 am

    Well, he’s correct. All they have to do is what non-black women and all men have to do: Earn that right.

    Or get a corrupt racist sexist into office as president, I guess.

    Peabody in reply to tiger66. | January 31, 2022 at 12:14 pm

    If that’s so urgent maybe the first black president should’ve taken care of that instead of picking an unqualifed whitey and a wise latina.

Clyburn is accustomed to rights never spelled out in our Constitution.
Like affirmative action and a host of other giveaways that they don’t earn by studying hard or working hard. They will always be the permanent underclass until they have a serious change of heart and ditch the “Where’s my reparations? ” attitude. With leaders like this I won’t hold my breath.

“I’m looking forward to making sure there’s a Black woman on the Supreme Court to make sure we in fact get everyone represented,” Mr. Biden said that night.”

It’s a damn shame that Carswell was never confirmed.
Then Biden would finally be represented.

    Gosport in reply to henrybowman. | January 31, 2022 at 1:14 am

    This is where dumbing down our education system hits hardest. People hear what Clyburn says and, since they don’t know better, think is sounds good.

    The problem is that the Supreme Court isn’t a legislative body there to “represent” anyone. It is a court that protects the US Constitution without passion or favor.

      TX-rifraph in reply to Gosport. | January 31, 2022 at 6:30 am

      I agree. Biden’s statement is a non sequitur in addition to being fundamentally wrong. “…making sure there’s a Black woman on the Supreme Court…” is a transaction that is part of a bribe. Protecting the US Constitution without passion or favor is a principle that applies to all. It is not conditional on whether you vote for me or not. Specific transactions (quid pro quo) are indications of corruption but the dumbed down voters evaluate on the basis of “What’s in it for me today?” without even a clue of ethics or principles or logic.

I wonder what Rod Blagojevich thinks of this.

Only 28% of “Nonwhite Americans” Agree That Biden Should Only Consider A Black Woman For SCOTUS.

Note that ABC lumped all non-whites together. That cannot be an accident. It’s a good bet that ABC did not want people to see that most of that 28% are black–and that it would show a large percent of blacks favor race quotas.

The only real qualification for a Democrat appointee to the bench is the ability to rule in line with Democrat policy, and invent some perverse interpretation of law to justify it. Adding a bit of race pandering to the mix is not a problem — a Democrat of any sub-division can be found to fill the bill.

I can’t wait until Marjorie Taylor-Green, who’s chairing the House Select Committee on 2020 Election Irregularities, subpoenas Jim Clayburn who’s then forced to repeatedly assert his 5A rights. That will be great…

….presuming of course House Republicans pick someone other than Kevin McCarthy to be Speaker.

    scooterjay in reply to TargaGTS. | January 31, 2022 at 10:22 am

    She reminds me of Gowdy without the bite. Speaking of….wonder what it took for TG to be silent?

    If McCarthy gets in as Speaker, forget it: we might as well recall Boehner. Or put in Jeb! Bush.

    It’s OUR victory: push in every way you can to get a warrior in the Speaker position, not a tired, GOPe re-tread like McCarthy.

Biden should only consider a black woman for SCOTUS since it worked so well in picking his Vice President.

Any promises made prior to the election are intended to generate votes. If you don’t get those votes, the question is moot. Any promises made after the election are also intended to generate more votes. Specifically, votes for D senators and representatives in the mid-terms.
If you don’t get the votes, you lose power, and THAT is what drives the whole machine. Queen Nancy cannot trade on inside information if she loses the Speaker’s Chair.

    scooterjay in reply to GLB. | January 31, 2022 at 10:25 am

    “Any promises made prior to the election are intended to generate votes”

    …and is the reason politicians cannot face legal action due to it being considered a lie. Wait ’til they figure that out. It’s only been 58 years.

Not only was Joe’s promise quid-pro-quo for Clyburn’s endorsement and vote, it is a violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

I’d love to see some serious legal analysis of the ramifications for naming a nominee in violation of the CRA.

    CommoChief in reply to mr_bill. | January 31, 2022 at 12:14 pm

    The various civil rights acts don’t enter into this process at all. The Constitution grants the President plenary authority to nominate whomever he wishes. The direct check/balance is the requirement to obtain advice and consent from the Senate. The indirect check/balance is the next election for President who nominated and the Senators who confirmed a nominee that voters disagree with.

    Lucifer Morningstar in reply to mr_bill. | January 31, 2022 at 4:41 pm

    I would love to see some serious legal analysis of the ramifications for naming a nominee for confirmation when there isn’t even a vacancy on the court. Would be interesting to say the least. (And no, Milhouse is full of it. You cannot nominate & confirm without a vacancy. That’s a violation of the norms of government (as the liberal democrats would howl if anyone but them attempted to do so.))

      Bullshit. YOU are full of that. Of course a president can nominate someone without a vacancy. Why on earth would anyone think he couldn’t? Likewise the senate can consent without a vacancy; why couldn’t it? The senate can consent to anything, if it likes. Blowing up the moon, or making pi equal to 4. That won’t change anything, but there’s nothing to stop them doing it.

      If you think there’s a problem with the senate giving the president its consent to appoint a certain person, if and when a vacancy should occur, show us where in the constitution it says that.

      If you had an argument to make you’d make it. Since you don’t, all you do is bluster. Go to Hell.

    Milhouse in reply to mr_bill. | January 31, 2022 at 8:04 pm

    Congress can’t amend the constitution.

2smartforlibs | January 31, 2022 at 1:57 pm

Wouldn’t want the best and brightest we need a box of crayons. sarc

Wouldn’t Joe get even more Atta-Boy points and praise if he narrows it further? Like a Black First-Nations Women or a Black Trans Woman? The latter (“trans”) seemed to work really well merit-wise in swimming, boxing and Jeopardy, maybe it would be a good thing here.

Otherwise, Joe wants a Supreme Court that “looks like America”. Right now, one black person on the court (Clarence) means that the court is a bit over 11% black; the United States is around 13% black. Pretty close. With a further black person, the court would be a bit over 22% black, which is way over the 13% average in the United States.

Font Resize
Contrast Mode