In “The Devil’s Disciple,” author Bernard Shaw at General Burgoyne’s 1777 Saratoga surrender has Swindon ask, “What will history say?” The General replies, “History, sir, will tell lies, as usual.”

Currently, media outlets are deceiving us by reporting only the historical parts that suit their agenda. They find it inconvenient to talk about Senator Biden’s character assassination of Robert Bork, a Ronald Reagan nominee. Biden followed that by orchestrating the “high-tech lynching” inquisition of Clarence Thomas. The process has become contemptuous. Before the late ‘60s, nominees were confirmed by bipartisan voice votes.

Today, the press is indignant and outraged that President Trump would have the audacity to pick a nominee to replace Ruth Ginsberg, implying incorrectly that he’s breaking the law. The history is clear but, unfortunately, it won’t be discussed. When Antonin Scalia died, Senator McConnell recited the common precedence of confirming nominees.

Throughout American history, when the president’s party controls the Senate, they get to fill vacancies. However, historically, when the opposite party controls the Senate, their Senators block nominees sent up in a presidential election year, and hold the seat open for the winner, as occurred with Merrick Garland.

The Democrats and the press shouldn’t have been shocked in 2016 and shouldn’t be indignantly protesting now. The precedence is as old as the republic itself and Republicans should not cave in just to appease the Socialists.

Twenty-nine times in our nation’s history there’s been an opening on the Supreme Court during a presidential election year. All 29 times presidents in office forwarded his nominee, whether or not they had the votes to confirm. U.S. Presidents include Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln, Grant, FDR, Eisenhower and Obama. Twenty-two of the 44 presidents holding office have faced this situation, and all 22 made the decision to send up a nomination.