Exactly. They pulled her because they didn't want "their team" asking Kavanaugh real substantive questions (not that the questioner was likely to really get to the bottom of anything, but at least her questions were pursuing facts). To be fair, the scenario that was playing out was sort of a "double team" against Kavanaugh. You had the prosecutor asking questions, you had the dems asking questions. I guess the majority just didn't think that part of the scenario through at all. After Lindsey Graham they basically abandoned the farce of it being a "quest for truth". From that point all they did was give political speeches and provide 5 minute reprieves from Kavanaugh having to answer anything. Pretty sad to have to do that for a Supreme Court nominee. For all the complaints, it's not like the dems went out of bounds or asked too many unexpected questions. What struck me was the dichotomy between them calling it a a sham and a political character assassination, yet simultaneously trying to say they believed the woman, that Ford was credible. Can't have it both ways.
My opinion of Ford greatly improved after today... I don't believe she is the true "bad guy," here, at least to my knowledge... Her attorneys and Senator Feinstein on the other hand... There's a special place in Hell waiting for them... Sorry, not sorry...
We'll see. At this point if BC is confirmed.....I think it will come with a heavy price come November - and perhaps beyond.... Be careful what you wish for.....
Unless they can confirm someone more conservative than him in the next two weeks, I think they’ll take a bigger political hit from not confirming him.
He outed himself as a compete political hack. "Revenge of the Clintons". Guy is looney tunes pure and simple, I see that as a totally unacceptable thought process for a Supreme Court nominee. He was completely cracking until Lindsey Graham pretty much bailed him out. It was a good political move by Graham, but I'm pretty sure his outburst was entirely theatrical and intended to save the nomination. Maybe it worked, but it was a pretty shameful display by both the judge and the Republicans on that committee. While I'm sure the press coverage is completely crazy (if not shameful persuits of some of these people), I didn't see any democrats behaving out of line in that hearing. Kavenaugh did, Graham, did, several other Republicans did. They abandoned decorum, and even silenced their own questioner when they realized it wasn't looking good for them. So the answer was to "go political". Even if you believe Feinstein acted inappropriately in "sitting" on the anonymous claim, doesn't really excuse the other side. The idea that the FBI shouldn't have gone out and investigated and interviewed these new witnesses doesn't pass the smell test. Having a guy send in a letter is NOT equivalent to an FBI interview. This could have been done by now if it started last week. Notice how Kavenaugh never answered the question "should the FBI investigate", even though he continually claimed he was open to "any investigation", it always came back to "whatever the committee wants to do", which means what Grassley wants to do (i.e. vote ASAP). Undoubtedly he was coached to not answer that question, in that moment where it seemed like he have actually agreed to it I believe that's where Graham had his freak out.
Possible, but she didn't seem all that polished, although obviously intelligent as to her field. Frankly, there wasn't that much time for "coaching" either of them. I was honestly shocked at how unpolished and melodramatic Kavenaugh was,I would have thought as a supreme court nominee he would require little to no "coaching". Between the two, he came off as the candy ass. Guy was immediately defensive to almost any question, even completely predictable and sensible ones that should have been pretty obvious for a legal mind that those questions were coming. The democrats hardly asked him anything that should have been unexpected. He may have been shocked that the sex crimes prosecutor was also grilling him (like how dare she!)? That whole thing was just bizarre to me.
8:18 p.m.: Committee to consider Kavanaugh nomination on Friday Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Tex.) said the Senate Judiciary Committee will vote on Kavanaugh’s nomination as planned on Friday, with procedural votes on Saturday and Monday and a final confirmation vote on Tuesday.
lol...... and Ford wasn’t coached ..... her recollection fabricated by Democrat operatives? C’mon man, Ford’s story is hard to believe,
I just don't see the big deal. The chances of the Dems taking the Senate are practically 0%, and even if they do, do you think that really changes the makeup of Trump's next nominee? Trump will probably go ahead and announce before the mid-terms anyway, so in effect it would have ZERO impact. So even if Kavenaugh is blocked and the next nominee can't get confirmed until after the mid-terms, what would be accomplished? I'd think if the conservatives really think this was dirty politics, it might energize the right wing base a tad in those elections. If he is pushed through, I'm not sure that would be the case quite as much (and in fact that might play into the left's base a little more). But in either case, Trump is just picking another from the list the Federalist society gave him. Maybe this shows why they shouldn't just be picking justices handed down through a "good 'ole boys" network, ya think?
It appeared that Kavanaugh was playing to his patron, the not so honorable Donald Trump. In fact, Kavanaugh actually appeared to have been intentionally imitating Trump's style and rhetoric.
And it’s not beyond the realm of possibility that Gibsontin, FL will have 2” if snow in 4 months. Cmon man. M
If they don’t confirm someone in the immediate future, they’re going to get blasted from the right with the “spineless cuckservatives” narrative. Got blocked by a bunch of Democrats, despite them having literally no political power - and worse, gave into their political game - is about the worst narrative possible for a Republican candidate trying to turn out voters.
As they should... Perhaps it wouldn't affect them as much in November... But their approval rating would take a massive hit without question if they don't confirm someone...
Because the prosecutor was asking about things that would normally be privileged. It struck me as highly unusual to be inquiring "who hired your lawyer", "who advised you you need a lawyer", "what advice is your lawyer giving you". Isn't she entitled to her lawyer, just like Kavenaugh? That's pretty much where the lawyer stepped in, probably because he couldn't believe that line of questioning. Yet... in the end she even answered those questions. Do you think that has relevance? Here's a question for you, who is paying for Kavenaugh's lawyer? Hell, did you know that somebody paid off $200K+ of his debts (which is slightly fishy, but I understand we don't want justices with financial debts). Still, if it is partisan money I find that a bit objectionable. I'm not sure of the precedent on that.
