If I had a lot of experience as a blackout drunk, as Kavanaugh did, I would search my thoughts and try to come up with what she was talking about to figure out if there is validity to it. If multiple women came forward, I would search my thoughts even further with the realization that there was likely something there that I couldn’t recall. I’m sure that Kavanaugh did the same thing, hence the evasive answers and the fear of an actual investigation.
So, those things about the lefty conspiracy for Clinton’s revenge, shit like that, mean spirited, aggressive and partisan…that stuff wasn’t in the prepared speech? He improvised that in the fierce heat of righteous anger? He pretended to read prepared remarks, because reasons?
Excellent point (and I’m a geographer of the social science type).
Still brings us back to the same question each time, though: If Democrats pack a few more justices onto the Court, what prevents Republicans from packing far more when they get the chance to do so down the road?
This would be like America lobbing one nuke at Russia, expecting to receive only one nuke in return, when in fact Russia might respond with dozens or hundreds instead.
Democrats have been nuked repeatedly since 2000. What did you expect?
The will of the people based on Democracy?
If the people think that there should be more Democratically nominated justices on the court, as they currently do based on popular voting, that’s what there should be. So, the people should be able vote in the representatives to right this wrong. Republicans can run on the premise that they will add even more justices, and the people can decide at that time if they want that.
But, currently, the will of the people is thwarted by undemocratic processes that have our federal government deeply in the hands of a minority party.
Don’t forget he said “what comes around, goes around”.
I expect consequences.
That’s a point, though. We can’t oppose the people trying to destroy our country because that might piss them off, and then they will try to destroy our country!
We should be nicer. Yeah, that’s the ticket!
I forgot that Bush nominated two justices. So, I have to correct this. It’s 4 out of 9 justices who will be there by a president who would not have been elected under popular voting.
Argue that this is what the Constitution intended as much as you want, but there has never been a single justice previously who had this ignominious distinction, and now nearly half of the court will be there via this method.
Harry Reid and the Dems were the first ones to invoke the “nuclear option”. Hearing them whine about norms now is laughable.
False. John Quincy Adams won the election of 1824 despite garnering only 31% of the popular vote. In 1826 he nominated Robert Trimble to the Supreme Court, who served there until his death in 1828.
You also forgot that both were nominted in his second term.
I endorse the sentiments of Fear Itself and elucidator.
Sure, this could get into tit-for-tat, but that makes a hell of a lot more sense than making no meaningful responses when the other side repeatedly violates the norms.
Yeah, and he did that why? Because Mitch McConnell was filibustering ALL of Obama’s judicial nominees. Just straight, flat across the board. None shall pass.
That’s the only time we actually responded in kind. Sure, that meant that we haven’t been able to filibuster any GOP nominees, but at least the GOP only had 2 years’ worth of vacancies to fill up, rather than 4+.
He wouldn’t have had a second term if he hadn’t had a first.
OK, it hasn’t happened in nearly two centuries, since the early days of the Republic. Whatever, dude.
Actually, that would be kinda interesting, to find out her story of when and where this happened, who else was there, etc.
First of all, I have never had even the briefest of alcohol-related blackouts, ever. Hell, I’ve never had a hangover. Second, I kept a pretty detailed journal during high school. Third, there are some other atypical details about my life back then that would probably trip up a prospective accuser. And fourth, I wasn’t an asshole in high school; there’s nobody who knew me back then who has reason to be pissed at me.
I would certainly want to hire counsel, but the odds approach certainty that such a false accuser would trip herself up practically before she started.
No I didn’t. Read what I wrote.
The GOP seems to be rallying around this cowardly narrative that they believe Ford but don’t believe it was Kavanaugh. There is not a single one of them that actually believes this.
As I have said earlier, the elevation of this illegitimate partisan hack to SCOTUS strongly increases the likelihood that Democrats are going to Court-pack the next time they have power. And if a future hypothetical SCOTUS decision declares that Medicare-for-all is unconstitutional? Hoooo-boy, there’s a roughly zero percent chance that any Democratic administration will tolerate such a decision, so expect either immediate Court-packing in response or whoever the POTUS is at such time to declare that the SC ruling is illegitimate and to continue implementation of the law.
Seriously, people on the right are underestimating the fury on the left over the GOP’s SCOTUS shenanigans; the theft of Garland’s seat, the elevation of Neil fucking Gorsuch, and now the confirmation of this hack Kavanaugh in spite of all the credible allegations against him, nominated by a president under investigation for potentially colluding with a hostile foreign power to steal the 2016 election. That’s building the case for Democratic Court-packing right in front of our eyes. And I get that the Democrats’ respect for institutions means they’re a few cycles behind the GOP in terms of radicalization, but c’mon now, the Dems aren’t 1000 years behind the GOP on this, so it is not preposterous to anticipate dramatic responses to GOP tactics in the next few years.
And if all of this leads to the end of judicial review, that’s a good thing! Yes, that means the end of rulings like Roe and Obergefell, but that also means no more obviously bullshit cases like any of the stupid anti-Obamacare lawsuits that have arisen over the past few years.
If concern about GOP retaliation is the issue, well, that’s why the Dems should Court-pack at the same time that they ram through statehood of DC, Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, and the Virgin Islands. Installing several more Democratic senators would make it much less likely that the GOP would regain a majority.
Preach it! And then when none of the people corroborate her story, … oh, wait a minute. That’s not good enough. They have to provide evidence that it didn’t happen. Darn it!
This is false as well. Benjamin Harrison won the election of 1888 despite losing the popular vote. He appointed four justices to the Supreme Court:
[ol]
[li]David Josiah Brewer in 1889[/li][li]Henry Billings Brown in 1890[/li][li]George Shiras Jr. in 1892[/li][li]Howell Edmunds Jackson in 1893[/li][/ol]