Chairslinger

Seems like confirming Kavanaugh now might be the worst of both worlds for the GOP electorally. They take the base's feet off the fire as far as motivation goes, and they face a full month where additional damaging evidence might come out about the guy they already confirmed. And when they start blaming the FBI for not turning up the evidence we start getting unnamed sources inside the FBI detailing every little trick the White House played to kneecap the supplemental investigation.

John Roberts must be so happy. As Chief Justice he supposedly values the legitimacy of the court very highly. He's soon to have two sex offenders and a stolen seat judge making up the bulk of his 5-4 conservative opinions, making rulings that generally about 60-70% of the country disagrees with. Oh, and these judges were appointed mostly by presidents who lost the popular vote, and confirmed by a Senate where people representing a minority of the population have a majority of the votes.

I don't get what is so hard to understand about this. If you asked me exactly what I was doing at 9:59 am on September 11th, 2001 I could tell you in detail. If you asked me exactly what I was doing on 8:22 PM of that day, I'd draw a blank. I think most people in the country would have a similar experience. I mean, I know these people have a motivation for ignoring the obvious, but fuck it's not too hard to get. Traumatic experiences often etch themselves in your memory the way other things don't. So fucking disingenuous. What Trump did is the very definition of mocking. The worst bullies may be the ones that feign ignorance and innocence when you call them on their shit.

Move over Steph Curry, we've got a new king of the crossover.

This is why an impartial FBI investigation, even if it's short, is a nightmare for the GOP. Any number of these small details could be damning, and it's looking like the GOP is not going to be in a position to shield Brett from it anymore.

I share the concern, as well, that at its conclusion GOP Senators will use it as a pass to vote yes. But I also don't think this is 'nothing. Assign whatever motives you want to Flake, and the parameters of the investigation, but they have opened up the can of worms where if the evidence knocks loudly enough, they're probably going to have to answer. What struck me most is how much pressure must have been put on Trump to green light this. The guy that whines about Sessions recusal. Though smaller in scope, Trump just signed on to do to Kavanaugh what he has been whining Rosenstein and Sessions did to him.

His entire characterization of his drinking habits is at odds with how many witnesses at the time describe it.

Until Trump, I wouldn't have realized gaslighting was a unique and prevalent psychological tactic that deserves it's own term. Wittes has been one of those "disagree with him politically, but think he's a great guy" people. I also assume the important part of what he is getting at is that last sentence. After parsing the legalise, I think Wittes is saying that even he, as a supporter of Kavanaugh, is troubled by Kavanaugh's fairly transparently false statements presented as exculpatory. Like, perhaps, the insultingly bad explanation for what he really meant by Devil's Triangle.

Yeah, Bob. If only someone conducted a more thorough investigation where other witnesses were put under oath. This point needs to be driven through the heart of every shameless GOP senator that makes it. There was no corroborating evidence presented today because the GOP would not allow it to be.

I have to say, I pretty much completely disagree with your analysis in this thread. Both earlier and now. 1. You said Kavanaugh's performance was for an audience of one. I don't think that makes any sense, and plays into the defeatist myth that "nothing matters" in the age of Trump. Trump dropping support is by far the least likely way of him going down, so playing to him like he is a Fox News pundit is pointless. Brett should have been playing to an audience of two. Murkowski and Collins. 2. If he is confirmed, seeing that as a win for the GOP I think means you were taken in by the liberal fantasy that this was ever about preventing the appointment of a conservative judge as the 5th swing vote. I see some liberals fighting Kavanaugh with the single minded ferocity that suggests they think stopping Kavanaugh stops the GOP takeover of the court. If you accept that this was never about that, then you are left with today being mostly a victory. As a simple matter of morality, a victim was allowed to stand up and tell her story and in the pragmatic sense if they ram through Brett after today it's likely to hurt them even more in November. If you have already accepted that the GOP will get some conservative judge on the court in the next 3 months or so no matter what, I am not really sure what the GOP won today. And if you hadn't already accepted that before today, I don't think you were being very realistic. Tomorrow is passing him out of Committee, right? Unless things are even worse for Brett than we thought, he should get through because the only possible hurdle we know if there is Flake. I think the real test comes during the floor vote. While there are always more political fights to be had down the line, and it's totally plausible we'll be back at the Collins door in a year to beg her to stop whatever horrible healthcare laws the GOP has dreamed up, I think this vote pretty much answers that question for these two.

The real longterm solution for this is to convince people Trump is so vile and unacceptable that the GOP should not be entrusted with the reigns of power for a long time. The problem here is that the GOP has been better at long term planning, and thanks to some luck, they have been able to make moves that set the table for undemocratically entrenching theor power. While winning the House(and maybe the Senate) in '18 is a start, and the presidency in '20 would be good, it's not enough if the GOP just takes back Congress in '22. The GOP has become too good at Constitutional hardball, and their base has proven that they have little problem with being lying, shameless, and just generally without values in pursuit of power. That's why I have no doubt packing the courts would backfire on us. The Democratic base would likely punish the party for such a craven move while the GOP base would celebrate and reward it. A little factoid has occurred to me a lot over the past 2 years that disturbs me. Ronald Reagan was elected in a landslide only four years after Nixon's second term ended. Democrats need to learn from that and not just turn it into wins in the next two years, but also going forward. They need to make the larger case of why the GOP isn't just the part against women, gays, and minorities now....but that will be the case for the next decade or more. They need to start labeling these people Trump Republicans so that they can use that term derisively on them for years to come, long after Trump has stumbled off the political stage.

The night Trump wins his second term.

Imagine a future where, after having already spiked Roe and opened the floodgates, Judge Kavanaugh casts the deciding vote upholding an Alabama law making it a crime for a rape victim to obtain an abortion.

Grahmn strikes me as someone with just enough shame and self-awareness that when he decided to become Trump's stooge he found he has to keep praising Trump so loudly just to drown out the voice in his own head that is disgusted by him.

This happens a lot with the GOP. They are so good at spin and propaganda that when it actually comes time to have a substantive debate/trial/hearing where they can't just Gish Gallop their way out of things the distance between reality and right wing reality becomes apparent and jarring. It's likely why they are so focused on taking over the judiciary. Despite its flaws, it remains the venue most resistant to rhetoric over substance. And they fucking hate that.

I don't think Trump will pull the nom because that is just too awkward for him and his past. At least with Moore the voters made the final decision. How does Donald Trump personally tell his SCOTUS pick that his past transgressions with women disqualify him for a position of power? So either Brett steps aside(I think this is a possibility) or Collins gets to do for the GOP what McCain did during the healthcare fight; save them from themselves with a no vote. As a sidenote, a bit of a consolation prize that Kennedy left thinks like Obergefell and Texas v. out to dry get get his buddy a job and this is the result. Enjoy your retirement, Anthony.

So the guys who came forward are Donald Trump and John Baron?

Need a political comic that depicts two guys in a car labeled GOP staking out a Pizza shop while priests sneak off with little boys draped over their shoulders unnoticed behind them.

With the way the question is phrased, I could maybe be a yes.

Couldn't happen to a nicer cum rag.

He's like that one member of your family that sometimes just lies about random things for no reason. "Yeah, the Summer of '96 I took a pottery class." "Dude, we hung out all that Summer, I know you didn't take a pottery class. And besides, do you think I am going to be super impressed that you learned to make a bowl 20 years ago?"

At this point, I think Murkowski is more likely a no then she is a yes. The crazy thing here is just how dead set Collins seems to be to ignore all good sense and vote for Kavanaugh. I think it's worth saying that Collins may be laying political ground work for a no vote. If you are in her shoes, it is probably smart to appear favorable to Kavanaugh so that if you do ultimately vote no you can make a plausible case that you wanted to vote for him but, for instance, Ford's testimony was just too disturbing to vote yes. That said, if Collins does vote yes I think it's worth stopping and considering just how far the "moderate" Republican has fallen. Things like killing Roe and repeatedly committing perjury in front of the Senate have already fallen by the wayside and now she is set to ignore multiple women's charges of sexual harassment and/or assault. Far from being a moderate, this is stuff that would have sunk a nominee with many legitimate conservatives in a Bush or Reagan presidency.

I think a better question is has anyone seen it....and survived? I would imagine looking at proof Coultergeist's origins would be like peeking into the Ark of the Covenant.

Pretty soon he'll be asking if they were wearing something slutty. This really could turn into the worst of all possible scenarios for the GOP because Trump refuses to pull the nom. He seems bound and determined to make women the next group that goes 70/30 for Democrats.

Monk is great, and New Who is an obvious one. I just started watching Chuck last night. Pretty sure that is currently only on Amazon.