Waste of time. Trump will just nominate someone worse. This one is reasonably sane for a Republican--Roe v Wade is safe---calm down.
3
Mitch McConnell wouldn't even risk the nomination of Merrill Garland coming to a vote, and now he has the gall to claim that Democrats are not willing to give Kavanaugh a fair hearing. He is even calling for a quick vote to confirm Kavanaugh.
This disgusting man should be at least embarrassed, if not ashamed, to mouth such hypocritical garbage.
6
Sad to see the direction Republicans have and are taking our country. Money really does talk- totally drowning out morals and ethics as evidenced by Mc Connell and others.
I don't care if Kavanaugh reads to blind kids he is not a good Catholic. He has a very weak looking face which doesn't really hide his mean streak. I think he might have been bullied as a kid which warped his world view. Sad.
3
There are TOO many Catholics on the Supreme Court! That should be enough to disqualify him. Let's have an atheist or a Buddhist!
2
"Let's have an atheist or a Buddhist!"
Name some.
1
"Given the Senate's make-up, it should not waste its political time and money on mounting a strong opposition to Judge Kavanaugh."
The Senate has a constitutional duty to give "Advice and Consent" (Article II, Section 2).
1
This is all for show, including the hearings. The Democrats are wasting their time trying to block this nomination. They don't have the votes. End of story.
At least Kavanaugh isn't an idiot. Trump has appointed much worse.
Maybe the Democrats should work on building a better plan for the future, like universal health care, or affordable education. You know - stuff that average Americans have been saying they want for the last few decades. The Democrats lost the the power to block this nomination because voters lost faith, never gaining much by supporting them.
1
There’s no legacy in this pick
2
Where and why does this statement appear in the
New York Times Article:
"Democrats and Republicans are keenly aware
that Judge Kavanaugh, if confirmed, would push
the court to the right, cementing a conservative
majority and shaping American jurisprudence for
decades to come."
The ages of three of the Conservative Justices
are 72, 68 and 63 - Thomas, Alito and Roberts.
They are not going to be on the Court for decades
to come.
Judge Ginsburg might be on the court until she
is 105, which gives her at least two decades more.
If the Senate goes Democratic in 2020, who
know if Trump will be able to put anyone more
on the court.
If a Democrat is elected for President in 2020,
then they can bide their time until a "Conservative"
Justice leaves the court. They won't have to wait
decades.
We all know the New York Times is Liberal/Progressive
but I would expect simple accuracy in its reporting -
after all is that not the basic duty of a Newspaper ?
4
What exactly is the Democratic strategy here? Even if they are successful in blocking the Kavanaugh appointment, who will Drumpf nominate next? Another Kavanaugh.
The goal should be to take control of the Congress and block any meaningful Republican legislation until the next Presidential election.
6
Of course the White House says the President didn't ask a Supreme Court nominee their position on Roe v. Wade or any other controversial social issue. The nominee was vetted by every conservative group in the country. They asked him his positions so the President could say he didn't.
1
In response to my three cents.
If environmental regulation is an important issue to you I don't understand your statement "I really wonder if there is a good reason to support Democrats anymore". Republicans will some day cut down the Sequoias- pave over all forests and parks and pollute every stream in the country. That's not a maybe. There should be no question who to support if you care about our country.
5
The nominee met privately with Trump. We all know what Trump asked him and we all know he gave Trump the 'right' answer, that he would keep Trump from being held accountable for his crimes.
3
Kavanaugh has the credentials, intelligence, and experience. Garland had those qualifications as well. I do not understand why Garland cannot be reconsidered as he was a centrist - the type I'd like to see on the court. Right now, we have two sides; shouldn't have sides. Just jurists who know the laws and appreciate the fact that it's their job to uphold the constitution and laws. For me, there is not room for activists. Realize that readers want activism, but that's an emotional response to a divided media that never, ever represents the whole story and the consequences of decisions. The Dems are angry, just as the Reps were angry. But are they really or are they just trying to appease the extremists in their party. Does everyone in DC have to act like a child?
4
Is it really all about Roe v. Wade?
Every time a SCOTUS Justice opening has arisen since Roe was decided, the "litmus" test has been the nominee's position on Roe. Yet there Roe still is, 45 years later.
There ARE other issues.
1
Re: the Nebraska Senator’s comment, the American people proved they weren’t “smarter than that” when they put Trump in office (albeit not by the popular vote.) I think Americans in general and Democrats in particular have every right to be alarmed about ANY and EVERBODY a corrupt President nominates for an important role in the nation’s future. All that said, unless some horrible skeleton tumbles out of a closet, this judge’s confirmation is pretty much a done deal despite a lot of talk of a “battle.” The more apt metaphor is political theater.
The 3 Democrats needed to confirm this candidate should fall on their swords, and vote NO. When their constituency finds they cannot have a legal abortion they're be a lot more angry than if these 3 say NO right now.
2
If Democrats are going to use the SCOTUS hearings to send a message to midterm voters, it had better be a message most voters, not just anti-Trump voters, care about. Democratic voters already care about reproductive rights. Nobody's minds will be changed about the abortion issue. The message should be about workers' rights, consumer protection and government's role in healthcare. Obviously, the nominee will avoid making clear statements on specific laws and issues but Democrats can raise awareness by asking relevant questions on the above issues. The hearings will be a campaign event for Democrats and they should use it wisely.
1
Democrats will make a lot of noise and lose to the Republicans, just like they did with Merrick Garland and most things in the last 30 years.
The Democratic Party is paid billions of dollars to "barely lose" to the Republicans. That's their job. Ask the Wall Street bank tycoons who were selling CDO's and swaps in 2008. They're doing great and did great with Democrats in charge. The average Democratic voter did not do great and is still not doing great. I can't believe people are still perplexed that Benie almost won the nomination and Trump won the election.
Can't you see?
#NewParty #Newleadership
1
“I thought he came across as a good family person, good, decent human being,” Mr. Manchin said. This is the kind of statement that gives me the creeps. Besides being an inane and meaningless comment, it sets the bar very very low. If that's all it takes to be a Supreme Court Justice we might as well just draw straws. Prepare for the corporate takeover of our democracy folks.
11
In today's paper, Gorsuch and Kavanaugh attended the same elite prep school! Don't those Trump people hate the elites? So, why is this ok now? These guys know nothing about getting your hands dirty kind of work. They are the Elites. Just on the other side of the Elite spectrum.
7
"Don't those Trump people hate the elites?"
The US Senate is not filled with "Trump people".
"So, why is this ok now?"
Supreme Court nominees must be confirmed by the US Senate.
"These guys know nothing about getting your hands dirty kind of work."
According to news reports, Trump put a lot of work into choosing a Supreme Court nominee.
Emily writes:
"I am a young woman, and guess what? Sex is not my foremost issue, and I am sick of everyone assuming that it is. ... environmental regulation ... is what I do care about. I really wonder if there is any good reason to support Democrats anymore."
Actually, environmental regulation is an issue that is important to very many Americans (me, for one) and on which the Democratic Party is quite active. So far, of course, the DP hasn't accomplished much there (replacing Pruitt with Wheeler, who is like Pruitt without the ethical problems), but Democrats indeed have been trying and continue to try.
2
All the democrats appear to stand for these days is support for illegal immigrants and identity politics.
1
Freedom is a great word, but must be tempered with responsibility, morality, decency, and knowing the difference between right and wrong, especially when dealing with America’s future.....little children.
In terms of human behavior, the more things seem to change.....the more they remain the same. Isn't the human brain universal? The brain which loves other humans is the same brain which initiates war and kills? Isn't dichotomy between love and hate what makes man imperfect?
Most Americans believe that they can do whatever they wish because the constitution gives them permission....no matter if what they do is moral or immoral, decent or indecent, or right or wrong. With this kind of total freedom the future will have no need of prisons, law enforcement agencies, nor law books. Why? Because if the law allows you to do what you want, then there is no wrong you can do.
2
The picture on Washingtonpost.com of Karl Rove with his arm around Judge Kavanaugh said everything I need to know about Trump's new Supreme Court justice pick.
9
"The picture on Washingtonpost.com of Karl Rove with his arm around Judge Kavanaugh ..."
That photo was taken in 2004 when Kavanaugh was on the White House staff. Kavanaugh was not a judge then.
If you look closely, you will see that Kavanaugh is clenching files in his right hand. Kavanaugh is not returning the gesture.
"... said everything I need to know about Trump's new Supreme Court justice pick."
What you need to know is how to contact your Senators, Rounds and Thune: congress.gov/members
1
I do that weekly. Still, I would not let Karl Rove come within 10 feet of my being.
Also, regarding your comment about contacting my congressional representatives, what I get in return are form letters and also abuse occasionally from Round's aides in his office in SD. The representatives in SD do not consider differing views. They are all Trump's minions.
Way to go, pathetic politicians. Keep spreading your vitriol right before important elections despite the fact your vitriol will accomplish nothing. Never mind the reason Democrats are helpless to stop this is because they failed from 2008 to 2016 and the voters saw that.
Me, I'm an Independent, former Democrat. While I don't agree with Kavanaugh on every issue, he's obviously qualified to sit on the Supreme Court.
#Walkaway from #Democrats
100,000 strong and growing.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/OFFICIALWalkAwayCampaign
2
Tough choice:
"It's not this nominee they have to fight, it's the next one. Pathetic fools."
True, the difference between Kennedy and Kavanaugh is far less than the difference between, say, Ginsburg and whomever Trump might name to replace her (assuming she dies or retires soon, which may not happen; who guessed Scalia would be the first Justice to die, after all?).
On the other hand, if Trump's critics wait, the ideological slant will already be 5-4 (frankly, it already was, with Kennedy, though Kavanaugh is likely to be conservative on more issues), and so the only question left to decide is whether it will be 6-3 rather than 5-4. (Not all SCOTUS cases feature the "usual" lineup, of course: in the recent Wayfair decision, Ginsburg was in the majority with Thomas, Gorsuch, Alito and Kennedy.)
Bottom line: Democrats are between a rock and a hard place, with very little "power" to get out. The next SCOTUS confirmation battle almost certainly will pose more stark ideological choices, but it may be too late.
1
Susan Collins sets back the cause of women to be, and to be regarded, as equals in society. She perfectly models the woman easily bullied by men. Aware of the importance of the laws and court decisions regarding abortions, she invokes the nominee's legal qualifications instead of his ability to make sensible legal, as opposed to legally rationalized, decisions. Mengele was a qualified doctor, but no one would want his medical diagnosis or treatment. In this deliberate choice to avoid the pertinent consideration in this case, she shows herself, once again, confort-seeking, wavering, and weak. As Hamlet might have said of this woman born a generation too soon and not an example to those born after her, "frailty, thy name is Collins."
6
Schumer needs to go! Seems to be too controlled by a small cadre of special interests, with little regard for his constituents. Besides, he's been in office too long.
His NY constituents need to become informed and to send him "packing!" New "blood" needs to be elected to fill this important NY Senate seat.
2
This commenter is "fact-challenged:"
"The Democrats have opposed virtually every Republican supreme court nominee since President Reagan nominated Robert Bork back in the 1980's."
Arguably, "virtually" saves this statement: Kennedy (who came after Bork) was confirmed 97-0. Though the "tradition" has since broken down (the vote for Ginsburg was "only" 96-3, for example), both major parties used to OK pretty much anybody the President picked. Not always, of course (see Robert Bork, for example, and he was not the first), but nearly always.
If we can get back to reality for just a second or two:
Kavanaugh will get confirmed before the SCOTUS' fall term begins in October, or else he'll get hit by a truck before then, in which case Trump will pick someone else that his critics don't like either, and that alternate pick will get confirmed before the SCOTUS' fall term begins in October.
1
The Constitution says very little about laws, except that only Congress can create them.
Because the Constitution is so short, basically a job description for the three branches of government (although the Bill of Rights and other Amendments do evoke certain inalienable rights),
the Supreme Court votes based on existing laws and precedents.
There is a rich history of case precedent, and laws. But when a law is challenged before the Supreme Court, the justices have only precedent to turn to, and their personal notions of constitutionality.
Kavanaugh's experience means little. Years on the bench don't equal impartiality. If a judge shows bias during his or her career, you will like him/her only if you agree with them.
As to Kavanaugh's "notion" that Presidents should not be distracted with indictments, the Constitution is very clear on the impeachment of Presidents.
The House is to call for it, the Senate, with the Chief Justice presiding, tries the case. Punishment is limited to removal from office, however, the Constitution says the person impeached "shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law."
Trump's been trying to get out of being investigated, even as he becomes ever more tight with Putin. So of course he'll like the guy who misconstrues the Constitution and offers him a way out.
4
It's not this nominee they have to fight, it's the next one. Pathetic fools.
3
What should be thoroughly probed is Kavanaugh's likely involvement in the Bush Administration's torture program. There are reports that he was untruthful about his role in this during his confirmation proceeding for circuit court judge. Given his high level positions in the Bush White House, I cannot believe that he was unaware of the torture being unapologetically perpetrated by Bush-Cheney. Do we want a torture collaborator on the United States Supreme Court? A long résumé of prestigious positions held is not a guarantee of the high moral character we expect of Supreme Court justices. It may just indicate that Kavanaugh is a very accomplished sycophant.
6
While they may not be able to change the reality of how Trump has been basically given a blank cheque ; thanks to too many Americans sitting on their rear ends on Nov.8, 2016; at least the Democrats are discovering their long lost backbone. Fight the good fight; do everything to try and frustrate the insanity of the G.O.P. until November; when GOD willing sanity will be restored to our neighbors and friends south of the border. Still hoping someone is going to wake me up after all this time and saying it was all a very bad dream. I wish...
7
Don't hold your breath. "Sanity" has never been a strong point in our nation's relatively-brief history. Instead, hatred, bigotry, racism, selfishness, self-righteousness, "you name it" has been unleashed and made "legitimate". Frankly, this "country" isn't worth saving. "Break it up!"
1
Greg, it's great that the Dimocrats have discovered their long lost backbone. Now, if they could find their long lost brain, they could have a completely dysfunctional CNS. Imagine what they could accomplish if they could evolve to the level of nematodes? Then what? Out of the primordial soup?
Now that we have a nominee, it is necessary that the senators communicate with the citizens their thoughts on judge K based more on his qualifications and past achievements and his personality and less on the fear of how he will vote as a supreme court judge.
Citizens will appreciate and remember how their senators are doing their home work.
2
Rachel Maddow last night reminded us that this nominee perjured himself before himself before the Senate Judiciary Committee during his confirmation hearing for his current position with the DC circuit. He was referred for prosecution by Senator Leahy to the then Republican Attorney General who, surprise, did nothing.
6
As you evoke the Holy Grail movie, Trump should not take lightly the threat of a New York Democrat, a party that gave us Weiner, Spitzer and Schneidermann, to "bleed on" him.
1
The Democrats have opposed virtually every Republican supreme court nominee since President Reagan nominated Robert Bork back in the 1980's.
Kavanaugh is highly qualified to sit on the supreme court. But just because he might disagree with the Democrats over abortion they automatically reject him.
The Democrats need to face the reality that a lot of Americans disagree with them on abortion, and think it should not be legal, at least not to the extent it is now. In case they haven't noticed, women are leading the fight against abortion. All the major pro-life groups are headed by women.
The Dems are in the pocket of the abortion industry, and hide behind euphemisms like "choice" and "women's health". But people aren't stupid. They know what goes on in those clinics. It's time to stop the killing.
3
The worst thing about Kavanaugh is that he will be loyal to trump. If any rulings on trump go to the Court, Kavanaugh will back comrade trump. Our biggest problem is not abortion rights. The problem is Putin is about to take over our Country, with the blessing of the GOP.
4
Putin's not the problem. The Democrats are. They're using this Russian collusion nonsense to try to invalidate the election and drive Trump out of office. At the same time they're busy facilitating the slaughter of our future generations in abortion clinics, the Dems are also flooding the country with illegal immigrants, many of whom are taking jobs from Americans and committing crimes against American ciitizens. The Democrats are the biggest threat to our country.
We are on the cusp of an incipient fascist state, a mafia one-party government, on the model of Erdodan's Turkey and Putin's Russia, with plutocratic, criminal oligarchies and their Trumpian puppets set to take charge 100%. it is all so obvious, with no attempt at concealment on the part of our dying democracy's usurpers. Yet no one in a position of power apparently has the courage to come right out and say so. Where are our former Presidents? Our judges? Our defense and national security champions? Our business professionals? Our professoriate? Our religious leaders? Our artists and entertainers? Our media? Are they all so compromised or fearful that they have lost their ability to speak, to provide moral and political authority equal to the immediate needs of the American people and our 200 year-old democracy? Has it all been just a sham preparing us for dictatorship in the service of criminalism on a global scale? The whole world is watching ... and so are we, the little people. It's said that one never sees a revolution coming, and that seems true today for too many Americans. But the same can also be said for counter-revolutions, and that may be our only hope.
8
How disgusting. Law scholars; Democrats and Republicans all agree that this is a great choice. This is a man of character that has been approved before for the Court of Appeals. How disgusting and disingenious of Senate Democrats, lead by the incompetant Senator Chuck Schumer to drag this man through a long, nasty and horrendous Senate confirmation hearing because he is a ..... Republican choice. How low can these Democrats go?
2
Woe is us. We are doomed.
There is plenty of blame to go around. But the real shock should the "revelations" about Leo, The Federalists, the Kochs and their well organized infiltration of law schools. We have been played. Quietly, effectively, efficiently. Opus Dei is having their day.
Separation of church and state is about to be a fringe idea - a joke. Women's reproductive rights? Dark money funding elections? Corporate rights over human rights? Down the stairs to hell we tumble.
We of the left, we of the center, we of the center right have been played - out organized, out spent. And it happened be because we were lazy and complacent. We believe that if we lay out the facts and appeal for compassion - that the vast majority of Americans will see our logic and superior thinking - and support us at the polls. Because we know we are right.
But we fail to defend freedom. We are not focused on what it takes to preserve the freedoms and rights we take for granted. We are not organized. We don't vote...
To all the outraged commenters, to all the horrified socially responsible liberal minded folks who finally looked up from their facebook news feeds long enough to see it - we have been outplayed. We have been lazy in our defense of freedom.
I would like to think the pendulum will swing back to tolerance, freedom, compassion - universal human rights - you know what I mean. But now I know I won't live to see it.
Next generations:
How outraged are you?
13
In any case, their job is to correctly interpret the Constitution.
That may be good enough, for things like Roe vs. Wade.
In the case that it is not, you elect people that write the Constitution that you want.
But you shouldn't be looking for Supreme Court Justices that will be coming up with their own interpretations that agree with what you want.
This guy will do his job well, interpreting the Constitution.
3
First, I'd like to thank Harry Reid for going nuclear and leaving us with this doomsday scenario. The 60 vote limit was a check and balance that served everyone. His political expedience, albeit in the face of real intransigence, has weakened the brilliant checks and balances built into our system of selecting our jurors to our extreme detriment.
Second, I'd like to thank the democrats for "mailing it in" on senate and house races (not to mention local politics) during 2008-2016. Yes, we had a brilliant, inspiring president during those years, but in hindsight the lack of effort to arm him with friendly states and a friendly congress...or at least a friendlier congress...has hobbled liberal causes for almost a decade (and please don't come at me with "gerrymandering"...yes, its real, but you have to give state and local elections more than lip-service to head that off - see GOP strategy the last 20 years.).
So - here we are, lessons learned? The judicial branch is all but lost for a generation - but local, state, federal executive and legislative branches are still in play. Time to get to the real work and salvage what can be salvaged of this mess. Let's leverage the checks and balances that remain in our brilliant political system and quit ceding the lower profile races to the GOP.
16
A political system beholden to an electoral college cannot properly be described as brilliant.
Same for Citizens United... what a name!!! We're so divided.
2
"The 60 vote limit was a check and balance that served everyone."
You are referring to the filibuster, which is permitted by the Senate rules in certain situations. There is nothing in the US Constitution requiring it. Where a super-majority is required, the US Constitution calls for one (e.g. when the Senate tries an impeachment case).
If you are going to make "a check and balance" argument, you need to explain how the filibuster fits into the operations of the Senate.
You can start your research with this Wikipedia article:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filibuster_in_the_United_States_Senate
2
She could exercise her right to an abortion in her own country, on it's dime.
To the barricades, Chuck! Scrutinize every last punctuation mark, belabor his past. We cannot afford to step back, not one millimeter. Do not fail us.
5
You can thank Harry Reid.
Trump cares about one thing only: his power to survive and be Emperor for Life. That is why he picked this choice-horrible is every way to a democracy. Trump wants Kavanaugh to say "Trump is above the law."
2
It should be apparent to anyone that for Democrats all politics ultimately boil down to a single issue, abortion rights. Irrespective of the moral or Constitutional validity or of Roe v Wade, there is something truly pathetic about wanting the legal and political conduct of America to pivot on a single domestic issue. It's sort of like worrying about the color of your curtains when the house is on fire and the blaze threatens the entire neighborhood. At the same time, considering the outright, blind hatred of the president fueled daily in no small part by this very page, one could assume that if Jusitce Kavanaugh were to appear in Congress pirouetting in a tutu with lipstick on his face, flanked by Ashley Judd and Linda Sarsour, he would still be harassed and harangued by the Chuck Schumers and Diane Feinsteins who would make every effort to deny him a place on the bench
13
Replace Democrat for GOP and your statement is just as true. I use to vote for the candidate, based on his/her position, prior to Gingrich, now I go strictly by party, as the GOP are the party of GREED and all sign on to strict anti abortion (a legal, medical procedure!) and anti government, pro corporation platform. Never republicans!
3
"It should be apparent to anyone that for Democrats all politics ultimately boil down to a single issue, abortion rights. Irrespective of the moral or Constitutional validity or of Roe v Wade, there is something truly pathetic about wanting the legal and political conduct of America to pivot on a single domestic issue."
It has been said by some that abortion rights is the Holy Sacrament of the Democrat Party. When one listens to them harp on this issue you have to agree.
1
“Judge Kavanaugh has impeccable credentials and interprets the law as it was written and intended,” said Raj Shah, a White House spokesman. “His record sells itself.”
I am not a lawyer and would like someone to explain to me how Kavanaugh's minority position in Heller that even semi-automatic weapons can be said to be either law as written and (or even or) intended.
12
"... Kavanaugh's minority position in Heller that even semi-automatic weapons can be said to be either law as written and (or even or) intended."
The Opinion and Kavanaugh's dissent are online.
Google "Heller v. District of Columbia Kavanaugh site:cadc.uscourts.gov".
(The dissent is in an appendix after page 45 of the Opinion.)
Researching the case will take significant reading, because it cites the earlier 2008 Supreme Court case: District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008).
I learned years ago that Hitler gained complete control of Nazi Germany once he got the backing of the legal and medical establishments, For the past few decades the Federalist Society led by Leonard Leo has been mainly responsible for the appointment of Alito, Roberts and Gorsuch to the Supreme Court. Kavanaugh, the current nominee was pushed forth again by Leo.
These right wing Supreme Court judges and conservative right wing think tanks, have been backed by the "dark money" of the Koch Brothers and Mercer families, Also since the 1990's the vast majority of media outlets have been controlled by the right wing and support a pro Republican and Tea Party perspective.
In the coming months we can expect billions of dark money being spent by these same families and other plutocrats to support Kavanaugh. It is a losing battle for the Democrats. The Republicans and the Tea Party forces have won the propaganda war against the Democrats the past two years with a plan that far surpasses what Goebbels ever implemented. Better for the Democrats to save their money on this fight and focus on a creative plan to try and take the House in 2018.
10
“Judge Kavanaugh has impeccable credentials and interprets the law as it was written and intended,” said Raj Shah, a White House spokesman. “His record sells itself.”
I am not a lawyer and would like someone to explain to me how Kavanaugh's minority position in Heller that even semi-automatic weapons can be said to be either law as written and (or even or) intended.
1
Worst choice imaginable. Just look at his record. Worst president in history. This court will be damaged by his appointment. Our country is in trouble at home, abroad and with the environment. We need Trump our. There must be a few republicans who know he’s bad. Every administration for decades ignored illegal immigration and there are 2 1/2 million illegals in C.A.. The Democrats better have a clear defined position on legal immigration and border security or they will lose.
Seeking votes by saying “we support women”, “we support immigrants” or Hillary’s “he’s a bad man”, wont work.
Chasing the Latino and women’s vote at any cost will fail.
5
It is so much fun watching the media whip Democrats into a rabid frenzy over nothing. Thank you all for contributing to this wonderful comedy, week after week.
13
The question is which came first? The chicken or the egg?
1
Maybe Hillary shouldn't have run on an identity politics based platform?
9
When Obama was elected, McConnell et al., met at the Caucus Room Restaurant, and planned to oppose everything that Obama would try to do during his two terms.
Ditto Merrick Garland...wouldn't even give the guy a hearing. That was unprecedented.
And McConnell has done away with the blue slip for opposing Federal Judges, within Senators home state.
Now, McConnell is bellyaching about the Dems opposing anyone who would be nominated for the Supreme's new slot.
McConnell's double standard is hypocrisy personified!
He's made his millions since he's been on the hill. Time for him to move out to pasture.
14
Maybe Harry Reid shouldn't have changed the filibuster rule for judges.
3
I think Garland might have been approved. That is why McConnell blocked a vote.
McConnell's current feigned disgust that Democrats oppose Kavanaugh from the get go and would have done the same for any Trump nominee must rank highly among the most hypocritical stances in recent history.
9
This will be a fight fit for a Monty Python skit. Schumer, obviously, is the Black Knight. Trump is Arthur. Schumer says he is going to fight with everything he has. That didn't work out too well for the Black Knight, did it?
2
The Catholic position on abortion is that it is prohibited even in the case of a threat to the mother's life. Is that also Kavanaugh's position?
3
Some of us apparently are not getting the news and have lost contact with the outside world. Kavanaugh will sit on the court. There is nothing the Dems can do about it. For Schumer and the rest to say so is them blatantly lying only for theatrics. Kavanaugh needs 51 votes. He will get them. In November 2016, Dems lost. Now comes the consequences. The prizes go to the winners. This is why elections matter. It is sheer stupidity to lose an election and then get excited about the other side reaping the benefits. Get excited in four months. Let's join hands and win elections. If we don't, sooner or later one of the old liberals will have to retire, if no other reason than failing health, then things will really change. Fifty-three percent of white women voted for Trump. You really expect me to wring my hands over Roe when white women have expressed on a national ballot they want it overturned? Again: elections have consequences. We need cold hard reality. You chased Bernie and his socialism lite? This is what you sowed and now this is what you reap. You bashed Hillary in 2016? This is what you sowed. In four months, a bunch of establishment Democrats will be on voting ballots across America. Fixing this is pretty simple. We are not abolishing ICE. There will be no free college. We on the center left are waiting for you. And we don't need establishment Democrats lying about our fight. There is no fight now. The real fight is in November. The Legislature makes the rules. Vote!
12
Agree with everything you've said, but I think the Dems do not believe they can stop BK's confirmation, but will use what voice they have to establish their objections on the record, for their constituents. Dem voters wouldn't be pleased if their senators just slumped in silent acquiescence.
3
I agree with Kavanaugh that the barrier for prosecuting a president should be high. But Clinton and Trump have wasted a lot of the time that they could have devoted to governing the country to fighting flimsy accusations.
However, my question to Kavanaugh would be whether in this context he doesn't consider it a problem that Trump is still so closely connected to his business empire.
The US is becoming more and more a plutocracy. The supreme court is playing an important role in that process and a lot of critical questions could be asked about that. Is it really good for the country that trade unions are so weakened? How free should the rich be to buy elections? Etc.
4
Hang in there Democrats!
It's outrageous that this stolen presidency results in yet another stolen SCOTUS seat - and that for a far right ideologue who will trample our bodies and our freedom.
And no way should this criminal president be given the opportunity to possibly choose his own juror.
I hope some principled Republicans will join us.
6
Let’s face it - our country just sinks deeper and deeper into the sewer flushed down by trump, mcconnell, ryan and the rest of the gop. This was created by Democrats who either didn’t vote and/or just couldn’t bring themselves to vote for Hillary. And it’s going to get much worse before it gets better.trump and the gop are very good dirty fighters and the democrats aren’t.
3
Mitch McConnell violated the Constitution and stole a Supreme Court nomination from President Obama. This was part of a concerted effort to take complete control of the Court. It came after eight solid years of organized Republican stonewalling of every move our first black president, Barack Obama tried to make.
Democrats have every right and every obligation to fight this nomination of Trump's which will drag the Supreme Court even further to the extreme right. It means the end of Roe .v Wade, it means refusal to prosecute Trump for crimes against the state, it means further voter suppression. Those who don't fight this nomination, no matter how difficult the odds ,are rolling over for a Republican one-party corporatist dictatorship from which there may be no return.
The corruption of the nomination priocess culminating in Gorsuch and now Kavanaugh must become a rallying cry for Democrats and a rallying cry for women who care about their right to control their own bodies.
4
Judge Kavanaugh is “one of the finest and sharpest legal minds of our time" just as Trump is one of the geniuses in the world.
2
If the president turns out to have colluded with Russia to throw the election and gets impeached, I think the Democrats and the American people are within their rights to ask all these illegal Trump appointees to step down in the interests of national unity.
If they refuse, then the Democrats are within their rights to do whatever is necessary to impeach these appointees or enact legislation to make them irrelevant. This goes for SCOTUS and all the way down.
3
It's time for the Democrats to avenge the theft of Merick Garland by the Senate Republicans both through blocking the Trump nominee for the Supreme Court Judge Brett Kavanaugh at the confirmation stage and also through massive campaign during the midterm elections citing threat to the judiciary under the Trump dispensation.
3
In light of how the Republicans secued this pick, they are obliged to appoint a centrist. Anything else will taint the Court for years.
1
Text book case of a thin skinned, mediocre, self absorbed reality television personality hijacking our democratic institutions with the full cooperation of the two other branches of government.
The only way to stop the Trump juggernaut as it realtes specially to the Supreme Court overturning Roe v. Wade is for women to unite and prosecute their case before the voters at the local, state and federal levels. That is the only way to neutralize ( neuter?) the obsolete old men, in all three branches of our government.
Women must come out of the shadows as they did with the MeToo movement and start taking some scalps.
2
It would take a video of Kavanaugh having a fling with Stormy Daniels, to keep this candidate off the Big Bench - but my guess is that we are not going to be seeing anything like that.
Kavanaugh is a slick as Trump is crude, so it's time to be saying goodbye to our reasonably balanced court.
The worst part of this deal, is that the ultras on the right will be giving Trump full credit for this, which will enhance his chance of re-election.
3
If Mr Trump is removed in ignominy, will his Supreme Court justices also be removed? That would make sense, because confirmation hearings have ceased to be meaningful in recent decades.
2
What a waste of their time as the mid term elections near. Are they so sure of election victory they can now do pointless rallying for non issues that appear to be only in their dreams? Or can they cite the case that will overturn Roe v Wade on the Court's current docket?
No confirmation until after the November elections: the people have a right to vote.
2
all the conservatives want is to send Roe V Wade back to the states which would outlaw abortions in many states in this country. Other targets: gay marriage made illegal, end of life options being made illegal. Notice how all these fall back on the right wing conservative christian views? Church and state are supposed to be separated, but they are coming back together. Our rights are being stripped away. and with net neutrality gone, the government can and will take away a free and open internet.
4
It’s disappointing to me that the Supreme Court has, for many years, been populated with an over abundance of Ivey League trained members. And now we have yet another to be nominated. I have felt for many years that the court has not been representative of our country as a whole, and that a great many qualified candidates are available who have been trained elsewhere throughout this great land.
The other issue that I would like to address is the upcoming confirmation circus. I’m doubtful that either party, when clinging to some political agenda, could be persuaded to confirm Jesus Christ himself.
5
DEMs should be picking their battles strategically, with their eyes on November.
Asking tough questions is good. Nothing about Kavanaugh should be hidden.
BUT what do they have to gain by obstructionist tactics? I believe nothing. There's a 99% chance they can't stop this nomination and if they did Trump would just present the worst possible new nominee out of spite. Then the GOP could go into November hollering about DEM hypocrisy.
Ask the tough questions. Move the process forward, all the while pointing out that they are NOT using the dirty tricks McConnell used against Merrick because they value the Constitution and the integrity of government higher than the GOP does.
Of course, even if they do all that the GOP will still use the same script, calling them "obstructionist" and the media (NY Times included) will use the same headlines, portraying it as a fist fight with lots of bloody noses, because that's what they believe generates more clicks (and more advertising revenue).
In short, party politics and reportage have little to do with reality.
7
I excoriate Senate Majority Leader McConnell and the Republican senators for failing to execute their constitutional duties as senators to confirm or deny the previous president's selection for the US Supreme Court. McConnell's reason: Let the public decide by election of of legislative officers. Now McConnell decides it is necessary to proceed with confirmation of this presidents selection prior to midterm elections; no public necessary; totally political and hypocritical. This is the type of behavior in our elected officials that is undermining the public's faith in their democratic institutions.
10
I think it's great that the leaker from the Starr Investigation is going to be a Supreme Court Justice. Obviously, he has all of the necessary qualities to make Republicans happy.
4
During the confirmation hearing, Kavanaugh is not going to answer questions of how he will rule on Roe vs. Wade or how he will rule on a President's susceptibility to a criminal investigation and trial during his term. Nor will he give answer about his personal beliefs on these matter. So Democrats should not waste too much time asking him to answer, because we've seen the deflection methods before.
They need to be more creative and should ask questions like: "Have you ever made a ruling contrary to your personal religious beliefs?" or "When you say you wish to interpret the Constitution as it is written, does that mean you are an 'originalist'? and does this include the Bill of Rights and the additional amendments (not just the second amendment)?"
14
Maybe they should bring Michael Avenatti on board who can think on his feet. Yea, I know that is not remotely possible. But we seem to have a lot of lawyers in congress who if they were in private practice would not be doing so well. I would think the best way to go at Brett is by nibbling around the edges and slowly go to the center of his beliefs. He is ready for an attack, don't go there. His speech Monday sounded like Trump wrote at least part of it.
3
You don't seem to realize the Presidents don't get to "pick" SCOTUS Justices. Instead, they have the right to nominate people,subject to the Senate's confirmation. Garland was never going to be confirmed because the Dems didn't have the votes.
4
The democratic party has no power.
I am starting to believe this intentional. Rich democrats, heck, any democrat who has a 401(k) and who is not in a traditionally adversarial employee-employer relationship (not blue collar) is benefiting from current republican policies. Eventually there will be a reckoning for the white-collar government employees but for now they are in on the game, too.
Anyways, the point is: why would these people want things to change? This democratic party is the perfect democratic party for the wealthy: it channels the frustrations of the urban electorate but isn't actually a threat to take power and actually change anything. The democrats in Congress will make a big show for their constituents back home but they're not stupid; they know they have no shot at actually stopping this nomination.
12
This is very true when you look at the fact that there are more democrats in Congress who are millionaires than Republicans. And also let's not forget that 3 of the ten wealthiest counties in America are located around Washington DC.
4
Murkowski and Collins should be targeted. They don't come up for re-election until 2020, but for the nation, they will now and ever more represent the soul of us. These women stood up to a government they believed in and said no they didn't believe their Republican government would care about the healthcare of the United States.
You have to hope people have not been gotten to. You know, threats wise. The thing is, we know what incredible pressure has been put on regular people to act wrong. We know all the thoughts swirling in their heads. We also know, they won't have a moment of peace if they don't do what they thought was right in the first place.
4
Mueller's team has announced that there is no collusion even now with the years-old ''case'' against Mr. Manafort.
As Rafiki said in 'The Lion King,' ''It is Time!'' for progressive rtainees to face the fact that there never was any collusion between the GOP and the Russians, only $145 million worth of cooperation between Russian citizens, Rosatom, and the Clintons and Podestas.
There will be no trial of this American President and may be half of the federal judges out there would toss this old tax case against anafort because Mueller's ''charge'' by Rosenstein is only about the 2016 election (won by the American worker.)
How funny fpr Mueller to indict various Russian entities only to find that one never existed, and THEN when one SHOWED UP asking for a trial! - all Mueller's sad donor crew has done is repeatedly ask for delays.
You couldn't make a farce like this up.
3
"You couldn't make a farce like this up..." Actually, you just did.
1
These are all false statements. Where are you getting your information from?
1
Reid had no choice since the Republicans were refusing to confirm ANY Obama appointees, much as they blockaded everything else he wanted to accomplish via legislation.
So no. We are not mad at Harry Reid.
We are mad - nay - furious at the GOP for trying to render us mute.
We Democrats outnumber Republicans by large numbers, yet thanks to gerrymandering, vast floods of corporate money, lobbying and "think tanks" we have to win by a landslide to pick up even one seat in Congress and it's just as bad on the state level.
But merely on the Federal level, between Republican skulduggery, voter suppression, racist gerrymandering (just upheld by SCOTUS), Citizens United and of course antiquated limitations on the number of House Reps, plus the fact that tiny Red states have two Senators just like enormous California and New York and Illinois, etc, we now have a tyranny of the minority.
The Republican Party has become a party of thugs ruling over a majority who disagree vehemently with their extreme far right wing agenda.
This behavior by the GOP is anti-democratic and un-American.
13
Trump nominated Kavanaugh because he stands for everything that is wrong with this administration. He believes that people should be able to own semi automatic rifles, regardless of how many innocent lives were lost as a result of that right. He believes that companies should be able to deny their female employees birth control medication, he is all for destroying what is left of ACA, and most importantly, he will take away the right for women to have abortion, even in cases of rape. But I think, the main reason for nominating Kavanaugh is so he can protect Trump with the investigation.
12
The Democrats should have fought harder for Garland.
I feel that I was deprived of my right as a citizen to have the President I voted for pick a Justice for a vacancy during his term.
29
Republicans control the Senate. Please explain how anyone can gerrymander the Senate.
The problem with the Democrats is that they are concentrated in urban areas on the coasts. In most of the country, they are in the minority no matter how Congressional districts are drawn.
Piling up millions of votes in NYC, Chicago, Los Angeles, etc. does not create a majority party.
And by the way... if not for gerrymandering, there would be no Black Caucus. Many districts are drawn in to insure that blacks are in the majority in the district to insure there is black representation in Congress.
4
Not really... there will be more Supreme Court to fill before Trump leaves office.
1
The Senate is gerrymandered and undemocratic by design, unless you think Texan votes are intrinsically worth less than Oklahoman votes.
This guy lied under oath to the Judiciary Committee on his last nomination, and the issue he lied about was detentions, enemy combatants, and torture. Not fit for public service at all.
Brett Kavanaugh was in discussions within the Bush White House over treatment and interrogation of detainees in 2001-2002. He lied to Senators Durbin, Leahy, Schumer, and Kennedy about it in 2006.
He most recently wanted to deny rights to a migrant in detention -- to whit, the right to end an unwanted pregnancy. That either makes him the world's premier anchor baby advocate or just a cruel human being.
He has a habit of voting to mistreat people in federal detention in ways that violate the U.S. Constitution, U.S. law, and international human rights law.
He should be nominated for mandatory retirement instead.
9
Others have covered McConell’s hypocrisy thoroughly. It is also worth remembering that he threatened, in the event of a Democratic victory in 2016, to block any SCOTUS nominees until a Republican President was elected.
If only a few Democrats had half his temerity, we might have a very different political landscape before us.
6
A son works at Deutsce Bank?
So what?
If that’s your idea of a “dot connected” maybe you need new spectacles.
6
Kennedy's son was Trump's loan officer ($1.5 billion) for convicted moneylaunderer Deutschebank (funneling Russian oligarch money to Trump).
It's not a dot, it's a direct line. The whole thing stinks to high heaven.
You really have to have your blinders on not to notice that Trump would not have survived his bankruptcies without Putin's oligarch investments.
Nice purchase for Putin; Trump dismantling the US, making it small, mean, and stupid.
36
Deutsche Bank has been Trump's primary business and personal lender for years...after US banks stopped dealing with him.
4
Apparently, Kavanaugh lied to the Judiciary Committee during his earlier hearing while he was under oath. Durbin and Leahy called him on it, but he was not prosecuted. Ask him whatever you like, but don't imagine he won't lie again when the profit is so much higher. He is unfit because he does NOT represent the current norms and values of the American majority as he reads the Constitution. He represents an authoritarian, greedy, narrow minded and self righteous group who call themselves "originalists", who would make Jefferson spin in his grave.
The following is inscribed on the wall of the Jefferson Memorial: "I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions, but laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."
37
But will the 'backlash' win us any more congressional seats in November, especially in swing districts where we need to get the seats from the GOP?
2
Mary O'Connell - I'm all for DEMs asking tough questions and getting the truth out. But what do they have to gain by obstructing the process? (I'm not saying they're doing that now, but what if...)
If they succeed in blocking Kavanaugh (highly unlikely), Trump will nominate someone even worse out of spite.
DEMs will go into November looking like the same kind of obstructionists that GOP were with Merrick. That will surely lose them votes in the swing states and districts essential to building a majority in Congress.
3
"He is unfit because he does NOT represent the current norms and values of the American majority as he reads the Constitution."
Of course, you're talking about the "current" cultural Marxist "norms and values" taught in our university Maoist reeducation camps and espoused ad nauseam by our Sovietized New York City mass-media.
That is, no need for a constitution when there is the great collective of "current norms and values", right?
3
The one and only thing Trump wants in his pick is someone who will protect him personally. Nothing else. Trump could care less about Roe v Wade or anything else. He wants a stooge.
40
The hack that said "One of my proudest moments was when I told Obama, 'You will not fill this Supreme Court vacancy'" deserves nothing but disdain.
44
My proudest moment was the day I didn't have to call obama "Mr. President" anymore.
1
Not just now, but ever: Where's the wisdom in any president having the sole power to nominate judges to the Supreme Court? Put another way, would you fly with a pilot who knowingly wants to crash the plane?
14
Trump must have vetted this selection for loyalty to him as the most important characteristic to have. To suggest that even a President is above the law is simply off the reservation. This choice is unenlightened enough to actually believe that a President can operate without oversight. We know what that leads to. This is about as unfit a selection as Trump was. Trump is demonstrating for us republican aspirations of the worst sort, and out in the open where everyone can see. Trump is bad enough without the added super power of being shielded from any doubt of how he operates ...esp. this operator.
14
I'm no constitutional scholar but I did take High School History. The framers of the Constitution deliberately constructed three branches of government and made certain that election and appointment to all three were for different terms (lifetime for SCOTUS). The intent was to allow for change but not swift change. We have had liberal courts and conservative ones. The pendulum shifts. It is shifting now but it is certain that it will shift again and conservatives will be bemoaning that fact. You'd need a crystal ball to predict when.
5
Reporters, please understand that All guns are semi-automatic UNLESS it can be fired automatically. If Kavanaugh is against the prohibition of semi-automatic weapons it is because he believes the 2nd amendment allows for gun ownership. If you can't grasp this fact, stop writing on the subject.
11
Not really, Michael Slater. Most guns used for hunting are not semi-automatic (bolt action and lever action rifles, pump shotguns). A semi-automatic weapon ejects the spent casing and loads a bullet in the chamber with just a pull of the trigger. It is designed for rapid fire scenarios, most obviously shooting other humans that may return fire. I support gun ownership. I also firmly believe in open debate of the risks posed by gun ownership and the need to hold gun owners accountable for training and proper use. Your rights come with responsibilities.
8
This president was not even elected by a plurality of the people but his opponent was, defeating him by more than 3 million votes. Thus he should be denied the right to shape a court, that affects all of us citizens, for more than a generation until he can garner at least a plurality if not a majority of voters. Barack Obama received more than a majority of votes on two separate occasions and he was denied this opportunity.
17
The Democratic and media eliteook down on Trump. They think he is stupid, he speaks with a Queens accent and yet he has consistently out-played them.
Kavanaugh clerk for Kennedy and has Kennedys approval.
The Democratics would have won but the Clinton machine derailed Sanders the candidate who would have defeated Trump.
I'd not for the Democrats Trump would not have won and appointed 2 conservative justices.
Time for Schumer and Pelosi to resign. It is too difficult to watch the Democrats go through this for 6 more years.
Dems need for leadership people with street smarts that can play Trump's game.
Somebody like a modern day LBJ.
8
Why why why aren't the Democrats focusing on this: Kavanaugh has called upon Congress to exempt sitting presidents from civil suits, criminal investigations, and criminal prosecutions.
He has also noted that “a serious constitutional question exists regarding whether a president can be criminally indicted and tried while in office.”
This is Trump's most obvious and effective gambit to neutralize Mueller, effectively ending the investigation well before the midterms. What is Schumer thinking?
12
Dear Veronica,
You speak as if the Democrats could do something about this. They are toothless, impotent.
Best
Ralph
10
"Kavanaugh has called upon Congress to exempt sitting presidents from civil suits, criminal investigations, and criminal prosecutions."
"Exempt" is the wrong word. In a law review article, Kavanaugh proposed that criminal prosecutions and civil suits be *temporarily deferred* while the President is in office.
Kavanaugh's article is online. Google:
"Separation of Powers During the Forty-Fourth Presidency and Beyond" by Brett M. Kavanaugh.
2
HDW: '"Exempt" is the wrong word.'
Correcting myself. In his 2009 law review article, Kavanaugh uses the word "exempting", and it is poor choice, because he has to qualify it with the phrase "while in office":
"In particular, Congress might consider a law exempting a President — while in office — from criminal prosecution and investigation, including from questioning by criminal prosecutors or defense counsel." (p. 1461)
Earlier, Kavanaugh uses "temporary deferral" in a section title. (p. 1459)
Inconsistent terminology in technical writing, including legal writing, is a sign of sloppy thinking. Senators should ask Kavanaugh why he couldn't get his terminology under control.
From the accounts that I have read, Brett Kavanaugh is a very intelligent, well-connected, done the right things, conservative Republican who will vote to overturn Roe v. Wade, ruin MediCare, and allow "dark money" into political campaigns. He might also let Trump's misdeeds go unpunished.
I'm nothing against Mr. Kavanaugh personally, but The U.S.A. might be better off with him not on the Supreme Court.
21
Not until the investigation on trump is completed should a Supreme Court justice be considered.
33
That is just the point! Judge Kavanagh has written , and I assume really believes, that a sitting president should not have to be bothered with silly stuff like criminal investigation, civil suits, depositions etc. The job is just too hard and we don't need this stuff because there's always impeachment. What rubbish! How can you have an impeachment unless there is an investigation first? Makes no sense. BTW since the job is so tough why not relieve the president of a Hectoring wife or kids to raise ? Make no mistake, Trump wants him on the court because Trump thinks the judge will not allow a subpoena for the president to testify to be enforced.
I hope the Senators questioning him press him very hard on this matter
2
Hormonal birth control and the IUD work by preventing the implantation of embryos. These birth control devices would likely become illegal if Roe is overturned and Red State conservatives get their way. Hormonal Birth Control especially isn't only used for pregnancy prevention. It is used to control abnormal menstruation and can be life saving for many women. Science is more complex than the Conservatives would have you believe.
You think In Vitro Fertilization is safe? If an embryo is given the rights of a fully born human, no one will be freezing embryos for the infertile. Too much of a liability if any of them don't make it to term.
Millenials who lose access to effective contraception will find out how fun "Tinder" was in the 1950's. Will they bring back those homes for unwed mothers?
9
The only reason a lot of people voted for Trump was because of the Supreme Court. Now they have it. So the only reason a lot of people voted for Trump is going away. Kind of like the only reason a lot of people voted for Obama was the Great Recession, and once he saved them from it they had no use for him anymore. The Trumpies are feeling their oats right now, but without the Supreme Court driving votes on the right, they're probably headed for quite a fall.
8
Real swamp draining, this. Except for time at college and law school and 2 years as a Circuit Court clerk, Kavanaugh has lived his entire life within the boundaries of the Distrct of Columbia. 43 out of 52 years. His entire professional career.
6
Since Senator Kennedy borked Bork few scotus nominees have spoken openly and honestly in Senate hearings. Later Sen. Biden advised RBG to answer no legal questions, she gave no insight to anything.
The ghost of Bork demands Justice Kavanaugh goes toe to toe with Senate tormentors and delve deep into judicial philosophy wherever they wish... the American people deserve that and would likely respond in kind come Nov.
4
A corrupt president and involved family continuing to aid and comfort willing foreign entities, thereby receiving perhaps as much as an extra Trillion $$$ of personal family wealth, due solely to his abusing the privilege of office, is committing treason.
If the new Chip on the SC block is prepared to let that happen on the pretense that a President in general should not be troubled by mere criminal charges while in office, then he is also committing treason .
15
"then he is also committing treason ."
Isn't it great? Whenever the dems have a chance of looking reasonable, they shoot themselves in the foot by wild statements or insult a lady, Mrs. Sanders, in a restaurant and cost themselves 100,000 votes in the heartland for no gain. Keep it coming, guys!
3
As an American, I am ashamed and disappointed that our country has descended politically to the same low level of so many other mismanaged countries.
Europeans used to think America was a cut above their own countries and admired our assertive forward thinking approach to running our economy.
The Advent of Trumpism has lowered the European estimation of the United States. Our traditional allies including Canada, England, Germany, and France are at a loss as to how to maintain a civil relationship with Trump!
18
What happened in the U.S. yesterday ???
Weren't you watching ? Didn't you hear the car horns last night ???
The French will be in the final match on Sunday.
It's hilarious to me that Democrats would want to "drill down" on the candidates view of executive power after the super abuse of which we had under Emperor Obama. No such outcries went up as he made rule after rule without any input from elected representatives. That his proclamations are being overturned every day renews my faith in government that he had destroyed. Worst president ever after Jimmy Carter. Both strived to make Americans ashamed of who we are. Bah.
9
Majority likes Trump? Where did you find that gem? Lost the popular vote by a landslide, if that's possible. And currently at barely 40% approval and 54% disapproval.
No, facts still matter.
9
Stop at nothing? Right now, Democrats lack both the votes to block it, or a strategy to become the majority party again. Unfortunately, this rant does nothing to mitigate either problem.
If anyone else makes you ashamed of who you are, that is on you. Neither Obama nor Carter shamed the US and both have excellent reputations worldwide. It is Trump who shames America.
1
Trump, the epitome of corruption, should not be allowed to nominate any SC justice who can influence judicial decisions for the next 30 years or more. But of course he is, and he is nominating a man who has the utmost sympathy for his case. Trump makes everything about Trump and America will suffer for it, not for just years, but for decades.
20
So, the Dems have come out swinging.
As a lifelong Dem (JFK/'60) I'll believe it when I see it.
My confidence the Dems is waning. Since January 20th, 2017 I have little to no hope the Dems are willing to go hammer and tong with the Republicans. Dems have been so full of hot air for so long, so willing to compromise where no compromise is possible, their current blunderbuss is suspicious.
I want, demand in fact, my reps, Schmer and Gillibrand, both of whom I am highly disappointed in, nothing less than a scorched-earth, take no prisoners policy when it comes to the Kavanaugh pick. I demand that Dems from this day forward obstruct any and all attempts by the Republicans to move this nomination forward. We are at the precipice, our nation teetering in the balance. We who adamantly oppose Trump will not allow this demagogue to dictate to US and execute his plans for dismantling this republic. Trump is an ugly pathetic sad sack, and all who choose to side with him are complicit in his crimes. This is a non-negotiable. Trump Pence Ryan and McConnell are the evildoers in this scenario. We the people who abhor them must stop at nothing to prevent them from taking any action whatsoever.
DD
Manhattan
18
Cold hard facts are precisely as laid out by DD in NYC.
We who oppose Trump can not allow this demagogue to execute his plans for dismantling this republic. He's now in Europe to upend NATO before meeting with with Putin.
9
The majority of Americans like Trump.
New York (his hometown), California, late night talk show hosts and the press don't like him. Most of the rest of the country likes him and what he's doing, and think that it's about time.
Kavanaugh is a reasonable choice. He will be approved.
5
Why do Donald Trump and his supporters resort to factual lies in attempts to support their views? Case in point here. The commenter states very confidently that the “majority of Americans like Donald Trump”. This is factually untrue. Trump’s approval rating in poll after poll is at around only 42%. His disapproval ratings on the other hand are over 50%. So the truth is that the majority of Americans DO NOT like Donald Trump.
14
OK, I'll play. If the 'majority of Americans like Trump', why didn't the majority of Americans VOTE for Trump.
8
Subtract New York, California and the talk show hosts and you will find that Trump is very popular.
Unfortunately, the Democrats will have a very long memory from this era of court packing by the Republicans. As a consequence, I expect that once the Democrats regain control of the House, Senate and White House, the number of justices will increase and the appointments will be fast and furious.
All of this started with the Obergafell decision and the Merrick Garland nomination fiasco. Ours remains a badly divided country - politically, socially and economically and neither party has to good sense to do what is in the entire county's best interest - it's all personal these days.
I predict an arms race in appointments to the Supreme Court for some extended time now.
4
Started when Harry invoked the nuclear option
4
Why is it that Democrats feel entitled to slur a well-qualified justice when arguably far less qualified nominees Kagan and Sotomayor sailed through with only superficial vetting?
A recent first executive pointed out that "elections have consequences".
It is time for morally bankrupt Democrats to taste the gander sauce and perhaps fake the capacity to choose the high road.
7
Why did Merrick Garland's nomination receive absolutely no consideration, when the sitting president still had a year in office? Who, exactly, is morally bankrupt?
15
If Trump did, indeed, nominate Kavanaugh as a way to protect himself from the Muller investigation, he might actually have shot himself in the foot. As conservative as he is, and opposed to president's being under investigation while in office, Kavanaugh does seem to have a strong sense of judicial ethics and boundaries.
If Trump's case ever comes up before the Court, it's possible the Justice might well recuse himself from the case, for exactly the reasons Trump nominated him. I'd love to hear The Donald's response to that kind of move. The irony would be delicious.
4
It's normal to decide that you're old enough to retire from your role/position.
What isn't normal is for SCOTUS to be publicly ordered by Chuck Grassley that if you're "thinking of retiring, do it now!"
(As has been recently reported) What isn't normal is to be "bribed" by the president to retire in order to give one party the opportunity to make a second lifetime appointment that will change peoples rights for the next two generations.
What isn't normal is for the retiring Justice, whose son works at Deutsche Bank (a dot connected), to select the candidates to replace him and Kavanaugh is one of the candidates (another dot connected).
Guaranteeing the retiring Justice the selected candidate will be someone of his choosing.
Why does this sound so...so...why does it sound so illegal?
11
Okay Democrats here’s the plan: come together and establish a consensus on the questions and continue a line of questioning with a cohesive structure. The most important line of questions relate specifically to the candidates ability to involuntary become pregnant - including as the result of a sexual assault. Now, as any good prosecutor will demonstrate you never ask a question you don’t already know the answer to, the one just mentioned included. The natural follow up is, due to the candidate’s admitted inability to appreciate the circumstances, why would he think that the decision to have or not have the child be his?
8
HAHAHA, sorry your elected Democratic representatives have already been bought and paid off. Pelosi will make noises but she will urge her Party to vote for the nominee.
Or for the money.
3
It was stolen from Bork 30 years ago. Time to return it to the victims, the American people.
1
That's OK, we'll get a judge in Midland, Texas to issue a nationwide injunction against the court packing.
1
Our default assumption must be that Kavanaugh will be confirmed. But that doesn't mean sudden death for Roe v. Wade. My guess is that his confirmation will provoke a blizzard of state laws making abortion more difficult and expensive, all of which will be challenged and fiercely litigated on their snail-like slog to SCOTUS, where at least some of them will be upheld, thus putting Roe to a slow death by a thousand cuts. BUT: Mr. Dooley ( does anybody still remember him ? ) said that the Supreme Court follows the election returns, so if we do our job Roe may survive, to the astonishment of everybody, left and right. Also, there will be some states which will not only allow but even facilitate abortions, encouraging abortion tourism reminiscent of Nevada's divorce tourism back in the days when it was the only state where you could get a quickie divorce ( and gamble while meeting the 30-day residency requirement ). As my favorite historian, the great Barbara Tuchman said, the unexpected is the norm.
5
Kavanaugh's nomination is problematic for so many reasons. But a guy named, BRENCZKOWSKI, who worked with the Russians at ALpha Bank (the one that's all over the Steele Dossier) faces his final Senate hearing tomorrow to run the Criminal Division of the Justice Department, which would put him next in line to Rod Rosenstein, to OVERSEE the Russia Investigation. Odd. The guy who would run a department once run by Mueller has no civil or criminal experience.
This is NO time to fall asleep at the switch loyal AMERICANS!
19
The Democrats don't have any possibility of blocking Kavanaugh. They are just playing political theater to try to stir up their base.
You'd think that Schumer and Pelosi would actually want to do something constructive to help their base, but No. It's more about appearances than substance.
17
Enough of Schumer. Chuck...get a real job and stop living off the taxpayers. Folks, Senator Schumer represents exactly what we do not need in Washington. No matter what your views are of the new candidate, Schumer has only one interest at stake...me, myself, and I.
15
This round was lost when the Republicans refused to allow Merrick Garland a hearing. And when the Republicans changed the senate rules for confirmation from 60 to 51.
6
Democratic Party falling apart! No hope for a majority in Nov 18
5
Democrats will be stopping nothing. They don't have the power. There is a reason I'm a registered "non-partisan independent" in my state of Nevada. This is a complete waste of energy because it is the three Democratic senators, who in their desire to maintain their seat (read: they won't stand on principle), will fold. It's time to stop thinking about the other side and focus on what to do about "winning" at the polls. Democrats have been outmaneuvered forever. Sheeesh!
9
Seems to me that I recall McConnell stated very early on that he would not even allow a hearing for Judge Garland!
How naïve does he think voters are (of course some are!) to even consider what this hypocrite has to say.
Yes, he is only doing what politicians do. That is about as comforting as saying that trump doesn't really mean what he tweets!
11
The democrats should fight but the fight should be tactical. The purpose is not to win as it will not happen but to divide the republicans in doing so. And also to peel away the independents from voting for Trump.
If they argue that the court needs a swing vote moderate it might get the independents to listen. Arguing that this is the end of abortion will not fly and may even strengthen the republicans. I would even leave out that the argument that this nominee is to protect from Mueller. I think it would be foolish and not believable.
Summary - we need one moderate in middle is the slogan.
8
He believes president shouldn't be subject to inditement. What if he was caught on video raping a 14 year old and slashing her throat, is he still immune? Where do we draw the line?
As for me treason with Russia ok it might lead to better relations, but other crimes should be answerable in a timely way.
I agree he should be temporarily immune from financial crimes etc. but raping and killing a young girl should be taken seriously.
Though that said kidnapping 3000 Hispanic children is not acceptable either. Not nice. But the public murmurs and yawns.
Why was I born here?
8
A President is subject to impeachment and removal from office upon conviction in the Senate after House impeachment.
Imagine if Obama had been faced with investigations initiated by a corrupt FBI and intelligence community deep-state effort to disrupt his administration.
2
In less than 10 days he would be impeached, convicted and removed from office.
That's what would happen.
1
Once he's removed from office, he'd be free to be prosecuted.
Mitch, Mitch, here's a news flash for you. Weren't you the one who swore to make Obama a one-term president and swore to oppose everything he planned for, on the night of Obama swearing in?
You think we forget your anti-democratic acts that fast?
36
I believe if the new and improved Supreme Court overturns Roe v Wade America will see violent riots in the streets which will make the Holey Week Riots look like a third grade school picnic.
Sharpening my pitchfork and whistling !
5
stolen seat 2.o
13
Democrats are on the run
12
This is so stupid. Are we supposed to pretend this is a basketball game? Dems versus Republicans- is that really so interesting. We need new faces and new ideas. NYT - please write some articles about multi-party systems, and how politics works when there are more than just 2 viable parties!!!!!
5
Good Lord, if the Dems are going to freak out like this over a replacement of a conservative SC Justice, what are they going to do when Ginsburg finally toddles off?
I have the strongest feeling Trump will be the man on the scene when that day arrives. Ginsburg can barely keep her eyes open as it is.
14
Frankly, I believe you have no idea how healthy and robust Ginsburg is. May she live another 20 years and enjoy every minute on the bench.......
Ginsburg is one of the most remarkable jurists this country has ever had!
Trumpet will not last through this ignominiously destructive term in office....... God help us!
With Kavanaugh's nomination and likely ascent to the Supreme Court, I do think social liberalism is under serious threat but I also feel the younger diverse generations will push this country much farther to the left than would have been possible without this right wing swing we are witnessing. Social liberalism may lose some battles in the short term but will ultimately win the war. However, it will not happen without broad-based activism and participation in democratic processes.
13
The libs spent to much time supporting anti gun and illegals. They have lost the will of the people.
12
Do you know Ginsberg works out with a trainer twice a week?
3
40 or so percent of the people, that is.
3
This is very stupid. So, we don't confirm Kavanaugh? Then what, another nominee, maybe worse? And the fight continues into the midterms, rallying Republicans to the polls to save their SCOTUS seat?
No. Bad, bad idea. Better to admit we've lost this round, concentrate on electing a Dem Congress in November!
8
A Supreme Court justice is not "a round". It's the most lasting damage that can be done to this poor country.
3
McConnell has been cruising for a bruising.....and I am looking
forward to seeing this battle to bring McConnell to his sorry
knees.....along with the rest of his untrustworthy swamp mates.
Kavanaugh has been picked as a willing scapegoat.....Let the
fight begin....ASAP....Go To It NYTimes editors....this is your
meat and potatoes.....do your muckraking and drain the DC
Swamp...with gusto ~~~~
10
It seems that many of my fellow democrats have their panties in a wad over trump's supreme court nomination. A year ago many democrats could see no difference between Hillary and trump. Are you seeing any difference yet? I also read that 46% of the women who support Planned Parenthood, voted for republicans. Does that make sense? Some pundits say that in the past democrats did not think that the courts were that important. Why bother to engage in politics?
I don't agree with the republicans on many things but they do know how to conduct politics and win elections. And they do use vicious means -- full use of wedge issues, smears, and misleading campaigning. But that is just par for the course. It is a sad fact of life and any democrat who runs for office is going to have to contend with it.
I don't think that my democratic friends realize that to do anything in politics, such as picking judicial nominees, you first need to win an election or elections. Mitch McConnel can do what he wants to do because he has the votes in the Senate to do it. The democrats control nothing at the federal government level and control less than a third of the governments of the states (by that I mean governor and both houses of state legislature). A lot of this hyperventilating by the democrats just reminds everyone of how weak and irrelevant they are.
8
Kavanaugh's background leaves him without a clue to how middle and lower class Americans live. How could he possibly, fairly, judge Constitutional issues for us with such narrow experiences. Please, Mr. Trump, nominate a grabbed-the-bull-by-the-horns, worked-their-way-up-by-own-bootstraps judge. This is America, not China, Russia, S. America, or... where the middle class helps support not just our own government, but the rest of the world. Give us one of our own.
1
Silly me - I thought judges were supposed to use their skills to determine whether or not laws have been appropriately applied in the cases before them. I didn’t think they were supposed to make legal determinations based on their personal career paths.
The Founding Fathers were not optimistic that the democracy they created would survive. They were right to be skeptical.
4
Enough so called progressives refused to vote for Gore (voting Nader or staying home) in 2000 to give us Bush who gave us Roberts and Alito. It's quite possible that this happened again in 2016 and we now have Gorsuch and will soon have Kavanaugh. Two closely lost elections, four right wing justices.
I've never believed in casting protest votes or in voting for someone one may wish could be elected but can't be. Perhaps those on the left who reject mainstream liberal Democrats because they see no difference between them and radical right wing Republicans will learn from this but since they didn't learn from the Nader debacle I have my doubts.
6
You might remember it was SCOTUS that gave BUSh to
the USA. They stopped the recounts and declared Bush the winner.
4
Let the heathen rage, and the nations contend.
2
If you're for crowning presidents king, above the law, Mr, Kavanaugh is your man. Read the provided links in this piece.
Nothing in the Constitution elevates sitting presidents above the law and to suggest such is well beyond 2 standard deviations outside the mean for any sane judge.
Impeachments are strictly political and Trump is right that he could shoot people in broad daylight in downtown New York and not suffer politically, particularly in a far wrong wing Republican Congress.
Only the consequences of criminal law get Trump's attention as seen in his up-in-the-night twitter tantrums, firing the FBI director, plan to self-pardon and attacks on the criminal justice system related to him.
With Kavanaugh and the other 4 radical anti Federalist judges, Trump is crowned king without a check to stop his "fire and fury" with which he is constantly in a lather.
As an agnostic my only alternative now is to get re-baptized and start praying hard because only God can stop Trump with an enabling 5/4 court.
3
Being from her home state of Maine, I’ve seen her demonstrate a remarkable lack of scruples. She says one thing and does something else. For instance, she voted to bring the DeVos nomination out of committee only to cast a meaningless vote against her in the full Senate, knowing her vote wouldn’t matter. She will do the same thing with Kavanaugh in conference or just vote for him anyway.
She is no Margaret Chase Smith.
4
Mitch McConnell thinks Democrats are nothing more than patsies because they always take the high road. McConnell is an amoral, corrupt politician. This is the time for Democrats to take a hard, mean stand. Last time, 3 Democrats folded like origami. How does the DNC expect to raise money when they waste it on weak Dems?
6
As of right now he's going to get confirmed. Unless he has some real crazy skeleton in the closet. What the Democrats should do is not vote at all and don't show up for the hearings, To protest the stolen seat and the excuses McConnell gave for stealing it. They should have done that the last time.
The Republicans & their Supreme Court won't overturn Roe Vs Wade, they will just keep sending those decisions back to the states. making it harder to get an abortion. But they have been doing that anyway. Where I think the main worry with this new court is with Social Security & Medicare and social programs in general. I think they might try again to privatize . or seriously undercut, and under fund these programs. The supremes will back them up. ..... And I can not stand Joe Manchin .. absolutely the worst
3
Kavanaugh touted that his mother worked at a predominantly black school. For this product of prep schools and the Ivy League, this is his borrowed credibility on the issue of racial fairness. That he even mentioned this shows he is utterly tone deaf. Very much like Betsy DeVos thinking her checkbook involvement in charter schools gives her the credentials to oversee public education.
7
Ironically this fight over the SC seat may just educated heartland voters as to exactly what these Conservative judges are doing. That's if the Democrats use this debate for this purpose. Instead of blindly rooting for a particular team, voters might see that these judges under the guise of "upholding the Constitution" or sticking to the "original text" are in actuality preserving the status quo of inequality, ruling in favor of big corporations, disdaining science to allow business to dirty the air and water, disrupting unions thus depressing wages, and of course impinging the liberties of women and those with different sexual preferences. Wouldn't hurt to have an educational fight rather than one purely ad hominem.
4
Advice to Democrats: Louder. Louder. LOUDER!
7
Mitch McConnell is all chutzpah and no shame.
5
Here’s a thought: of all the current SCOTUS judges currently on the court, the liberals were voted in with almost universal GOP support. The conservative judges were ripped apart by then senate democrats (remember Clarence Thomas being run over roughshod by Ted Kennedy, and Justice Thomas’ response was it was a “high tech lynching of a black man who tried to rise above his station?”). Perhaps once these conservative leaning judges get on the court, they hold a legitimate grudge against liberals because of how they were treated during the confirmation hearings. In other words, your side is making it worse by how you treat them during confirmation.
And please, don’t even try saying liberal picks were just better choices and that’s why GOP senators were more accommodating. Rubbish.
10
Because -- if you would please remember the full story (and not your own preferred version of history wherein the devil is Harry Reid) -- Republican racism against Obama resulted in their blocking **seven times** as many of Obama's appointees then all other administrations since 1967, when cloture began.
To wit, as reported by Politifact, "Pre-Obama, 36 judicial nominees were subject to a cloture filing, we found. From 2009-2013, it was the same -- 36 judicial nominees. To put that in perspective, and to see Cardin's point, look at it this way: Less than one nominee per year was subject to a cloture filing in the 40 years before Obama took office. From 2009-13, the number of nominees subject to a cloture filing jumped to over seven per year."
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/apr/09/ben-cardi...
So while it's true that Harry Reid changed the rules, he did it because of the unprecedented Republican blockade against federal appointments. Having lost the election to the black man, they wouldn't allow him the power granted to all previous presidents to make federal appointments.
The Republicans are the original sore losers here in their manipulation of the cloture loophole. This analysis essentially boils down to "Republican Racism Started It All" -- but those *are* the facts of the matter in the case of Judicial and other federal appointments. The numbers don't lie.
1
Whoopee. The Dems shudda thought before approving Clarence Thomas (truly disgusting, thank you Joe Biden) . And by now people should have learned that all of us are SICK of political ads... No thank you, Andrew. (I don't like Nixon on ICE and I hate AC on TV!) Waste is so much fun.
I don't know how elections are won .. Trump seems to be one H of a campaigner and I am fond of the transparent moments -- e.g.Thomas.
I don't love the idea of losing the right to abortion as a purely medical procedure --OTOH really if you are going to have sex and do not want babies maybe two forms of protection (so sorry it's not comfy). (the people I know who had them were all lower upper income-wise and in involved relationships or married.)
Personal responsibility..... and common sense, please.(A president free from criminal liability??) The problem seems to be that the SCOTUS is "above" the law.
Don't all the super rich have enough already?? and where is the luxury tax. I guess $$ does not make one happy.. but making other people unhappy makes you happy?! (What's the name for that?)
2
"but making other people unhappy makes you happy?! (What's the name for that?)"
That's called sadism.
6
I’m surprised RBG hasn’t offered to retire in return for a guarantee of Garland getting her seat. Trump should know she can make it past 2020 while his chances are 50/50. It would be the smart move for both sides.
2
Because Trump is not exactly a man of honor?
3
They were demonstrating in the streets in multiple states over school funding a couple of months ago. Making the broader connection to voters in those states, that austerity and service cuts in ALL the government agencies is all we are going to get from Republicans moving forwards is a hard sell in the red states in the face of the barrage from the Propaganda Organs.
I'm sure that's just what you said during the Warren Court years.
1
Okay, this is getting on my nerves.
Actually I'm beyond offended that McConnell denied Garland and is now "excoriating" Democrats. In my view we're midway through a soft coup.
If Democratic politicians can't take back the reins in the midterms, then our goose is cooked. And I have little confidence that Democratic politicians have what it takes to stand together with coherent, compelling messaging that motivates the liberal/progressive majority to vote.
Perhaps too many "liberal/progressive" people are also apathetic for this constitutional republic to survive.
5
You keep counting who didn't vote and we will tell you why but just ignore us.
No problemo.
It is remarkable that Senator McConnell insists that this judge go through the process quickly considering he wouldn’t even agree to hold hearings on President Obama’s pick for the Supreme Court. Double standard or phony excuse? But then, I just wonder what would have happened if Obama had picked a conservative?
5
Obama did pick a conservative. Which is why he lost the follow up election for his party. A strong Hispanic jurist being denied a vote would have fanned the flamed of outrage.
3
McConnell had no problem denying Judge Garland a hearing - he blackballed him just because he was nominated by President Obama. The hypocrisy of this man knows no bounds. His pronouncement breathtaking given the unforgivable way Garland was treated.
15
McDonnell should keep his mouth shut. He led the campaign to block completely and from even having a hearing of Obama's nomination for the Supreme Court. It is time for everyone to stand up and fight for our Democracy and Constitution before these demonic Republicans destroy it. Time for Democrats to stand up for our rights any of them that vote for Kavanaugh should not get any funding for their campaigns from the Democratic Party.
6
After Trump and Putin sign the American Russian Non Aggression Pact I fear for the future of the Baltic States. For a skip notorious for never paying his creditors Trump's assidous bookkeeping on what his NATO allies "owe" is frankly offensive and betrays his avowed prideful ignorance of history. Though World War II started in September 1939 America did not join the fray until December 1941. It was America's leadership in the post WW2 era( through it's aid to the defeated states, The Marshall Plan, The Berlin Airlift and, in concert with its allies, establishment of the United Nations) that helped cement America as a flawed but hopeful beacon of Democracy to the world. But now we have a leader who rejects these institutions that have served us for over 70 years. Now we have an agent of Chaos whose actions invoke what Oppenheimer remarked at the creation of the bomb. Trump is not yet a destroyer of worlds but his slavish obsequiousness to authoritarian regimes and contempt for America's traditional allies does not bode well for a stable world And shame on the Republican Party that spit on the values espoused by Eisenhower and Teddy Roosevelt.
5
This ship has sailed. Dems need to accept Kavanaugh because anyone else will have a similar point of view but not necessarily his fine mind and experience. It's all show. Dems should stop whimpering. It's their fault we lost it all by putting up a candidate even lifelong Democrats (like myself) could not get excited about. Arrogance and blindness to the voters put us here. Let's not blame Kavanaugh for our mistakes.
8
The height of hypocrisy, brought to you by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell:
In 2016, McConnell had already announced — on the day Associate Justice Antonin Scalia died in 2016 — that the Republican-controlled Senate had no intention of confirming any nominee chosen by President Obama:
"The American people should have a voice in the selection of their next Supreme Court Justice. Therefore, this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President."
McConnell in 2018: “They wrote statements of opposition only to fill in the name later. Senate Democrats were on record opposing him before he’d even been named! Just fill in the name! Whoever it is, we’re against.”
5
More emotional, crazed, unbalanced, unreasonable opposition based solely on politics. I think Democrats hate Republicans but they don't want to admit it.
4
Let's see the strength of Maine Democrats... don't give up on Susan Collins. Give it all you've got and do not let her off the hook.
10
Yea right Mitch... except you denied a sitting president's SCOTUS nominee a fair hearing and kept him sitting out in the capital benches. What goes around comes around....
10
So many believers in “eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth” political justice in these comments.
The country is going to be blind and toothless by the time you all are done with it.
4
Obviously Mr. Kavanaugh is "qualified" to join the Supreme Court, his conservative record notwithstanding.
My issue with this nominee is that, just as the Republicans argued that the previous Supreme court appointment should be delayed until after the election, even though it was almost a year until that election, it would only be fair to wait once again until after this election occurs.
I know the Reps won't buy that. They'll argue that 2016 was a Presidential election, while 2018 is only Congressional. But as long as the results of the upcoming election could be dispositive, even if in a negatively, delaying the vote should occur.
8
I would like to agree with you, but that's not gonna fly this time around. If the D's win solidly in the midterms, they can stonewall for as long as they can hang together and the R's complaints will be hollow since they started this particular spitball fight. And they should, blocking Gorsuch was very dirty pool.
But it is not that surprising that we ended up with an R after 8 years of a D in the White House. The very dirty trick played with the Gorsuch nomination does not have to be avenged right now, and realistically can't be.
Kavanaugh is as qualified a pick as could be hoped for from a Republican President right now. Seeing Trump *actually do his job correctly* is even a little bit reassuring to me.
1
Garland!!
Why not file a lawsuit against Trump picking the judge who will decide his case?
2
This nominee is frightening. His belief: presidents should not be burdened with criminal investigations into their conduct.
Forgive this comparison. In Guyana presidents cannot be indicted while in office. This is precisely what distinguishes America (no one is above the law) from many other countries. (where the rule of law is very weak and where presidents are above the law).
Majority leader McConnell should do the decent thing and place this nominee on hold until after the midterm elections.
7
"Majority leader McConnell should do the decent thing and place this nominee on hold until after the midterm elections."
And that's called an oxymoron.
2
The only oxymoron is McConnell putting Garland's nomination on hold 10-months before - but Kavanaugh's - is ok 4-months before an election. And, both Steph and McConnell are colossal hypocrites.
Don't worry, Republicans. The Dems will fight fair; they will make cogent arguments; they will be polite yet firm; they will posture as angry though wise; and when they lose the Senate vote they will go home. In other words, they aren't playing the same dirty games as you and never will be.
3
The policies of the administration are not those of the majority. No need to argue which policies, or why. When people feel outrage they will act. That is the history of civilization. The common man/woman will go along with each injustice, affably, until the moment they are aware, and the
n offended, and then they vote, but first, they demonstrate, strike, and boycott.
The time will soon come for social media to do good and be used as a tool to wage effective strikes and boycotts.
Our Democrat leadership needs to get radical, but do not call for personal attacks. Organize demonstrations, boycotts, and strikes. Quit asking for donations! Instead, or in addition, send me an email to participate in a demonstration, strike and boycott!
7
Several years ago Brett Kavanaugh delivered a lunchtime speech at the American Law Institute's annual meeting at the Ritz Carlton Hotel in Washington. The speech was universally panned as being the most arrogant, conceited, egotistical, bombastic, self-centered presentation the audience had ever listened to at this yearly conference of legal Heavy Water Brains.
4
The objective of the war is not Kavanaugh but Trump. Kavanaugh is only one of the battles.
Kavavaugh is qualified, so what.
This is bad fight. There is literally nothing the Democrats in the Senate can do, except maybe delay the inevitable, and even delaying the inevitable is a bad idea as it simply provides campaign fodder to the Republican party ("we need you to vote for us in the fall so we can confirm Brett Kavanaugh!"). It seems to me they'd be better off getting the confirmation over with and thereby removing the Supreme Court as an issue in the fall. Make speeches, invoke Merrick Garland, talk about the hypocrisy on the other side of the aisle, then vote. Once the vote is over, they can run campaign ads focused on the potential consequences of the new Supreme Court picks instead - something that plays more in their favor.
Democrats in Congress seem to know they need to pick their fights. It's a shame they're so bad a picking them.
4
A week ago I would have agreed with you. I've done a complete turn around. Democrats took their eyes off the prize in 2016, when it was all about the Supreme Court and voting rights. Republicans, to their credit, did not. The day after the election I just wanted to strangle the Bernie-or-Bust people and the voters who "Just don't like Hillary." Erosion of voting rights means chipping away at democracy. I've gotten over a lot of angst by accepting that we got what we voted for, minus 3 million. We deserve what we have now. The next challenge is to fight this nomination to the death. Yes, of course, we'll lose. But it will remind us what will be important in Nov. Wake up. Get mad. Keep your eyes on the Prize. Vote.
2
Kavanaugh is a political hack who while having a good legal mind has but it to use jockeying for political favor among elites. I predict he will not be confirmed- not because of his credentials, judicial temperament or issue stands- but because of skeletons. And this turn of events will probably play in the favor of Democrats and those who believe that judges should be advocates for the common man and not puppets of elites.
1
Justice is supposed to be impartial, unclouded by bias of any kind. Justice is supposed to be about the right thing, carefully measured jurisprudence balanced with the greater good. How can a Supreme Court nominee be considered simply because his views happen to gel with those of the ruling party? Will I be convicted of speeding, not because of the actual velocity in a controlled location, but because of my political affinity counter to that of the court?
This is not naïveté posing the questions. The situation - effectively combining the power of the executive branch with that of the judiciary - means that the legacy of any given administration could potentially hobble due democratic process for generations, decimating, in a trickle down effect, any hope anyone has for sublime justice. Long after Trump has vanished from the scene, a youthful Kavanaugh may still conjure up his political ghost with bruising repetitiveness.
I believe this is how democracies become tyrannies: Trumpism, whatever it stands for, ironically laughable, cruelly divisive, dangerous, and bitterly vitriolic as it appears, could outlive any concept of the Founding Fathers, or any New Deal enlightenment that America has enjoyed before its politics became a TV ratings game. The Republican Party has clearly seen the benefit of Trump’s jugularism, and is bleeding the country already dry of compassion. Overturn Roe vs Wade, save a baby, destroy the babies of another nation instead? Evil hypocrisy.
1
Have at it, Dems and Progressives...
Just about four months left till the mid-term elections...
Trying to shut down the SCOTUS nomination and approval process will play about as well with the broad center as tries at shutting down the federal government have...
Further, you're going to give the GOP about five times the footage they'd need for 2020 campaign ads vs any of your current crop of presidential hopefuls - who are all actually very intelligent people - looking shrill and stupid as they pander to a group that's going to nominate their own presidential candidate at the end, anyway...
The greens aren't about the environment - they're about the matching funds...
Chuck, channel your inner centrist and come to your senses...
Barrett is a capable jurist, but wouldn't be considered for a decade - except in an inflamed and polarized environment - even to replace Bader Ginsburg...
Go get a deal to get Garland and Srinivasan added to the top half of the list - and moved to the top of the list if you retake the Senate...
Though we are getting the President and Congress we deserve, we are - for the moment - getting better SCOTUS Justices than we deserve...
6
New Hampshire - is that a US state? Have to look that up!
The liberal chickens have come home to roost. let's do away with the myth that the courts have not been politicized for a long time by so called activist judges. Conservatives and Republicans have every right... even a duty... to represent their convictions
We won... get used to it!
7
Absolutely not. They have a responsibility to uphold the constitution. Will their personal views inform their interpretation of the laws, yes, there is no way around this. But they need to respect legislation that has been passed and in place for decades as well. Why do conservatives always seem to favor the "less lawful" path in all things?
1
I find McConnell’s comments hypocritical (again) - he now wants the Democrats to play nice and fair when he he said his goal was to block any and all of Obama’s work no matter what it was. The irony is amazing.
1
The typical response for a SCOTUS candidate when asked about issues is "we'll cross that bridge when we get to it" .
2
McConnell has no right, and NO voice in the matter. He is the obstructionist in chief. No question he is the one to point fingers at in the fall of the Republic from grace. The activist court argument is not a one way street. This is clearly an attempt to stack the SCOTUS in partisan favor for decades. Checks and balances indeed. The founding fathers did not foresee the moral and unethical likes of Mitch McConnell and his partisan republican ire. Gross. disgusting unethical and unconstitutional.
5
It's simple: does the man represent a constituency, the rule of law, or the Republican (and probably Russian) Oligarchs?
If the constituency is the American People then he falls short: we don't want abortion sent to the back-allies again, at least 75% of us don't. We don't want children locked up and forgotten about (Our government can't their parents- that's forgetting about, discarding, the children) in our newly built concentration camps.
We don't want laws that enable our President to shoot someone on fifth avenue, with impunity. We don't want our President going down to the treasury and taking bags and bags of money out and taking them home, with impunity.
That's what kavanaugh stands for, impunity for the President, he wrote it up in 2006, I believe.
He doesn't, just from that writing, honor or respect the law. He puts a man who holds the Presidency to be above the law.
That completely destroys the whole concept of law, of the Declaration, The Common Law, and the Constitution: "All men are equal", implies no one is above the law, they have equal protection and equal responsibility to obey the law.
The Common law applied to all the Kings Men. The Constitution declares the "equal protection of the law" but establishes punishment for it's violation, by way of "Due Process of Law".
These degreed people without a respect for law should never be Judges. No wonder they kept him out for 3 years, before American Oligarchs bought him his seat on the D.C. Appellate Court.
3
So, all the Supreme Court Justices are Jewish or Catholic, except Gorsuch who was raised Catholic but attended an Episcopalian Church recently, whatever that means. I find this a little weird.
1
Weird, and it's not random. Here's why it continues:
https://www.thedailybeast.com/the-secrets-of-leonard-leo-the-man-behind-...
So the entire GOP is OK with the fact that this nominee could excuse Trump from any indictments/subpoenas and even allow him to pardon himself when Trump is ruining NATO relations, started a trade war, criticizes our intelligence agencies, financially profits from his position, cozies up to oligarchs and dictators and is going to very soon meet ALONE with Putin, a US adversary, the one who hacked our free elections, who may have him compromised.....all the while when his entire campaign and HE himself is under investigation?
WOW! I mean WOW!
7
Every moment spent on this losing cause, every Facebook post, Op-Ed, and editorial, takes time away from an issue on which the Democrats control their own destinies, like reducing the horrendous gun violence rate in Chicago. There, in a "blue" city, 5 were killed and 24 wounded last weekend. The the only reason it doesn't get national attention is that it isn't a white middle-class dude shooting strangers all at once. If Democrats can fix this kind of rot in their own midst, they won't have to worry about Justices like Kavanaugh, because they'll control the presidency and Senate forever.
1
Attack of the 80 year-olds. Who's gonna win this one?
3
"The American people are perfectly capable of having their say on this issue, so let's give them a voice. Let's let the American people decide. The Senate will appropriately revisit the matter when it considers the qualifications of the nominee the next president nominates, whoever that might be". - Mitch McConnell (2016)
Why not appropriately revisit that statement? Let's take Mr. McConnell to task and let the American people decide with their votes at the midterm elections. Shouldn't the Senate wait to hold to confirmation hearings until after the potentially new Senate is seated?
6
"next President."
Which word don't you understand?
And RBG was married for 50 years to a corporate lawyer who made millions of dollars per year devising ways for big corporations to save hundreds of million per year in taxes. So, should we impeach her?
3
It would not be a Supreme Court nomination if the opposition did not try to portray the nominee as the worst human being ever born.
This tribalism from Republicans and Democrats alike is poisoning our society. Oh, for the days when most qualified candidates— regardless of their views on judging — were confirmed quickly and almost unanimously.
Whatever people think of those views, Judge Kavanaugh is no Harold Carswell. Like Judge Garland — who also should have been confirmed but for some awful and divisive politics — he is eminently qualified to sit on the Court. Absent more petty tribalism, there’s absolutely no reason to deny or delay his confirmation.
6
A highly trained, well-written appellate court judge being opposed by a knee-jerk campaign run by the "oppose anyone" Democratic leadership. How are Americans supposed to have faith in our leadership when discussion is purely political and does not take into account the actual qualifications of the nominee.
11
What a charade we'll see from the Dems, another moment they wait for to grandstand and accomplish not one single thing. They won't have the votes, all they do is waste time. What are they doing in the GOP districts across the nation to turn GOP votes over to Dem votes come time for the primaries? Already I am nervous knowing how little they are working toward winning back the Senate or House. If ever there was a need for a third party in American politics, it surely is now.
5
What a great choice for the court. An to think in a few months Ruth Bader Ginsberg position will be open for another Trump pick.
7
There should be no vote on Kavanaugh until after the mid-terms.
“The next justice could fundamentally alter the direction of the Supreme Court and have a profound impact on our country, so of course the American people should have a say in the Court’s direction.”
-Mitch McConnell
9
No, he is ruthlessly shrewd. Obama should have made a recess appointment of Garland when faced with McConnell's unprecedented obstruction. You can bet that the republicans would have done that had the roles been reversed. Unfortunately, democrats don't have it in them.
10
All show! The Dems have nothing, and can do nothing. McConnell is stealing another SC seat. Lifting the 60 vote rule on SC Justices is going to give us corporate rule for a long time to come. Meanwhile the Republican, and Democratic base will be talking about abortion and the 2nd amendment.
It's no wonder Dems can't win an election. No backbone.
3
Sure, when you rig things through gerrymandering and voter rights attacks and hiring Russians to interfere anything is possible. Regardless of of the fact that we vote in larger numbers for democrats both for the presidential candidate but also more voted were cast for democrats for the House or Reps and yet republicans "won" more seats. The deck is stacked against us bigly and you blame us as if that is our fault. You celebrate their theft of our democratic institutions. That is simply... amazing.
4
I am far from celebrating. Just stating the facts. Many of the arguments Trump makes, especially those concerning the failing of middle class America, should have been Democrat arguments. The difference would have been the Dems wouldn't have been trying to kill unions and such. Yet again when is the last time you heard a Dem actually get out and defend unions? The most we get is a bunch of meal mouthed nothing! That's what I mean when I say they have no guts.
When the history of the Fall of the Republic is written, historians will point to McConnell's block of Garland as the point of no return.
24
That will be chapter 10. You have to start with the Southern strategy, and work on down through there.
Many would, at this point, given entrenched racism, say that the point of no return was Lincoln's not accepting the south's secession. It would have been smarter to leave the south at the pressure of the entire globe to solve slavery. As it was/is, the south has resented us ever since. And we thought is was no big deal, just fringe stuff they would die out. So now it rears its ugly head in the current format of anti-immigration, abortion and the gays. Yes, it would have been horrifying for slavery to have gone on for another 2-3 generations, so there ultimately can be no moral argument that Lincoln was wrong. But here we are, with white nationalists emboldened.
So here we are, again needing to consider secession. And we seriously ought to. We need to cut these folks off and let them wallow in their ugliness and let the world turn their backs on them. We, progressive states and peoples, need to move on with our lives unfettered by these people that we will never resolve our difference with. And they are holding us hostage to a terrible future. Will we just shut up and put up? Will any indignity be a bridge too far?
We need to put secession back on the table.
5
Trump handed the Democrats a political gift on a silver platter. Just before the 2018 elections the Democrats get to hold daily hearings and judgments about Kavanaugh that remind the American people just what kind of policies the Republicans will force down our throats.
He is against abortion rights but for torture.
He is against voting rights but believes corporations should decide if their employees get contraception with their healthcare.
He was there when the Republicans tried to impeach a President for sexual misconduct who now works for a serial sexual predator who he NOW believes can't be impeached for any reason.
The Democrats need to fight against the GOP not against Kavanaugh. He is entitled to his far right wing judicial opinions; but, the Republicans must be held responsible for forcing his beliefs onto the American people and all the harm that he is about to inflict on liberty and justice.
7
Please take this fight to the ballot box. I know a majority of Americans are disgusted with Trump and with the Republican leadership, but unless they bother to vote, this country is not going to resemble a democracy much longer.
4
But it is a democracy. That’s how Trump got elected. It includes a lot of people not voting. That’s what you get in a democracy.
2
The majority of Americans are not disgusted with Trump. New York (his hometown), California, late night talk shows and the press don't like him. Most of the rest of the country likes him and what he's doing and think that it's about time.
7
William B., speak for yourself. All those labels were pasted on Democrats by the GOP, who were projecting their own faults on us. I am not holier-than-anyone-else, smug, or particularly intellectual. Just a lower-class, hourly worker who can't abide those who think providing a social safety net is somehow both un-Christian and un-American.
1
I never thought the country's politics would turn into the Netflix show House of Cards. To quote Mark Twain, “Truth is stranger than fiction, but it is because Fiction is obliged to stick to possibilities; Truth isn't.”
5
Dems have a decision to make. If they think they can hold off this nomination for 2 1/2 years on the hope a Democrat wins the presidency in 2020, then by all means block away! Otherwise they need to be strategic (not seen as their strength). If they sink Kavanaugh, Trump has endless replacements for him. If this seat is still open in November, Republican voters will swarm the polls and swamp whatever blue wave may be coming.
Dems have to look like they can fight back, but there aren't any realistic scenarios here that end with a liberal justice. So they can, and should, scream and yell, point out the the hypocrisy and dirty dealing of the Republicans, etc. But don't let this drag on til the mid-terms, or the Republicans will clobber them with it.
3
Senator McConnell, have you forgotten your position regarding Merrick Garland? There are plenty of people that will be happy to refresh your memory about it.
9
'…painting him as an arch-conservative who would roll back abortion rights, undo health care protections, ease gun restrictions and protect President Trump against the threat of impeachment.'
The right in law and in equity to the voluntary termination by a woman or girl of her embryo or of her foetus within the first trimester is now well established in the USA.
Hence, dismantling rather than conserving that right cannot be an act of conservation, cannot be the act of a genuine conservative.
Words matter. Edmund Burke epitomised conservatism, as did Winston Churchill at various times during his long political career. Each man was a conservative in that each believed in conserving that which was best in England, that which had become the norm in the settled way of life of the English-speaking peoples.
A radical is a person who wants to uproot the existing order, to turn things on their heads, to destroy and smash if necessary existing rights in order to impose the radical's vision upon society. Margaret Thatcher was such a radical, as was Reagan, because each was determined to bring about fundamental changes by force, irrespective of the harm caused.
Those in America who wish to destroy the rights carefully introduced since the end of WW2 are not conservatives. They cannot be conservatives in any proper sense of the word. They are radicals. They are zealots. They are destroyers of the rights of others.
They are the barbarians at the Gates of Rome.
11
True, the likes of Reagan, Thatcher, McConnell and Kavanaugh are not conservative. Nor are they radical. They are reactionary - the element of the political spectrum that's to the right of conservative.
They do/did not wish to conserve their present state of affairs. They wish to restore a society they perceived to be ideal: one where women and union labor had limited, if any rights, and most conflicts could be avoided by instilling fear in their neighbors.
Unfortunately, too many americans are mistakenly nostalgic for those days when the vast majority of us would have suffered some social or financial inequality, or both.
Politicians like Reagan and McConnell will continue to exploit their supporters' well-established tradition of voting against their own self-interests. And Democrats will fail to convince them otherwise.
1
If Kavanaugh is OK with Senator Susan Collins he's OK with me.
Let's see how this goes.
2
I wouldn’t put that much faith in our Senator Collins. She is more clever than you think.
And so it goes, temporal human beings caught up in the moment. What a moment this will be. I hope Judge Kavanaugh can see beyond a generation. I wish this was not about short term gains and political advantage. Time to think beyond a generation or two. Try 10 generations on for size. Are we that forward thinking? RAW
2
Seems like a useless battle to pick. The Democrats will lose 3 of their own on this issue, folks who face tight races in states that Trump won. They will place their re-election credibility above party. While those 3 won't gain any traction with Trump for voting for this appointment, they may believe that positioning to retain their Senate seats is more critical than a vote on this particular Supreme Court judge. I happen to agree.
The Democrats need to win mid term national elections and state and local elections. Whining won't cut it. And people who are fed up, Democrats, independent, and Republicans need to go out and vote for candidates who reflect alternate values and positions to those in play with the current administration and Congress. The Republicans have played a long ball game to control the Congress, the Presidency, and now key Supreme Court appointments. It's the Dems turn to drive the change- and citizens turn to show up in the fall and vote.
4
"Alternate values"? We've had enough of that during the previous administration and some of those need editing.
4
Kavanaugh is probably the "best" of the people on Trump's list from a Democrat's perspective. If he is defeated, Trump will nominate a more extreme judge after the mid-terms when the GOP will probably have a bigger cushion in the Senate.
3
Our Republic doesn't require a majority of Americans to dislike this. The current government, Congress and the President were voted in by a minority of the voters.
This is a Republic not a democracy. Votes like Representation isn't based on majorities.
A majority of Americans voted for Democrats in all 3 branches of government.
8
This Democratic line of attack was prepared before the selection. Regardless of who Trump selected from the list of 25 provided to voters before the election, the Dems were going to say he's too conservative and endangers abortion rights. The only line of attack that's actually particular to Kavanaugh is his view that a sitting President can't be indicted. That's actually a mainstream view long shared by the Department of Justice, and, likely, Mueller. It's a done deal. Roe won't be overturned because conservative justices have respect fo past decisions. That fealty to the past doesn't apply in every case, of course, but the conservatives won't want to have a major social effect, as overturning Roe would. It's liberal justices who think it's their job to run society.
3
The battle was lost when Democrats and liberal minded independents sat out the last election.
The Democratic Party can't afford to lose Conservative Democrats in States that can and will move to the Republicans.
You can't govern, control the legislative process and committees without Conservative Democrats.
If we learned anything during the Obama administration, is you need majorities in the Senate or you're finished. What Republicans did to Garland should have been enough to bring Democrats roaring to the polls for Mrs. Clinton. Asking conservative Democrats to lose seats to Republicans isn't good politics and it won't work.
6
Obviously, the Democratic opposition to Trump’s nominee was a matter of fill-in-the-blank. I’ve received so many Democratic fund-raising emails since yesterday I can’t count. Too bad they didnt press for Merrick Garland when they had the chance, but now they want to run the midterm elections on opposition to the nominee, whom they are portraying as the end of the world as we know it. Good luck with that. Abortion has become a non-issue in reality because of medical advances making surgical intervention less important, so that wont galvanize voters. The fairness issue will. Affirmative action, that tool of discrimination against Asian Americans and others of ability, will turn this nomination and this election.
4
Note that Kavanaugh's father run a cosmetic industry trade group that routinely lobbied against safety regulations for his industry. Apparently the job paid well enough to pay for a completely private education for Brett, starting at an elite (read exclusive and very expensive) Jesuit Prep School, and then Yale for college and law school. So this is a guy whose contact with the rest of us is mostly theoretical or as a professional in a position of power. Consider the saying attributed to Aristotle "Give me the boy until he is seven, and I will show you the man." Look over Judge Kavanaugh's judicial record, in the context.
9
At least Kavanaugh is Ivy League. For an awful moment, we had the possibility of a nominee who wasnt.
The cost of his primary education wasn't that much more than many public schools where top students founder and fail to reach potential.
1
Your statement is factually wrong.
Here's the current tuition schedule for his prep school:
Day Student Tuition: $37,215 (US)
Resident Tuition: $60,280 (US)
English as a Second Language Program: $7,880 (US) additional
Even as a Day Student, the amount spent on his education was on the order of 5 times that spent on a public school student in San Francisco.
1
Sen. Mcconnell by violating " the Rule " if any he had introduced to deny President Obama 's 2016 nominee Judge Garland, for almost a year, and unprecedented procedures . Not allowing appropriate meeting with Senators, Senate committee hearings and vote , and up and down vote in the Senate for Supreme Court seat. Mcconnell has demonstrated lack conscience for political gains and lost his credibility with all Americans for the rest of his career, particularly with his coworkers . What do you think ?
8
It is a near certainty that Kavanaugh will be confirmed. The only question is whether he will be a Thomas or a Kennedy once he’s on the bench, and the best case scenario for the left is that he becomes a swing-vote, like Kennedy.
So, instead of savaging him and tearing him to bits, which will surely embitter him and push him into Thomas territory, why not treat him with respect and dignity, and even vote for him? Maybe that makes him feel that he was treated fairly and he doesn’t become a reliably hard right vote.
Of course, Democrats won’t take that advice, but they should.
4
Can “cheap political fear-mongering,” mean telling the truth?
- of course it can.
People need to listen to all of the cues from this candidate (in previous judgments, writings, and in his testimony) to parse his leanings. - they are explicitly radical in nature that would push the court wildly right with the strong probability of an end result of an activist court ( more than it is already )
What that means, is the probability of millions upon millions losing their rights, freedoms and way of life, as settled law and precedents are struck down on ideological grounds.
The republicans in the Senate are not going to ask any question that may shine light on the above, and the candidate is going to obfuscate at every turn to answer any question posed by a Democrat.
The result will be a Supreme Court judge being confirmed by a +1 margin (the slimmest margin in the history of the United States), however will be adjudicating for 100% of the population. (and beyond with policy and laws that will affect the international community)
This is wrong on so many levels.
10
My dissension is based on the fact that every candidate President Trump has on his list was picked by the Heritage Foundation. He may well be qualified but he is tainted by the process that brought him to the President by politics.
6
Actually it is based on his qualifications and credentials. Any so-called lawyer who believe that an elected official is above justice isn't a very good lawyer.
6
"But the Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, excoriated Democrats for engaging in what he called 'cheap political fear-mongering,' and for declaring their opposition to Judge Kavanaugh even before his nomination was announced."
I think Mitch McConnell enjoys accusing the Democrats of everything he was guilty of in 2016. He knows he has a party that doesn't care the least bit about their own hypocrisy, and enjoys his opponent's feeble outrage.
Mitch McConnell sees weakness in his opponents, and so far I can't say he is wrong. He played hardball and won in 2016, and with the stakes as high as they are, the Democrats still can't seem to close ranks let alone swing a Republican defector or two.
5
McConnell had 54 seats in Congress in 2016, while Democrats do not have a majority. So McConnell certainly had an advantage over what the Democrats have now. Having said that, he was able to block Garland's nomination without even so much as a hearing. I certainly don't recall any Republican waffling for fear of re-election. Why is it, when it comes time for Democrats to fight on the question of judicial nominations, a bunch of them get weak-kneed over re-election fears at the slightest mention of a fight?
9
In the adjacent article, "Kavanaugh Followed the Narrow,
Elite Path of Supreme Court Justices", one sees the disastrous results of politicization of Supreme Court nominations. Instead of being a Council of Wise, it became an almost evenly divided body of traditional conservatives, nominated by Bush father and son, and leftist radical troublemakers, nominated by Clinton and Obama.
1
Well, it's all a Democratic political version of "The Charge of the Light Brigade." The Republicans appear to have the votes; Mitch McConnell will once again invoke the "nuclear option;" and the Supreme Court will continue to be a now solid conservative 5-4 majority for years to come. So ends "Equal Justice Under Law" with five men with a right-wing ideological "judicial philosophy" that bends the law to a pro-corporate, pro-executive power, anti-civil rights, anti-women's rights, anti-immigrants' rights, anti-gun regulation and on and on for another generation. The looming loss of the Court makes it imperative that the Democrats re-take control of Congress.
7
But it was OK when Obama replaced two moderate Justices with hard left liberal Sotomayor and Kagan (a close personal friend of Obama!) -- wasn't it? It's OK to stack the Court, so long as it is to the left?
Kavanaugh said:
“Like civil suits, criminal investigations take the president’s focus away from his or her responsibilities to the people. "
However, this should not apply to Trump, whose focus is on golf. Hannity, profits from his branding and image, not on "responsibilities to the people"
9
McConnell wants the will of the American people to be followed, which is why he stalled 10 months on Merrick Garland. McConnell will certainly wait until the midterm elections before proposing to confirm Kavanaugh.
McConnell is certainly fair and even handed as a Senator.
Fair and honest is a core Republican value.
37
Kavanagh does not deserve confirmation any more than Goresuch did. For McConnell to interfere with Obama’s choice as president is simply so shocking that it throws everything Into question and should put the kibosh on anything or anyone this mafia boss nominates.
16
If dismissal is “successful”, won’t a worse choice be next? What is the Dems long-term view here? Sort of looks like they just want a commotion, maybe to show they’re alive???
12
Going all out for illegal immigrants and then going all out against a very qualified American citizen. Dems seem to have no idea how bad they are looking.
24
Clear that even if the great man Moses, himself, were nominated, the Dems would still find him unacceptable, LOL!!
19
Strange comment given the fact that McConnel would not even give Garland a hearing.
2
Yeah, I don't want a Supreme Court justice who thinks GOd talks to him. Thanks anyway.
1
Yeah, and who wrote it. ugh.
The guy takes his orders from the Pope. That's what the problem is. We need to lobby the Pope. That's the only possible way to save Roe V. Wade.
3
Set the stage, friends and neighbors, for the next wave of leftist hysterical mania. This sore loser behavior should just about ice the midterms for the GOP and pave the way for our President’s second term. Thank you Diane, Chuck, Nancy, Elizabeth, MSM, one and all.
31
Fewer people, nationwide, believe the GOP line than the center and the Left. I am afraid the Republicans are scared of being toppled.
9
as we used to say in school days, you wish
Brett Kavanaugh is not a beloved charismatic figure; he rules for business, aganist the environment, against the safety net, etc. A legally sophistical shill for what the American public is against, about 70-30. Ď.J. Trump's con job (faux populism) misled a critical number of swing voters to think he was different from hard right Republicans; he hasn't been. This is another illustration.
2
McConnell's play on the Garland seat is nothing but unseemly and anti-democratic. If he's a winner, I'll gladly wear the loser moniker. But then again, I wouldn't be following this type of person.
Well both Pence and DT get their double whammy fringe ideologue.
1) Undo women's reproductive rights
2) Squash Mueller investigation
Congratulations gentlemen. You are both the epitome of disgust to the majority of Americans.
22
This tripe from McConnell who refused to hold hearings on ANY nominee that Obama put forward. McConnell is a megahypocrite! The man has absolutely no shame.
45
So what else is new? Democrats had their chance to fight many times and they blew it. Now here we are.
Oh that wacky Mitch McConnell! Getting his panties in a bunch when Democrats do a dead-on imitation of him two years ago.
Doesn't he know that mimicry is the sincerest form of flattery?
All that's missing from the Democrat version is the groveling before Combover the Great.
24
Mitchell, meet Kettle
...then smoke Pot...
...ashes now, pot not.
2
Mitch McConnell's hypocrisy knows no bounds. He is a bully in the sandbox, a liar motivated by unlimited desire to wield power for power's sake. He is weakening our country significantly and this latest diatribe about Democrats playing politics is shameless considering what he did during President Obama's last year in office with respect to Merrick Garland. Sad day for our country, but no surprise whatsoever.
25
Too bad, so sad that a sitting American President could not play the political game to get his nominee installed.
Maybe that is why he was an ineffective President.
4
defeat Kavanaugh, jail trump and McConnell!!!
15
If wishes were fishes, I'd be a diving duck.
1
"Democrats go on the attack" is an oxymoron...
15
Chucky Schumer, Pelosi, McConnell and Bride of Chucky, Maxine Waters are down in the street burning tires in front of the White House!
17
The USA does not another white male Supreme Court justice.
3
Why not??
2
When Dems were in power, they mocked Republicans by calling them the "Party of No." I well remember this, as I was then a Dem and thought it was true--it influenced me; I thought that a party that only focuses on 'no' and gut-level negativity and hate and conspiracy theories is not a productive party.
Now that Republicans are in power, and I have left the Dem party (I'm independent) I find Dems far worse than Republicans ever were. They're not the 'party of no' -- Not they! On no, they're 'the resistance." They're not the 'moral majority' -- Not they! Oh no, they're the party of morals and goodness!
Anyway, the Dems will continue to lose the more they a) are the party of no, no, no b) beat their breasts & literally believe they are the party of light and goodness & have a copyright on morals and c) treat anyone who disagrees with contempt at best, hysterical denunciations & smear campaigns at worst.
Trump won. Republicans will want Supreme court judges who reflect their principals, just as Dems do. In Republicans' minds, their values are to align to the constitution. Dems may want judges who reflect their personal contemporary values, but for a Republican these are just their personal values, not constitutional values. One may disagree with this without hysteria & smears particularly when it's pointless & comes across (again) as the Party of No.
22
the word is principles and Trump has none; nor did the seat that Gorsuch occupies come about through a fair and Constitutionally sound process; there is more to say but not to this troll
2
‘Democrats GO ON THE ATTACK!’ Aw, Man, Republicans better be scared now! The NYT says Democrats are ON THE ATTACK!! Why, God knows WHAT they might accomplish!!!
Lol!
42
The red state elections have voted Kavanaugh. No way the Montana senator is voting no. It’s over.
6
To be clear, what the republicans did to President Obama, the democrats are doing the same to President Trump! Politics in america does not seek consensus but division and intransigence along ideological, geographical and party lines. Regardless who is in the White House; our nation is divided as each side seeks to impose its will on the other. Rural v.Urban, middle class v poor, legal immigrants v illegal. There is a great civil war within our nation and Putin's Russia has nothing to do with it. Every vote cast is not for change but a legitimization of our broken political system... Before any confirmation hearings, the alarmist, pontificating by way of gesticulations and mass hysteria, warn of an imminent rolling back of civil rights that will leave the most vulnerable unprotected. Madness has replaced reason; and dogma has replaced debate. Both sides are to blame as one side blieves the election was stolen and the other claiming obstruction is a method to destroy the Trump Presidency!
1
"Senate Democrats . . . opened a broad attack on [Judge Kavanaugh] Tuesday, painting him as an arch-conservative who would roll back abortion rights, undo health care protections, ease gun restrictions and protect President Trump against the threat of impeachment."
What exactly is the basis for the attack? Are Democrats claiming that the nominee is not qualified for the job? No
Are they claiming that the nominee has a poor character? No
Are they claiming that the nominee is corrupt or corruptible? No
They are claiming that they know how the nominee is going to rule on various matters and that Democrats will be unhappy with those rulings.
And this is a proper basis upon which to refuse to confirm a Supreme Court nominee because . . . ?
Stop wasting your time and money Democrats. You will only confirm to your opponents and those who are somewhat on the sidelines that you are sore losers.
Concentrate your efforts where they belong and will do some good - with the voters.
13
As an aside, I don't even recognize Chuck Schumer in that picture. I know that he isn't wearing his glasses, but I still see no other resemblance.
5
Checks and Balances 2.0 and "judicial incrementalism" (SCOTUS composition): https://www.fundamentalreform.org/
How we appoint Justices to the Supreme Court and maintain them on it needs fundamental reform.
Life tenure for SCOTUS Justices injects unnecessary uncertainty, risk, and, ultimately, polarization into our political process; and each of these negative aspects will intensify as life expectancy increases in the coming years.
The ideal for our representative democracy is that no majority (conservative, liberal, or other) can disproportionately impact the political direction of the country. Life tenure for US Supreme Court Justices all but guarantees this will happen.
Please go to Checks and Balances 2.0 at https://www.fundamentalreform.org/ and read about the checks and balance that “judicial incrementalism” would provide.
4
Will Harper - Thank you for that! Ever since I was in high school learning about politics, I've wondered why Supreme Court justices get life appointments while local judges have to he elected to tenured seats. I'm sure that's been on other people's minds also.
1
It is disingenuous to oppose a competent, intelligent and civil Court of Appeals judge on the ground that you disagree with positions he has taken (or will take) -- positions that other qualified judges have already taken. It is patently stupid to oppose him knowing you will lose.
This is just another simulation of thought and action by Schumer and Pelosi to assuage the impotent rage felt by their constituents.
If the Republican-controlled government and the right-leaning court does things the majority of Americans dislike, and the usual channels are, as now, blocked, it is time to fight using other means: The economic boycott and the general strike. If 65% of the country stopped buying anything made with a Koch brothers input, they would be neutralized. if all the government workers walked out, their unions would in short order get the agency dues they deserve.
7
The democrats don’t have a chance. They brought this in themselves just like the republicans did a few years back. No compromise no talking to each other just steve each over in the back. And this is how they say you lead a country ?
6
Yeah, that's great guys. Except you kind of needed to care this much when it was Garland. You needed to care this much when it was the midterms in 2010. Actually, you needed to care this much when it was Carter running for reelection.
But yeah, go ahead. I mean that sincerely. I hope it works.
9
Such a weak president. Now here we are. The fight of his life should have been for Merrick Garland. Instead he cruised through the last year of his term, clearly exhausted. Thinking that Clinton would be the easy win for the presidency. So bad.
So regret his presidency on so many levels.
The Dems are ALWAYS out-foxed.
13
McConnell sees no contradiction at all in cheating to avoid election of M. Garland and replace him with Gorsuch and then berate Democrats for expressing virtually identical goals. After all McConnell has virtual religious beliefs that he is right and thus can do anything he wants to achieve that. Democrats are wrong, so their behavior is despicable. In his heart he believes that. We need to smile nicely to him and remove him from office.
McConnell and many conservatives like him are immersed in a dogmatic religious fervor. Their enthusiasm towards small government and empowerment of the rich to get richer and the poor to live in squalor is based on firmly based dogma with no concern at all for long term consequences. Catastrophes like Kansas on a small scale and Venezuela on a major scale are the results of emotional enthusiasm backed by no practical plan.
Unfortunately, those catastrophes only show up after a lot of damage is blatantly apparent even to the true believers. Like mules, one has to figuratively hit them with a 2x4 before you get their attention -- lose jobs, lose medical care, lose homes, and have children with awful educations because that is where the conservative governments cut budgets first.
McConnell and at least half of all Republicans, and many long term Democrats need to be quietly extracted from government before the US slips into an irretrievable mess.
3
It would be REALLY helpful right now if the Times would write a front page article reminding the reading public of exactly what McConnell perpetrated when Garland was nominated during the Obama administration, 14 months prior to the election! Blow by Blow, with quotes! Because Americans have no long term memory I am sure they have already forgotten. He would not consider any candidate and blocked the nomination from coming to the floor. By allowing McConnell's hypocritical remarks to stand unchallenged by the press, it is tantamount to biased reporting, as is characterizing Democrats' reaction as "trying to paint" Kavanaugh as an extremist. He IS an extremist, avowed and his decisions are already well known to many who are raising the alarm right now. There is nothing fair about this process; and importantly, there was nothing fair about refusing to appoint during Obama's term. The final outrage is changing the rules to a simple majority for such an important decision. That was completely partisan. So, NYTimes, stop worrying about being too liberal and tell it like it was/is.
15
Democrats go on the attack. That’s pretty funny, since the Democrats have zero power in government, and can do nothing.
19
Talk is cheap Democrats. We are in this mess because of the arrogance of the DNC who has smashed debate within the party and has alienated voters. Kavanaugh is surely going to be confirmed. Don't waste time on his conformation when the bigger battle is in the fall midterms and then in 2020.
13
And interesting take, Gorsuch also clerked for Kennedy and went to prep school with Kavanaugh.
The deep state never sleeps.
2
Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander. You reap what you sow, Mitch.
2
McConnell's voice is the cry of a guilty conscience.
4
Mitch McConnell will be judged by history as the man who destroyed this country for the sake of his odious political party and his donors.
4
Oh their tears taste like champagne.
Collins and Murkowski both voted to confirm him to the Appeals court.
This is over, but hey, make some statements and do some fund raising.
5
Done deal. He will be confirmed.
11
McConnell: “Senate Democrats were on record opposing him before he’d even been named! Just fill in the name! Whoever it is, we’re against.”
Yeah, right.
How about January 20, 2009, the day President Obama was inaugurated Mitch? Remember? The dinner meeting Republicans had at which you decided you would never agree to ANYTHING that President Obama proposed? THAT meeting?
How about your statement that "The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president"?
How about your decision not to even hold hearings for President Obama's nominee for the Supreme Court, Judge Merrick Garland?
You now suggest Democrats are treating Brett Kavanaugh unfairly for wanting to give him a thorough vetting?
Really??
McConnell. He stands for hypocrisy and bad faith.
11
Dear Fellow Blues,
By our long standing elitism, our holier-than-thou self-induced piety, our smug intellectualism, we elected them, and this is the price our descendants will pay for the next half-century....
Congratulations!
6
"M"itch Mcconnell has NO standing to complain about Democratic politicians objecting to Kavanaugh. None. Simple as that. McConnell's mouth may move, but NOTHING that comes out has merit. None.
4
Mitch is worse than a two year old when it comes to whining and not as good as Lyin' Donald when it comes to remembering his prior babbling. Mitch kept saying that our Liar In Chief's nominee would be approved by the fall by his Senate cronies, long prior to last night's announcement identifying the nominee. What comes around goes around and if for no other reason than this need to teach Mitch to lie better and think first and put his mouth in gear second, the Dems need to draw out this process every possible minute.
2
This is a Constitutional Crisis if there ever was one.
Three separate branches of government were designed for checking and balancing. There is no checking and balancing when the executive, while under criminal investigation for conspiracy and obstruction of justice, can play politics with the supreme court while the congressional majority aids and abets the process.
We are out of balance! We are in crisis!
3
The Democrats are being snookered into hysteria over this Trump appointment that we have no power to defeat. Flailing around and emotion don't play well against the machinations of the Trump Republicans. It's not smart. What's smart is to win the midterms with all the energy and drive possible, not dissipate the passion in an unproductive tirade against Kavanaugh. We need to win and bring balance back to our national life through focused electioneering in our communities and states.
7
If the Democrats make the centerpiece of their legislative year about defeating Trump's nominee for the bench, they may make the same mistake some Republicans have made about backing Trump because they think he's against abortion. The problem is trying to pigeon-hole a judge when they are dead set against being defined that way. Additionally, we are entering a phase when many Democrats running for office insist they are viewing positions not as partisan politicians, but in a nonpartisan way.
1
The questioning ought to zero in on Constitutional "originalism" which Kavanaugh favors. It is fraught with problems. Trump should do better.
1
If red state Democratic Senators vote against confirmation ..and lose their seats..Trump will be able to appoint an even more conservative Justice because he will have the votes to confirm.
1
This paper also has an article, Trump’s Reality TV Court Rollout, Slick and Suspenseful by James Poniewozik about how the POTUS used used his reality tv experience to deliver the announcement. This whole stunt is news here in Australia too, except that it really isn't and shouldn't be. But such is the state of our media/global media that this is what we are fed as international news.
2
"The judge is widely respected in Washington and in legal circles, and has an Ivy League pedigree, much like Justice Neil M. Gorsuch, Mr. Trump’s first Supreme Court nominee."
All the more reason to nominate someone from a distinctly different background. Men who have grown up as "privileged" (or "monied") white boys don't add much perspective to the Supreme Court, regardless of whether or not they are strict constructionists. Instead of people of wide experience and intellectual genius, we are served by well-trained intellects who are at best mediocre justices. They may know the law and the Constitution backward and forward, but they rarely really understand what it means. Can the Democrats ask the right questions? Start with those suggested below by A. Stanton.
1
“Whether the Constitution allows indictment of a sitting president is debatable”
To me this is the most alarming view of Kavanaugh and quite likely the reason Trump selected him in the first place. The Democrats are of course powerless to stop this, let's hope they are smart enough to use it to focus their messaging before the midterms.
1
I read that McConnell's declaration that a President could not nominate a Supreme Court judge before an election was a law, and should be enforced as such. I think it would be interesting if Democrats took that stance. We are entering a very sad time in our history when the Supreme Court is becoming as polarized as the rest of the country. In essence, we are becoming a lawless, petty dictatorship at the mercy of who ever is in power and their thoughtless whims. Right now there are plenty of thoughtless whims, and more than a few lies. We are becoming unhinged and looking more like our already unhinged President everyday. Our Government is so far down the rabbit hole of fantasy powers they are completely lost. The people have the power - and they do in all types of Governments, they just forget from time to time. I hope everyone votes and expresses that power.
3
DEMs need to pick their battles carefully. What is there to gain by trying to block this nomination?
99% chance they won't succeed and in the rare chance that they did Trump would probably replace the nomination with someone even worse, just out of spite.
Most importantly, does taking on this fight help DEM chances to win more congressional seats this November?
11
Unfortunately the Dems have no backbone and no ability to fight. I wish them luck but I'm not convinced they even care.
2
So let's see ... McConnell lead the way to ignore President Obama's nominee, who had been pretty much unilaterally approved and liked by the Dems and the GOP.
And Trump, the swamp-cleaner, nominates someone whose entire career has been in and around DC. And Trump BOASTED how any nominee would definitely help overturn Roe vs. Wade.
Now, I do look forward to seeing the analysis of his past cases and decisions ~ I guess here are about 300 of them. BUT .... anyone who believes "law" is defined by what the Founders wrote in the Constitution, no interpretations or charges allowed, is kind of like someone who believes that the Old Testament, especially Genesis and creation, is absolute truth.
Not quite my beliefs.
1
Kavanaugh already a Trump toady?
JUDGE BRETT M. KAVANAUGH: Mr. President, thank you. Throughout this process, I have witnessed firsthand your appreciation for the vital role of the American judiciary. No president has ever consulted more widely or talked with more people from more backgrounds to seek input about a Supreme Court nomination. Mr. President, I am grateful to you and I am humbled by your confidence in me. Thank you.
"No president HAS EVER consulted more widely or talked with more people....."
Seriously? From the golf course? I figured Trump’s team reviewed his remarks, and added this. How would/could Kavanaugh have determined this to be true, and it cannot be reassuring if he is already letting Trump put Trump's own words in his mouth…… If I were a Senator, this may be the first question I ask him – how did he determine the truthfulness of this statement? What else can we believe after that????
7
Lest one forget, there is a huge diversity of opinion in this age of Trump. When a supposed President, one who did not even garner a majority of votes let alone a mandate, ignores the wishes of over half of Americans and destroys our Democracy with malicious abandon, we have a problem, one that is often solved by a bloody, destructive revolution.
A true leader, which Trump certainly is not, is a uniter. Trump has waged war against everyone who has opposed him politically from the outset. He has used the power loaned to him by our Constitution, and backed by a temporary Congress to forever tip the scales of justice in favor of his demented cult - and they, for the most part, welcome the fleeting power to do what THEY want with total disregard for truth, ethics and morals - all in the name of quick money and misplaced "religious"dogma. They are conned by the rich at the expense of the poor and disenfranchised - those who vote without any thought of consequence.
Appointment of Kavanaugh, intended as red meat for Trump's religious zealots aiming at Roe v. Wade and the second amendment (not a word of resolution for the masses slaughtered by gun violence) AND as a get-out-of-jail ticket when Mueller's Russo investigation bears fruit, is a bad idea. Although a competent jurist, Kavanaugh has been promoting himself for the job and, based upon his statements and actions, would argue that a sitting President should not be charged for crimes. WRONG!
2
Hold strong.
All will be remembered in Nov.
5
Enough of the fight over the supreme court. It was over on election night. The fighting should have been waged during the campaign. Democrats should focus their attention on bread and butter issues, such as health care, and how Trump is removing funding for the ACA - see today's new headline on front page. Every day health care is being gutted. And if you think you are safe because you have employer health care, you never know what will happen tomorrow, if you are fired. You will lose that health care and have to rely on ACA. This is what democrats should be screaming about in the senate. They have no leverage. Whether it's this pick or another, the outcome will be the same. This is a waste of time and energy, and distracts from the greater harm perpetrated by the Trump administration policies. And this is why democrats keep losing.
1
DEMs need to pick their battles carefully. What is there to gain by trying to block this nomination?
99% chance they won't succeed and in the rare chance that they did Trump would probably replace the nomination with someone even worse, just out of spite.
Most importantly, does taking on this fight help DEM chances to win more congressional seats this November?
4
Great questions but probably Bernie is the only Senator with the guts to not only ask them, but to insist in full and complete answers, like as is done in court. Chuck: are you reading this; it applies to every Dem and every true American who is in the Senate.
2
This man is dangerous because he will stop any effort to prosecute or even investigate a president, viz. Trump. This is precisely why Trump picked him.
Besides the tremendous increase in executive power, the more conservative court will impoverish even further the poor, workers and consumers, limiting our rights while increasing those of corporations and the rich.
Housing and healthcare are at stake, as we enter a new and bigger gilded age. Compared to this, abortion rights are minor. Yes, they are important, but do not forget the now dying New Deal.
5
The Starr Report will get new life. That and the Bush v. Gore raid on Florida. How about the leaking of investigation secrets? Bless Kavanaugh, he brings that too!
1
Democrats should use their power when they are in majority.....
not cry when Republicans exercise their rightful prerogatives.
Maybe the way to get the conservative justices on their side is to do the hard work of winning elections and passing laws. For equal rights, for non-discrimination, for climate change, for people rights over corporate rights, ......
5
As for you Mitch, yes you are the paragon of virtue,
As for the rest, elections have consequences. Sometimes you should not sit home for the presidential cycle, hold your nose if you must, but always remember how critical SCOTUS should be in your choice.
Vote in November against all GOP candidates if you don't want an even more conservative choice for the next pick when Ginsberg retires.
God help America if SCOTUS gives Trump free reign.
Mitch McConnell has absolutely no shame. He refused to allow a vote on Merrick Garland because Barack Obama "only" had 10 months left of his term. Now, he has the nerve to complain about the Democrats' tactics.
4
I feel in between, blaming Obama, for not having the intestinal fortitude to simply put Merrick Garland on the court, ignoring Congress, and using his executive powers, as Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz, suggested earlier this week, and being angry at Trump, for, well, simply being Trump.
Nevertheless, civil libertarians are right to be up in arms, against any Trump nominee. I guess Mitch Mc Connell’s suggestion of waiting until after the midterms, is squarely off the table, Americans should be clear, that the GOP, is clearly the party of Trump, and will continue to support his shenanigans, in spite of the things that Trump’s family has done, in acts of espionage, against the United States, in order to business with Russia.
The Trump playbook is getting old and is ripe with problems, as the current results of Robert Mueller’s findings, so far have revealed. Looking back at Watergate, or even the Clinton, “Whitewater Scandal”, yielded so many indictments and prosecutions, this early on.
The bottom line is the Trump and Kushner families are crooks, who have dwindled billions of dollars from clients, and their names are proverbial mud, in their home states of New York and New Jersey, respectively.
Trying to stack the legal deck, in what is sure to be bad news for number 45, is another transparent act of vanity, an example of Trump’s total lack of respect, for the rule of law, and ALL Americans, that he took an oath, to defend and protect.
Simply disgraceful!
1
It sounds like the issue that Democrats have is that future Justice Kavanaugh reads the Constitution instead of making up whatever he wants
5
What will happen if Trump is indeed guilty of some crime? He is under investigation and if found guilty, do we declare his two picks null and void? Seems to me a country as great as the US, having Supreme Court justices chosen by a crook, is wrong on so many levels.
5
You are ASSUMING facts not in evidence. Present some proof, otherwise you look like Mueller, floundering around looking for something, anything, to justify his existence.
2
As Senator McConnell said about the Garland nomination back in March of 2016, eight months before the presidential election, "Let the American people decide. The American people are perfectly capable of having their say on this issue, so let's give them a voice."
Just like McConnell refused to hold a hearing for Garland because he was nominated by a "lame duck" president, Democrats should refuse to participate in a judicial hearing by this "lame duck" Senate.
Let the American people decide who they want as Senators to vote on this nominee. The American people are perfectly capable of voting for Democratic Senators in November who would withhold their consent of Kavanaugh. Let's give the voters a voice on who should be on the Supreme Court. Just like Senator McConnell said we should.
5
I am still waiting for Senate Democrats to go on a war footing. Recount to Senator McConnell — to his face — the long list of dirty tricks that got us to where we are now. It won't change the preordained vote, but boy-oh-boy would it play with Democratic voters. We now have two impeccably credentialed reactionaries, one about to join the other on the Court, who seem strangely impervious to the problems of flesh-and-blood people who have to live with their rulings. (Gorsuch's dissent in the "frozen truck driver" case was mind boggling.) I'm hoping Democrats at last will go for the jugular.
2
Legislate don't Litigate. A lesson Republicans have always adhered too and one Progressives still don't seem to understand nor have a plan to achieve. In the past few months Obama's legacy has been whittled down to a damaged but standing ACA - legislated; otherwise Obama's victories are all but wiped away. Forcing litigation on Government employee Unions - Ka Boom! to government worker unions. DACA - Made by Obama's pen - eliminated by Trump's pen. Iran Deal - not legislated, approved by the Senate, gone by the stroke of Trumps pen. Litigate Trumps Muslin ban; Trump wins - nothing to do with the Supreme Court - any President should have won that one.
Legislate abortion rights, legislate healthcare, legislate gay rights, legislate immigration. Have foreign agreements approved by the Senate and stop building sand castles. Do the hard work of elections - Republicans have. You can't gerrymander Senate seats and Republican hold and have held the majority.
4
I think Merrick Garland is one of the sharpest legal minds of our time.
1
Once again trump gets to destroy this government from within for kicks. He’ll be richer once he leaves office as will his criminal family, criminal cabinet and members if congress who have no backbone.
2
Democrats should refuse to meet with this guy. Let them use McConnell's own tactics. McConnell's remark are personify what is wrong with American politics.
1
Why did he pick Kavanaugh? Could it have something to do with this man's strong belief in rights for the executive branch? Now, why would I think that?
2
" ... Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, excoriated Democrats ... " Mr. McConnell has no business excoriating anybody. Mr. McConnell has shown his belief that with great power comes the chance to abuse it. Deny President Obama's SCOTUS nominee even a hearing with nearly a year left in the presidential term. But put Mr. Trump's nominee on a fast track. Party above country.
2
Like other GOP nominees, Kavanaugh will always side with the oligarchs. Money is power, especially dark money. Citizens United, radical gerrymandering, voter suppression, abuse of women, people of color and immigrants: all in Kavanaugh's wheelhouse. Still, he is qualified.
He should be rejected not due to his misguided advocacy for the wealthiest, but for the context of his nomination. Unconstitutional McConnell. Criminal investigation of trump. Putin's interference in our elections. The GOP's "new normal" and the illegitimacy of trump are stains on the nation.
We must take back our country. Kavanaugh is not a part of that mission.
2
Mitch McConnell sure has a short memory! By STEALING a Supreme Court position from Obama, he has set the Court on an ultra-right tilt that is quite out of line with what Americans want.
1
I can't understand the whining over Garland's blocked nomination. He wasn't going to be confirmed anyway because Democrats didn't have a majority. And oh by the way, the majority needed today to confirm Kavanaugh is a result of Democrat Harry Reid changing the rules, after he was told by Republicans it would come back to bite him. Stop making McConnell a scapegoat and look in the mirror -- Dems made terrible bets and got outplayed. Crying over spilled milk isn't productive.
6
Elections have consequences. I won and you lost...... Barack Obama.
Democrats should by now realize that losing the presidency means losing their ability to nominate justices on the supreme court.
Not knowing much about Judge Brett Kavanaugh until yesterday has changed to he is is qualified, open minded, scholarly from those who have expressed non partisan opinion.
A long -shot fight to block Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation by the senate will be seen as mean spirited , vindictive and indecent by independents.
As I have said before, the judiciary has become too partisan when judges continue to show their loyalty to the party from which the president belonged nominated them and it has become a sick Washington game. The primary qualification of a judge should be and ability for fair and unbiased judgment.
6
A judge vetted and approved by the Federalist Society is not fair and unbiased.
4
Why Trump nominated Kavanaugh
1. He will protect Trump from the law. Kavanaugh has written that a sitting President cannot be charged with a crime. Trump is a criminal and needs Kavanaugh for another vote to protect him on the Court.
2. Kavanaugh is willing to lie fir Trump. In his speech he claimed “no other President considered as many candidates as Trump”. Sounds exactly what Trump would want him to say, even though it is a lie. Trump only considered the names on the list given to him.
3. Kavanaugh was the one candidate McConnell asked Trump not to choose. Trump loves to show McConnell who is boss.
2
schumer and feinstein need to delay this nomination until after the midterms---the democratic party can get control of the senate and block the appointment!
10
That Kavanaugh wrote in a 1998 law review his belief that a sitting president couldn’t be indicted stinks to high heaven! Of course, Trump wants him to cover his hide, and of course, Mitch McConman would get bristled over Democrats’ objections. What a fixed game: so no matter what corruption Mueller’s investigation unearths, the country is in the hands of Supreme Court collaborators! The only credentials that Trump cares about is what will allow him to walk scot-free after his Russian hook-ups to throw him the election.
“How weary, stale, flat, and unprofitable,/ seem to me all the uses of the world!
Fie on’t! Ah fie! ‘tis an unweeded garden,/That grows to seed;
Things rank and gross in nature possess it merely/
That it should come to this.”
10
Thank you for your post and the Hamlet quote.
1
If the Democrats don't fight this, they'll lose even more of their progressive base.
People on the left are tired of chasing after cowardly Democrats.
Voters want candidates who will go the mat.
2
Dear Judge Kavanaugh,
I enjoyed watching your fine performance the other night in which you assured the American people that you are a common, ordinary, decent American citizen, and not a part of the governing elite, with a loving wife, two loving daughters and that you look to hire as many women law clerks and blacks as you can and otherwise are a good guy.
The problem I have is that you are being appointed to the Court by a President who lost the popular vote by almost 3 million votes and is now busily engaged in tearing the country apart.
I hope you will appreciate my quandary concerning your suitability for the Court and would appreciate receiving your answers to the following five questions to give me a better idea of the type of man you are.
I already have a pretty good idea of who you are, so simple yes or no answers will do.
1. Do you believe women possess the right to receive ordinary, well recognized medical treatments from their doctors without interference by the State?
2. Do you believe that Corporations and rich people have the right to purchase as much political advertising as their money can buy?
3. Do you believe that illegal migrants are human beings and possess the right to be treated as such?
4. Are Presidents entitled to shoot a person down on Fifth Avenue while still remaining President?
5. Do you believe that Judge Garland received a fair shake from the Republican Party?
With great thanks in advance for your quick response.
Stanton
168
“1. Do you believe women possess the right to receive ordinary, well recognized medical treatments..”
I’m 100% pro choice, but there is nothing ordinary about getting an abortion. Nothing.
4
I don't think you understand what the role of a Judge/Justice is.
3
Your questions for Kavanaugh frequently use the word believe. Well, it's not about "believing" for a federal judiciary. It's about interpreting and upholding the Constitution and our laws.
4
Mitch McConnell can keep his opinion to himself after he stole Obama's Supreme Court seat in 2016. That alone shows the depths of depravity to which McConnell and his GOP cronies are willing to stoop to support the stooge in the White House. Elect a clown; expect a circus.
10
You have to fight the good fight. There are no guarantees in life or politics. Being “smart”, being “strategic” doesn’t really make sense when there is an all-out assault on all liberal values by a whacko party led by the ridiculous Donald Trump.
10
We will hold hearings for Kavanaugh, but would NOT for his boss Merrick Garland?! The hypocrisy...
24
It is especially rich when Senator McConnell, of the we-won't-give-Merrick-Garland-so-much-as-a-hearing-even, to say:
“Senate Democrats were on record opposing him before he’d even been named! Just fill in the name! Whoever it is, we’re against.”
That "Whoever it is, we're against" has a certain echo-like quality to it . . .
50
Doesn't make it any less true.
1
I am disappointed in my Democratic leadership. Pick your fights, preferably ones you have a snowball's chance of winning. Now you will just make our party and its candidates in the midterms look foolish and impotent. You should have fought tooth-and-nail when McConnell blocked President Obama's court nominee to show the American people how low Republicans will go to protect the power of the upper class and corporate overlords. Now, you should go to mat for universal, single-payer healthcare to get Democrats a majority in one or both houses.
5
You forget that Democrats are every bit in bed with bid business as are the Republicans. The Democrats could have given the American people single-payer but they deferred to insurance companies. We will never see single payer.
You forget that Democrats are every bit in bed with bid business as are the Republicans. The Democrats could have given the American people single-payer but they deferred to insurance companies. We will never see single payer.
Trump and the truth.
The New York Times used to keeping a running list of the lies told by our President. They've let it lapse, as they got fed up with the monotony - but one can still Google it.
Given this, how on earth can some twenty or so justices have been bowing and scraping in front of Trump to get a seat on the Supreme Court?
Didn't telling the truth used to be one of the cornerstones of the Law?
23
Never forget these judges are nothing more than lawyers with enormous ambition and huge egos to match. They aren’t revered or somehow otherworldly. They are just as greedy and hungry for power and recognition as their puppet master. If not, they would all refuse the nomination due to the illegal hijacking of Maverick Garland’s nomination by the Republican Party. Anyone Con Don nominates has no scruples or sense of justice. They are all trash.
3
Mitch McConnell just drips with hypocrisy. He who announced his intention on President Obama's inauguration to make Obama a one-term president and, on the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland, refused to even have a debate. He is an abomination. If only Kentucky would remove him from the Senate. They'll have a chance in 2020, if we're still an intact nation by then.
14
Really?! Mitch McConnell is excoriating Democrats for declaring their opposition before the nomination was announced?!? How shameless is he and the Republicans to conveniently ignore what they did with Garland. The hypocrisy would be ironic if it we're so horrifying. We are getting dangerously close to tyrannical behavior - or perhaps we're already there.
13
I hope the the Democrats put up a fight without any precedent. They have to call from the roof-tops, waking up Americans to see the existential, present dangers they will face and upending their lives retrogressing forever. And look who is excoriating the Democrats - Mitch McConnell! He is the pot and the kettle - very black! Judge Kavanaugh to Justice Kavanaugh! That is the end of justice in this country. The Supreme Court is already compromised. One more Conservative the Bench and will not be a country of laws.The Democrats better put up a very dirty fight because these sleazy Reupblicans know no other.The stakes are too high. The Democrats'chances of winning is extremely slim or non-existent. But I hope there are decent, patriotic Republicans who will be equally enraged and stop the deluge into anarchy.
8
What? We won’t be a country of laws is Kavanaugh is appointed? Your kidding right? The left are the ones that refuse to enforce our EXISTING laws (e.g., immigration). Justices like Kavanaugh are likely to follow the law.
3
I agree, but can't help but feel that this is wishful thinking.
Hate leads to the darkside.....
Interesting, I remember McConnell declaring that he would not give Obama's nominee an up or down vote before Obama had made his pick too.
McConnell once again shows himself to be the biggest partisan hypocrite in DC
15
Not only would he not allow an up or down vote, he would not even allow hearings.
1
To the barricades, Democrats! Time to don silly pink hats and demonstrate in safe-zone coastal cities and college towns! Time to lift signs supporting illegal immigration and transgender bathrooms!
Actually, it's past time for you social justice warriors to start reflecting on what's brought you to the point of irrelevancy, why you've lost over 1000 seats at the national state and local level in the last decade, and why you're on track to lose again in 2018 and 2020.
34
Funny thing a little gerrymandering and voting rights tampering and Russian interference will get you. But I suppose you blame that on dems too. Just so you are aware in France, there are more of us against “Trump” and his collaborators than there are supporting him. Lots more.
And please be smarter in France and don’t fall for this horrific nonsense.
3
And people actually getting out into the streets, taking action, and demonstrating is less effective than an NYT comment berating them for doing so how, exactly...?
2
Oops - disregard “France” - seriously need to remember reading glasses on the train home.
2
To quote President Obama:
“...elections have consequences,”
and, in case there was any doubt....
“I won.”
15
This is now what passes for reporting? All emotion and no facts on Judge Kavanaugh's credentials and how those compare to current members of the court. Unfortunately the news worthiness of NYT's is slipping as the editors and reporters emotions clearly show through in their writing. What happened to "all the news that fit to print"?
15
" Mitch McConnell excoriated Democrats ...."
This is the man who engineered the Senate's refusal to even consider Merrick Garland after he was nominated by Obama. Such a disgusting hypocrite, a pathetic excuse for a person ... much less a senator.
Whenever one is shocked by how low the republicans stoop, they go to new depths.
24
The Democrats need to find the new Anita Hill! Day time TV needs some spice way too boring!
1
Democrats lack the will to fight back.
I would declare a "state of emergency" for Democrats.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
May Day, May Day!
All hands on deck.
This is an emergency.
All able bodied Democrats, report for duty, now.
What about Presidents, Clinton, Carter and Obama?
What about Bernie Sanders, and his followers?
No time to waste. Sound the alarm: beep-beep, beep-beep!
We must win the House for Democrats this year!
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
====================================
6
Be careful Dem Reps and Sens. You don't want to energize the Trumpists for the mid-term elections. DJT wants you to make this as controversial as possible and will hold the hearings close to the elections to motivate his base. You're going to lose this one and of the finalists it could have been worse. There's a special place in h-- for McConnell but he is going to win this one so sit tight and save your chits. You can't win, you can only jeopardize your chances of taking back the House and Senate in November. Be smart.
5
This section seems more like therapy than actual ideas on what to do.
21
And your ideas are...? We have no. “Ideas” because we have no power in Congress. We can only appeal to the better nature of republicans to resist every candidate “Trump” sends up until after the election. McConnell explained that was absolutely imperative when we are too to an election that no candidate should ever be put to a vote. And we are closer to the fall elections than we were to the 2016 election in relation to Garland. So it is even more critical. Unless, of course, 1) McConnell was just making stuff up to suit his political agenda, which would be appallingly bad governance, or, 2) he views the majority of Americans with contempt, which is disgusting.
2
It beats screaming into my pillow.
2
Next time, don't undermine your presidential candidate.
2
Even though I hate the Republicans, I must give them credit for having played a long game leading to just this moment - seizure of the highest court in the land for decades to come.
They built a legal infrastructure decades ago and started grooming young men and women going into the legal profession.
They outright stole the presidential elections of 2000 and 2004 in order to pack the Supreme Court during the eight years of Dubya. Keep in mind, Dubya only won through massive voter suppression and flipped votes both times around. Even then, it wasn't enough in 2000, and the SCOTUS had to give him the White House even though Scalia, Thomas, and O'Connor were ethically required to recuse themselves from Bush v. Gore.
By the time this court is done, the United States will be a failed state and a third-world country. We're already well on the way.
6
Democrats and Hillary used the same issues against Trump and lost. They will continue to lose and issues like their bogus attempt to impeach Trump will only result in his election to a second term.
— Senate Democrats, facing an uphill struggle to reject the nomination of Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, opened a broad attack on Tuesday, painting him as an arch-conservative who would roll back abortion rights, undo health care protections, ease gun restrictions and protect President Trump against the threat of impeachment.
8
DEMs need to pick their battles carefully. What is there to gain by trying to block this nomination?
99% chance they won't succeed and in the rare chance that they did Trump would probably replace the nomination with someone even worse, just out of spite.
Most importantly, does taking on this fight help DEM chances to win more congressional seats this November?
3
We live Donald Trump's America where the majority of the people who did not vote for him are treated as if we do not exist. If the United States truly was a democracy and Presidents were elected by the popular vote the following judges would not be on the Supreme Court: John Roberts (GWB), Samuel Alito (GWB) and Neil Gorsuch (Trump) and now Brett Kavanaugh (Trump). So the entire conservative wing of the Supreme Court owes its existence to the fact the United States of America is not a democracy.
12
I sure hope there is more to Chuck's plan than, "we will ask him tough questions during the hearings."
Senator Schumer, in case you haven't been pay attention, THAT strategy hasn't worked and won't work. The MAJORITY of Americans didn't vote for Donald and don't agree with what he is doing. Its time for you to get loud or get out of the way so someone who does have a fire in the belly (or can communicate it) can lead us past this mess.
4
American democracy is an illusion. Small states have too much power in the senate. The electoral college echoes that disproportionate control. And it was that control that loaded the Supreme Court with conservatives and they returned the favor by choosing Bush over Gore, and consolidating the power of the very wealthy with Citizens United. And then they refused to acknowledge the racial and partisan gerrymandering in Texas, thereby tightening minority control of the government. If we truly believe in democracy we absolutely need a new constitution.
14
One can do both: educate the populace as to the issues and the importance to VOTE, and do one's best to block the nomination.
Those are not mutually exclusive possibilities.
3
The Dems will not be able to block this. However the argument shouldn't be about qualifications. The argument should be that a president under investigation should not be allowed to pick a SCOTUS. That person may well have to wade into the fray.
6
So let me get this straight, The Republicans want to stack the deck in their favor and the Democrats want to stack the deck as well...Oh well, so much for fair play.
4
If Democrats cannot peel even Susan Collins away from voting to confirm Brett Kavanaugh, they can only sputter angrily as another arch-conservative is seated on the Supreme Court. However, there is a moral and legal argument to be made, but it's not about Judge Kavanaugh, but about the man who nominated him. Donald Trump is already involved in two criminal cases brought by Stormy Daniels and Summer Zervos and the Special Counsel has yet to be heard from. It's inappropriate for anyone facing criminal charges, especially a President, to appoint a judge who will, based on his record, vote in favor of Mr. Trump. Until the charges are resolved, Judge Kavanugh should not be appointed. But, if, as is likely, he should be confirmed to sit on the high court, it should be with his promise made in public under oath to recuse himself from any litigation concerning Mr. Trump that comes before the court. The only real remedy to the hyper-partisan composition of the Supreme Court by both conservative and liberals is a Constitutional amendment specifying that a super-majority of 67 votes be required in the Senate to confirm anyone to be appointed to the Supreme Court. We need independent thinkers, not partisan ideologues whose vote is predictable as is that of Judge Kavanuagh and everyone else now on the court. This partisan wrangling is indicative of the failure of providing "Equal Justice Under Law" and is undermining our Constitutional democracy.
6
This is not a "Conservative" appointment, it is a naked political power grab. What should be alarming to every citizen is the willingness of the current court to overturn what had been "settled law" and UNANIMOUS decisions by three judge federal appeals courts panels on convoluted "constitutional" grounds.
All for the "political" gain of the Republican Donor base.
Republicans no longer believe in the rule of law.
7
*Ask the question - ask the question on the minds of
the American people - Is Kavanaugh a Mr. Fix it for Trump?
Senator Whitehouse just had a very penetrating interview on MSNBC/Meet the press, where he raised the possibility of
dark money involved in the nomination of Kavanaugh,
as dark money was involved in getting Gorsuch into the
Supreme Court, about $18-20 million was spent selling
Gorsuch as their candidate.
So is Kavanaugh a fix it nominee?
After all it was Kavanaugh who argues for the protection
of the president by stating that there cannot be any indictments against a sitting president.
Yet Kavanaugh was part of the Starr team who was involved in President Clinton's impeachment.
Strange?
So the question must be asked by the Senators and the media - Is Kavanaugh just another Mr. Fix it for Trump in the Supreme Court?
3
Kavanaugh is the worst and possibly corrupt sycophant
to be nominated by Trump.
There is a terrible smell of a right wing collusion.
The right wing wants the end of women's right to choose their own destiny and make decisions about their own bodies, there will be a major attack upon civil rights, and equality an attack on gay marriage.
Trump and the extreme right wing are using Kavanaugh as a cover for the most brutal attack upon
human rights in America.
The next time Democrats control both the Houses of Congress, and the White House, then they should seriously consider expanding the Supreme Court
and negating the right wing dominance that dark money has bought.
Will one day the people of America say that this
Supreme Court is like a mob boss running America
in the interests of dark money?
1
I don’t understand the commotion about Kavanaugh. He is basically a younger, slightly more conservative version of Kennedy.
Kennedy sided with other conservatives most of the time, as will Kavanaugh. It’s not like Kavanaugh is replacing Ginsburg or Breyer. I might understand liberals being more upset with that.
It really seems at this point, that Democrats are just looking for new fuel to keep the cash-generating, outrage machine running at full speed.
10
The Democratic leadership is making another mistake. Something they've been known for.
Forget an all-out fight over this far right nominee, and start focusing on what you actually can do: working your tails off to get reasonable Democrats elected nationwide in the House and Senate. Susan Collins foreshadowed it in this article. The fight over Kavanaugh is a lost cause.
3
I think the Democrats ought to apply the McConnell rule and wait until after the next election. He wholeheartedly endorsed that approach when Garland was nominated. Otherwise get ready for yet another assault on our democracy
5
Three problems with that: First, its not the Mcconnell rule, it was the Joe Biden that first suggested it. Second, this isn’t a presidential election year. Third, Dems aren’t in power to enforce such a strategy - something about elections have consequences.
I am grateful to Mitch McConnell for using his power to protect our rights. Merrick Garland when on the DC circuit, voted for a rehearing after a three judge panel on his court struck down D.C.’s handgun ban, ruling that it stripped residents of their right under the Second Amendment to own firearms.
What this means is that Merrick Garland probably did not believe that people have an individual right to own firearms.
Not holding confirmation hearings for Garland was a gamble, but the right thing to do.
Trump won the election and the GOP held its majorities in Congress. Elections have consequences. Democrats have to do better than nominating Hillary Clinton and they need new leadership Schumer and Pelosi have got to be replaced. They are clueless.
9
I’m just flat out tired of 70 and 80 year old presidents/senators/reps/ making decisions that they won’t be here to feel the full weight of. Like blowing up the deficit, or ruining the environment. Please, retire! It’s time for our government to get younger, smarter and put age/term limits on those in government.
NO one over 65, please! Time to spend those golden year anywhere other than in the US government.
6
Remember Merrick Garland. If the Democrats in the Senate are ever going to grow a spine, now is the time. This country is in bad enough shape without a right wing Supreme Court for the foreseeable decades.
3
I wonder if, once a permanent member of the court, a person might shift in their opinions. It is my hope that this is possible.
2
The time for a confirmation fight was in November 2016, but too many independents and center-left Democrats thought there was no difference between the Republicans and Democrats. They stayed home or voted for "change" and this is what we get. I don't blame Democratic leadership, I blame those who didn't vote. Saying we are fighting now is arguing about the impact after the car has already gone over the cliff.
5
“'They wrote statements of opposition only to fill in the name later,' the ordinarily staid Mr. McConnell said."
By refusing to consider the Merrick Garland nomination McConnell and the Rs blew up the building. Now he has the audacity to complain about a little graffiti in the rubble.
6
This is a totally counterproductive use of the Dems energy. Once you lose all centers of power, you can’t just throw a temper tantrum because you don’t agree with the policies or nominee. They need to take a page out of the GOP playbook and fight the local races across the country, and try to win back municipalities and state houses. THEN, they can win nationally and make their own supremes picks. They should give the GOP everything- if their policies are really so unworkable, voters will vote the other way the next time. But for now, we’re getting exactly what we deserve because as a national political party, they have oroev d themselves hapless time and time again, snatching defeat from the jaws of victory on a regular basis.
Justices denied is justice applied. Opposition to Kavanaugh should start on his front lawn every morning before he leaves his home.
That same opposition should be seen at the front doors of Thomas, Alito, Gorsuch and Roberts as they leave their homes.
They should know and feel that denying justice to their fellow Americans is unwelcome, unreasonable and unacceptable.
2
Regardless of what you think about his policies, this nominee will endure indignity of the type that should never be imposed on a human being. Every possible attempt to humiliate him or embarrassment will be made. He will be insulted and mocked. Every word he has ever uttered or written be publicly criticized. He will be tarred and feathered for the world to see.
He will be confirmed, but not before our system is in tatters, portrayed for the joke that it is to the rest of the world. And the next time there is a Democratic president, the Republicans will get even. Then the Democrats will get even when there is another Republican president.
And so it will go on forever, and ever, and ever.
2
Too bad the Dems lacked the backbone to shut down congress in protest of the Republican intransigence. That's what happens when you elect centrist, status quo, pro-business Dems.
1
I've been reading that Kennedy made a deal with Trump that he would retire if Trump nominated Kavanaugh (who clerked for Kennedy). If this is the case, Kavanaugh, having been hand-picked by Kennedy, is probably competent and at least somewhat independent minded.
Let's face it, Trump will put someone in. The most the Dems can do is derail Kavanaugh, the first one. But then the country is in for someone far worse.
7
Reading where? Sources, please.
3
Like to see your sources on what you are citing
2
Check out these articles supporting what I was talking about:
https://thinkprogress.org/trump-anthony-kennedy-brett-kavanaugh-corrupt-...
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/07/10/white-house-spokesman-repea...
I'm not sure this story has held up but the non-denials from the White House were suggestive.
This nomination is about more than abortion. It is about forcing insurance companies not to discriminate about pre-existing conditions, the scope of what businesses can do, and the ACA. This Supreme Court nomination has the potential to wreck so many lives in this country.
Wake up, America! What will it take?
4
November 6, 2018.
Before the "next" nomination, we vote.
Elections have consequences.
We always hear how skilled and educated our next Supreme Court justice will be be, how experienced, how brilliant, able to navigate the ethical nuances of jurisprudence, to deliberate, ruminate, and arrive at carefully considered opinions based on law.
And yet, when the important decisions come down, it seems that our esteemed justices vote predictably along party lines. So what gives? We might as well have nine monkeys with YES or NO buttons in front of them.
6
There are no printable words to express the depth of my feelings toward Mitch McConnell. Suffice it to say they are not warm and friendly.
6
"Senator Susan Collins of Maine, a key swing vote, spoke favorably of Judge Kavanaugh on Tuesday, telling reporters, “When you look at the credentials that Judge Kavanaugh brings to the job, it will be very difficult for anyone to argue that he’s not qualified.” "
Is he legally qualified? Probably.
Is he ethically qualified? Definitely not, in my book. I expect judges to try to interpret the law impartially, and I have no confidence whatsoever that this man will attempt to do so.
8
So what happens, if through Mueller's investigation, it's determined that Trump and his cronies, along with a number of pols in the Senate and Congress, are traitors and that the entire election was rigged?
Shouldn't this possibility be considered as a reason to hold of on the process, especially since this is an election year?
I mean, this is the new norm for considering a nominee to the Supreme Court, although it's not what's written into the constitution, right?
So what makes this different?
4
It makes me uncomfortable to learn that both Brett Kavanaugh worked for the Bush administration, not in a judicial position but in an administrative communications position - read - political messaging. And he met his wife who worked for Bush as well. It further compromises the neutrality of the judiciary to hire a "company man" and "company couple" who worked to promote the Republican camp. Isn't this unusual?
13
Like Clarence and Virginia Thomas, she with Citizens United.
6
And so the Democrats should come out swinging at McTurtle about trying to ram Kavanaugh into the SCOTUS before the people have their say at the polls. And the people should come out in buses to make their voices heard now, and now wait until November.
9
"The Senate Republican leader, Mitch McConnell, excoriated Democrats for declaring their opposition to Judge Kavanaugh even before his nomination was announced."
You mean the guy who refused to consider President Obama's appointment? The hypocrisy of this repugnant psychopath with his painted-on phony smile is just sickening.
115
Multi-millionaire McConnell pursues his own selfish interests -- and those of his well-off Republican compatriots. The mystery: How thick can working Americans be to fall for McConnell/Republican sucker plays?
29
Seems Americans 'thickness' is mind boggling. seems to increase by the minute.
Yes. See the difference is Mitch McConnell opposed all things Obama, a president with really no track record and therefore little to oppose or support so just, like Nancy Reagan, say no. And Democrats are opposing someone with a track record that is, well, you know, anti-liberal and anti-democratic and essentially that of a troglodyte's. See how that works?
2
These NY Times headlines are really too much.
"Democrats Go On the Attack"
"A Confirmation Fight Unlike Any We Have Seen in History"
Stop already.
The Democrats will pander and capitulate. They'll go on all the MSNBC shows to bloviate about how they're going to fight and then do nothing. The time for "a confirmation fight unlike any we have seen in history" was for Merrick Garland.
118
Do you people ever stop? It's obvious you're being paid by Republicans to pretend to be a leftist.
1
Eric,
The seven letter word you are looking for doesn't start with 'wind'.
You may recall that the nomination of Mr Garland never reached the Senate.
1
Long article but why don't you tell us about the Judges credentials, accomplishments, education, work history and how the Senate voted on him 13 years ago? give real background information and less of what political hacks on both sides say...
If the Times wants to be relevant then provide more information and less political propaganda...
50
Amen. Hence no news in the US just a really long comment and we then we all get to comment. Listened to CNN on the way to the Airport, same thing. I refuse to turn to Fox but come on now folks, it all feels like Fox.
Everything you ask is available in the Times, just not in this article. Look a little further.
1
McConnell is a trash partisan who has savaged some of the greatest governmental processes in history, in a scorched earth campaign to impose minority rule on countrymen he apparently loathes.
Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.
I don't think history will particularly favor old Mitch.
62
Gotta love Obama!
Lost the House
Lost the Senate
Lost the WH
Now about to lose the SCOTUS for 40 years
23
Sad but true, though I don't blame Obama alone. In fact, I don't think he was the root of the problem. He just helped the disaster along.
The entrenched DEM leadership, Clinton/Pelosi/Schumer and their circle is the problem. They've been using the party for their own personal ambitions and to carry out the bidding of their Wall Street supporters.
Was that Obama who did that? I thought it was the racist haters-- oh yeah--it WAS the racist haters... and they are still blaming Obama.
3
Obama never lost the White House. He served two complete terms.
1
The guy who held up the SCOTUS nomination in 2016 has NO moral high ground from which to excoriate anyone. McConnell is an abomination.
144
Yes, McConnell is an abomination. But he also knows how to play the kind of winning voter-centered political hardball game that the full of hubris Democratic Party decided to become too pure to play in beginning, at least, in 2010.
2
The Democrats will fight the nomination. But, they lost that fight beginning at least in 2010 when hubristic and fringe purisms fully emerged to replace the hard ball, voter-centered politics that bought decades of success from LBJ’s voting rights legislation to Clinton’s Family and Medical Leave Act and two terms of economic prosperity. Obama didn’t throw hard balls. Instead he got lucky by following up Bush II. Sure his leadership led to saving the world from economic depression, but he didn’t get down and dirty to sell it or his health care breakthroughs. The spark was gone and the Democrat’s losses beginning in 2010 proved it.
Then, with glimmering hope emerging with the increasingly evident Trump disaster, the Democrats decided that pure was better than politics as perhaps best represented, under Kirsten Gillibrand’s leadership, they ran out of town one of their most voter-engaging emerging politicians, Al Franken.
So, yeah the Democrats say that they will fight Trump’s Brett Kavanaugh selection for the Supreme Court and express their fury at the “unfairness” McConnell’s perfidy in pushing this nomination after blocking Merrick Garland. But, Trump chose Brett Kavanaugh knowing, despite all his trash talking of McConnell that he can rely on McConnell to play the hardball politics that the Democrats gave up on decades ago.
Has the lesson been learned? Kavanaugh’s over. Now let’s see who the Democrats choose to both to lead and to run in November and in 2020.
1
Remember, way back when, when we were all hoping against hope that Trump might harbor some of the centrist leanings of his Democratic past? And then he bashed immigrants, the environment, the ACA, NATO allies, the economy, supported neo-Nazis, lied like an insane person, cozied up to the world's handful of remaining Communist dictators, etc., etc.?
And now we are are down to hoping that Chief Judge John Roberts might be counted on to control the Court's agenda so that the outlier right-wing Court will not overturn all of the progressive and civil rights decisions of the last 100 years?
20
McConnell's hypocrisy knows no bounds! “Senate Democrats were on record opposing him before he’d even been named! Just fill in the name! Whoever it is, we’re against.” - Just change that to Pre-trump GOP Senate and you have the most unprecedented obstruction of Advise & Consent since our nation was founded - What a Jerk!
33
Liberal minded here.
I've heard some liberals say good things about Kavanaugh as a judge.
But, allegedly good people can lead us to bad places. Suddenly, you are there and it's hard to undo.
Search "El Salvador abortion" and you'll read about a society that went mad.
Complete ban and criminalization of abortion.
Women and doctors made into criminals.
A woman has a miscarriage (did you know one quarter of all pregnancies end with miscarriage) and she's prosecuted for killing her baby.
That's reality in El Salvador.
Although, even crazy societies draw back eventually and things are getting a little less insane there.
But, hey, I wouldn't want to deprive any of my right wing country-persons the satisfaction of hearing about a miscarriage in the neighborhood, publicizing it on social media and having a loving, understanding group of enlightened radicals show up at the grieving would-be mother's home shouting, LOCK HER UP!!
Nope wouldn't want to get in the way of your fun.
Societies go insane when people allow themselves to be led to insanity.
Even though they know better.
They just like being part of the mob.
And, the mob doesn't like it if you come to your senses and want out.
Hitler did it to Germans.
Trump is hell bent on trying to do it here.
Won't get me.
Nope, nope, nope.
I'm an individual liberty and dignity, George Washington, Thomas Jefferson American. I believe in our American civic creed.
Has Trump gotten to you?
23
Paul King - I totally understand your point. But this is my question. Assuming the DEMs succeeded in blocking Kavanaugh's nomination (highly unlikely), could we expect Trump's replacement nominee to be any better? I believe he would pick the worst of the worst just out of spite.
Strategically, with regard to November's election, I see no gain in trying to turn this nomination into a bloody fight.
Hey Kids!
The battle began and ended with the 2016 election.
America lost.
U snooze
U lose
17
Great post Steven. But I think it might be more fitting to say:
U believe your superior opinions on progressive issues must be accepted by all on the left, even though a majority select another candidate, and then U petulantly reject consolidating your vote behind the selected candidate who nonetheless supports the vast majority of your progressive ideals,
U lose.
1
Yes, the 2016 election in which Clinton won a majority vote and the key swing states that were lost to the electoral college were subject to extreme gerrymandering by the GOP.
It's a dirty game and the dirtiest are winning at the moment. Nothing to be proud of.
1
If Red state senate Democrats up for re-election this year believe voting for Kavanaugh's confirmation will make it easier for them to get re-elected, I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell them
38
The new Republican Supreme Court will finally show Trump's working class supporters that Republicans are not their friends.
6
The Senate Democrats have effectively removed their ability to block any Supreme Court nominee during the Obama administration, a decision that was known and agreed at the time to be unbelievably short-sighted.
Now the Republicans will reap what the Democrats sowed.
11
Weren't most Democrats and progressives strongly in favor of former Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid exercising the nuclear option and changing the Senate rules to end the ability of the other side to filibuster nominees for federal judge positions? Didn't most Democrats want a simple majority rule in the Senate (and, yes, the Electoral College was still relevant for Presidential elections)? Now, that change in Senate rules pushed by Democrats will make it much easier for Trump to get his nominee confirmed. Democrats have no one but themselves to blame for their inability to filibuster Kavanaugh's nomination.
4
I disagree.
If the Federalist Society and the Heritage Foundation love this nominee, you do not need to ask what positions he holds. They have made 100% clear what they stand for.
There is nothing to lose if the nominee is already set to rule against settled law (stare decisis) to make any position that his philosophy impels him to hold the new law.
5
In 2017, we saw ferocious grassroots energy help the Affordable Care Act to live to fight another day against all odds, under a hostile one party federal government. I'm confident we can do it again to put the brakes on this SCOTUS pick.
5
What about gun related issues? The NRA will ensure a lot of gun cases get to the conservative court. Seems that few people remember that the NRA let McConnell know that if Garland was confirmed, its money to the GOP would dry up as well. And McConnell let all GOP Senators know that. Just ask Sen. Kirk, who wanted to hold hearings. Oh, and partisan gerrymandering, anyone?
4
It is quite likely that K. leaked confidential materials from the Starr investigation to the media. Someone certainly did. The media know - but won’t tell.
1
The only things Senate Democrats can do here are: grandstand, and "work the refs," by which I mean, hammer on his position on executive privilege hard enough that it at least gives him pause if he's ever forced to rule on Trump's many, many shady dealings.
Also: we need better Senate Democrats. VOTE.
14
Centrist Democrats being forced to make impossible choices are not the problem here, sir.
1
Make this about this about Judge Kavanaugh's very pro-big business views! Do we really need someone who would side with ever-growing mammoth multinational corporations (e.g., Amazon, Apple, Google, etc.) that continue to put profits before people? Do we want to forget about the dangers of big trusts that are much larger than those which thoughtful Republicans (e.g., Theodore Roosevelt) tried to reign in during the early part of the 20th century? Have we learned nothing from the Facebook/Cambridge Analytica scandal of 2016?
Ronald Reagan, and the Republicans who succeeded him, all ran on deregulation/pro-business platforms that appealed to many Americans, but the current Administration (e.g., EPA, Dept. of Commerce, etc.) wants to cynically and recklessly do away with basic and necessary regulations that protect the civil liberties as well as the economic health, and safety of the vast majority of Americans. It is time for the Democratic Party to once again to step up to the plate as the defender of democracy and the common good. Mr. Kavanaugh, however qualified, is the wrong man to serve on the high court in the post-industrial, digital era when some companies have more power and knowledge than Adam Smith could ever have dreamed of!
14
Elections have consequences. Democrats lost. We need to focus on cleaning up the mess Republicans will leave behind after November. Schumer should focus on winning seats this November.
3
No surprise that such detailed coverage was available within minutes of President Trump's announcement of his Supreme Court nominee. All the media have had these stories and editorials ready to go for days. There were 4 "top picks", and a week is more than enough time to prepare detailed pieces on 4 people. It's like having canned obituaries for celebrities; the boiler-plate text and images are already done, all that is needed is a bit of updating before the final product is ready to print, post or broadcast.
Here's my own prediction, written (I swear) hours before the President's announcement: The choice doesn't matter.
Whoever Trump picked, the mainstream media would launch a salvo of articles and opinion (scare) pieces explaining why the pick is terrible for women, LGBTQs, migrants, poor people, abortion supporters, in fact pretty much everyone else except the notorious 1% and big business. The media would also say the Supreme Court will now be biased or even irrelevant.
The purposes of the barrage, of course, are to draw all but negative attention away from the nominee and to agitate the Democrat-liberal-socialist-radical base.
In fact, there is little the roused rabble can do about this; Trump pretty much has the votes to confirm. However, stay tuned for the mass breast-beating, hand-wringing, wailing, virtue-signaling, "spontaneous" protests, and accosting Republicans in restaurants.
What are Democrats to do? Get out the vote in November!
2
How many Justices of the Supreme Court were brought up in Roman Catholic households or attended the Roman Catholic services?
Did their court decisions, majority or minority, comport with the teachings or admonishments of the Roman Catholic Church?
Women and minorities on the court are noted, so how come religious affiliations are a taboo subject in the media in otherwise rigorous studies?
1
As Mitch himself said "Give the people a voice in the filling of this vacancy".
A fraudulent "president" under investigation for conspiring with foreign powers and obstruction of justice doesn't get to choose a Supreme Court justice.
12
I don't understand how Justice Gorsuch can look himself in the mirror, considering his Jesuit school education.
Should he indicate he will resign whenever a democrat is elected President, he will have reduced the temperature of this debate over the next Supreme Court Justice.
3
Pointless! Barring some long-hidden closet skeleton, he’ll undoubtedly be confirmed.
However the rituals must take place and the pointed questions asked and sometimes answered. The obfuscations, evasions, and self-serving vagueness must be put on the record.
The real effort of trying to reverse the slide back to the dark ages should focus on getting out the Democratic vote, retaking control of the House and Senate, and putting a Democrat in the Oval Office in 2020. The Supreme Court is lost until Thomas or Alito choose to retire or die (assuming Ginsberg and Breyer are replaced by liberals). Focus on the possible - the Supreme Court is a long-term game.
8
For purposes of History, the Congressional Record, and to the entirety of America, the Senate Judiciary Committee should pose these questions to the nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh:
Merrick Garland is the Chief Justice of the D.C. Court of Appeals. Is that correct?
Do you think Merrick Garland is qualified to sit on the Supreme Court?
Is Judge Garland your 'boss' at D.C. Court of Appeals?
Is Judge Garland more senior to you on the D.C.C. of Appeals?
Do you think it was right for Mitch McConnell to deny Merrick
Garland and the opportunity to be interviewed on the Hill?
Do you think it was right to not have his nomination vetted?
Do you think it was okay, that a single body body on the Justice Committee, was able to prevent your boss, Chief Justice Merrick Garland of the D.C. Circuit, from having his nomination brought to the floor of the Senate?
These questions should illuminate for history the installation of Judge Neil M.Gorsuch to the Supreme Court was a sham.
40
Best comment I've read yet.
I see no point in trying to fight an obstructionist battle using every procedural trick in the book. But I would VERY much welcome a few DEMs putting some hard hitting questions to him, so it's all on record.
4
I agree with all of this, except that Chief Judge Garland is not Judge Kavanaugh's "boss." The courts of appeals do not work that way.
1
Is anyone else troubled by Sen. Blumenthal's use of the Parkland massacre as a political hammer to bludgeon others with? There's something quite sordid about that: couldn't he have just said his anti-gun message without even mentioning Parkland?
7
Why should he have NOT mentioned Parkland? Guns are the problem. Parkland is what happens when the problem is not addressed. If we are going to talk about the problem, shouldn't we talk about WHY it is a problem? Not doing so makes no sense at all.
Gorsuch sleeps like a baby at night. Your thoughts mean nothing to him. And I don't mean that in a bad way.
The Chief Judge is not the "boss" of the other judges. A boss can fire you. The Chief Judge can't fire the others.
Mitch McConnell refused to even give President Obama's nominee, Merrick Garland, a hearing. He insisted upon waiting for the next election, which was TEN MONTHS away at the time.
Well, the next election is only FIVE MONTHS away. McConnell and his corrupt Republican Party are going to be blown out of the Senate and the House.
51
In a rare (and only partial) defense of McConnell, the election he referred to was for President, and his argument that the next President should appoint the next justice. Dubious, but clear.
However, he's highly hypocritical to criticize Democrats for coming out against Kavanaugh before hearings, given he never even gave one to Garland. But hypocrisy is the one norm that McConnell observes.
"And a key Republican swing vote, Senator Susan Collins of Maine, quickly signaled just how hard it will be for Democrats to pull any Republicans into the opposition. “When you look at the credentials that Judge Kavanaugh brings to the job, it will be very difficult for anyone to argue that he’s not qualified,” she told reporters."
We should hold no illusions. As with her response to the tax scam bill giving massive tax cuts to the filthy rich by damaging health care markets (after receiving "assurances" i.e. lies, by McConnell to shore up health care markets), Susan Collins is a Grade A fool, and cannot be counted on for anything.
69
It seems that the primary reason why Collins is the Great White Hope for political sanity is her sex. Make her into a man and she's just another cookie-cutter I-do-what-Mitch-tells-me-to-do Republican.
3
I’m disgusted by her. She’s supposed to be strongly pro-choice. How can anyone in her position with the power to stop this madness just go along? I’m sick of all of the Republicans who KNOW-they KNOW how insane these last 18 months have been and still fall into line.
2
Mitch McConnell has no right to excoriate anyone for anything when it comes to the Supreme Court.
7
Trump and the Republicans will install this right-wing, anti-individual and civil rights, corporate stooge while the Democratic Party indulges in theatrics that will please Trump’s base while frustrating progressives. If Cory Booker, Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gillebrand, and Elizabeth Warren lower themselves to playing Cassandra in this scripted pageant, ask why. Be suspicious of voting for them in 2020.
I'm wondering where McConnell's outrage was when HIS party's stonewalled Obama over the Garland nomination. For almost a full year.
12
Where was Obama's outrage? Where was Hillary's outrage? Where was Bernie's outrage? I guess they all thought Hillary was assured the election.
Democrats have been neutralized by Republicans who put their party above the country. He will be confirmed as Trump insulated himself from possible criminal charges. Until the Democrats can gain a new leader who can unify their base I’m afraid the Republicans will continue to have them backed into a corner. Ironically Trump’s mishandling of the economy could erode support of voters who voted for him. Just give it time.
4
I think there should be a number of different supreme courts that have experts pertaining to the specific case being considered, maybe I'm too idealistic. Why continue to adhere to a 230 year old idea that lets the same nine people (some of which are over age 80) rule on such a wide breadth of issues?
1
Senate Democrats and anyone else who cares about civil rights and women’s rights should be deeply concerned. Kavanaugh’s recent dissent in the Garza case reflects his personal and religious (Catholic) biases that diminish the independence and rights of women, implicatethe government in women’s personal medical decisions, and reveal his antipathy to the right of abortion. Like other “originalists,” he seems to ignore that women and minorities had no rights in the colonial era and that the world is a very changed place, demanding an interpretation of the Constitution and Bill of Rights that is in keeping with the modern world. I often wonder if originalists like Kavanaugh are merely trying to cloak discrimination and attacks against the rights of women and minorities in grand talk.
4
This is a battle that was over on the election night in 2016. A Republican president with a Republican majority in the Senate is going to get his nominee through. A well respected one like Kavanaugh is a sure thing. The Democrats will make a lot of noise to please their base and raise money but they know it is over before it starts. And if you are enjoying this show wait til Trump gets to nominate Justice Ginsburg's successor. Elections have consequences as President Obama famously snapped at Republican congressmen. And until the Democrats win the Senate and or White House they have no real power over court appointments.
12
A one power party over the entire Government and Country is not a Democracy. No matter what party you belong to this is not a good thing for our country. I know, we voted for it, but no matter...If the Republicans did not define hypocrisy they would wait until the midterms to make a selection, just like they did in an UN-constitutional manner to Obama.
3
A one power party over the entire Government and Country is not a Democracy. No matter what party you belong to this is not a good thing for our country. I know, we voted for it, but no matter...
1
True, but Mitch McConnell blocked a legitimate, cetrist candidate and used his position to block even a a hearing for Judge Garland. Ridiculous.
2
The Democratic leaders know that cannot do anything at all about the horror show that is happening to the SC . So disheartening.
What our Democratic elected leaders are doing here looks like pandering and basically waving hands in front of media cameras.
4
I'm reading today's paper's cover story. I admire the GOP's dedication of activists and organizations who have been working since the 80s to fulfill this dream of theirs. We don't have that type of long-term dedication, or voters who realized what was at stake wrt to the Supreme Court.
GOP policies disgust me, but their way of politics has been more successful and effective in our broken political system. The number of counties, state legislatures, gubernatorial offices, and Congress/WH/Supreme Court that they control proves this.
We need new Democrat leadership. One that knows how to fight back dirty and instill fear in the GOP, who knows how to recruit charismatic people that focus on jobs, healthcare, education, infrastructure, and environment rather than smaller social issues. Dems have the ability to pass Constitutional Amendments to add/fix Supreme Court seats, and other reforms -- but they lack the will.
28
Unfortunately (or fortunately, if you are me), it looks like HRC is not going to give you your wish. All indicators point to her giving it another try in 2020.
3
"Intellectual dishonesty"? Please.
Senator Mitch McConnell could not have been / could not be MORE intellectually dishonest. From 'one-term president,' to blocking Obama's nomination, to failing to consider the legal abyss* this president is about to plummet into, he seeks to rush judgement on the stolen Judgeship, that Mr. McConnell himself engineered.
*while high crimes and misdemeanors ARE impeachable offenses, obviously, multiple investigations are NOT (yet) convictions, but, with this election less than four months away, this is not the time for the Senator McConnell's intellectual dishonesty.
Plus, as a Supreme Court Justice, Judge Kavanagh'd be voting, on the president's culpability.
I don't think so.
3
Yes, John,
Democrats lack the will to fight back.
I would declare a "state of emergency" for Democrats.
May Day, May Day!
All hands on deck.
This is an emergency.
All able bodied Democrats, report for duty, now.
What about Presidents, Clinton, Carter and Obama?
We must win the House for Democrats this year!
====================================
1
Mob frenzy. Closed minds. Intellectual dishonesty. Media fanning the flames of fear and misunderstanding.
This Judge is a fine candidate by any criteria of experience and fairness.
He will uphold the law and expect settled issues and precedent.
25
Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, excoriated Democrats for engaging in what he called “cheap political fear-mongering,” and for declaring their opposition to Judge Kavanaugh even before his nomination was announced.
But it's OK to delay a Presidential Supreme Court nominee because it is an election year and we must let the people decide.
Is he delusional or plain stupid?
34
McConnell is, in my opinion, not delusional, not stupid, just plain mean and aggressive, and corrupt.
8
"mendacious lies"?
As compared to the other kind of lies?
I can think of several stronger adjectives.
Kavanaugh will likely be confirmed so are the Democrats making a mistake to position themselves as his enemy when he will be on the Supreme Court for 30 years? Clarence Thomas felt Democrats gave him a high tech lynching which probably influenced him these past 26 years. Putting each Republican nominee through hell is like boot camp, hardening the justices against Democrats forever.
11
"hardening the justices against Democrats forever."
What? No. The SC Justices are in for life once in. They dont care once in. The Justices are political and polemical (sadly) but the notion you have about them makes no sense.
3
Right, we certainly don't want to rile them up. Republicans and especially Trump are very forgiving, principled people. If we'll just be nice to them and give them what they want, we can count on them to support democratic, egalitarian principles. Being both cowardly and historically clueless will surely be a winning combination.
4
He's got a Federalist Society stamp of approval. He's already a guaranteed partisan
1
Any court system where Judges time their retirements to give one political side the choice of their replacement is not an independent judiciary. Any court system where even Death does not reset the balance is doubly unjustly constituted.
This is the court system we have in the US. Its rulings should be viewed as the law of a corrupt land, but not valid under the ideals of Justice.
Any Judge that takes part in this system should feel more shame than pride at the accomplishment.
How can we complain about the unjust nature of court systems like Poland, Turkey, or the friend of Republicans- Russia, when we have such a grotesque system at home?
15
Dems, be careful with what you wish for. Suppose you succeed in tanking the nomination. Then what? Trump can nominate someone even worse that may well get confirmed.
5
It is really futile for Senate Democrats to attempt to block Kavanaugh's confirmation. Instead, it would be wiser for Dems to use the hearings and platform to educate, reinforce and motivate their constituents and progressive voters -- and the cable news and C-SPANners watching -- on what issues are at stake (via Supreme Court and lower courts) and why grass roots energy and voting matters. Dems should lower the decibel level and demonstrate leadership on these important judicial issues. It would be a better and more productive way to "advise and consent."
15
As a citizen it was an outrage that Obama's pick was blocked by the GOP. That was pure politics. Now a President under investigation by the FBI is politically attacking the FBI and calling the NY Times and CNN and any media that offends him "Enemies of the people". "Oddly", he picked a candidate who has argued the President cannot be indicted. As a citizen this is an outrage that has nothing to do with Party and nothing to do with the qualifications of Kavanaugh. it is an attack on the Constitution and the independence of the Judiciary. No vote on a Supreme Court Justice until Mueller is finished investigating.
46
Republicans have made a mockery of democratic institutions and norms for a generation. With the decision to block Merrick Garland, they succeeded in smothering the Supreme Court's remaining credibility. Congress has no good will left, and Trump has proven that incompetence and malfeasance can indeed occupy the White House with a little push from Russia and domestic opportunists. This is the legacy of the GOP. But, to paraphrase Mitch McConnell, you'll come to regret this sooner than you might think. The next two election cycles will destroy the Republican Party, and they will deserve it.
31
Kavanaugh: Let's protect even a few cells that have formed in utero through abortion controls. Then we can sign their death sentences when fully formed and attending schools through unfettered gun laws. (Please check Wash DC decision where Kavanaugh decided that restrictions on assault rifles were unconstitutional).
19
Like a malignant cancer, Trump's Whitehouse and Republican majority Congress has metastasized to the Judicial branch. The treatment and perhaps cure is the midterm election and 2020 to purge this moribund disease.
22
Where are the principled Republicans? There have to be some in Congress who care about country over party. You know that the President is currupt. Why are you pretending he is a real President and not a puppet of a foreign government? Why do you just ask Putin whom he'd like to put on the Supreme Court? Is there no elected Republican with a backbone enough to stand up to their own party? Seriously?
12
It shows how corrupt they are, he apparently has black mail material on all of them. And yes, Donald Trump and Putin are two of the best on the planet at the art of blackmail.
6
To be fair, Hillary Clinton was a centrist, and she lost.
2
So is his job to implement a conservative political agenda as he has outlined in all of his public comments the past 20 years, or is his job to interpret the constitution as written and rule based on the letter of the law? How can you state that you expect him to do the job as he should when he has stated publicly that he has a political agenda that includes destroying environmental regulations, overturning Roe vs Wade and granting the president of the United States special protection from the rule of law that applies to ordinary citizens?
2
I'm grateful to Sen. McConnell for proving comedy through his disingenuous comments. His hypocrisy is so bottomless one can only laugh.
18
The well-founded criticism directed at Congress is equally applicable to the Supreme Court. And as a co-equal branch of the government, Justices shouldn't feel the need to flatter the president. Judge Kavanaugh has already shown signs of sycophancy. To me, measured, careful, thoughtful use of language would be a prerequisite for this position.
8
Trump is a lousy President. Mitch McConnell is just as bad. Terrible leaders, both are national disgraces.
But this is just fear mongering on the part of the Democrats. The guy is qualified and will do the job as he should.
It’s like wanting to impeach Trump because he is a lousy President, even if he hasn’t done anything impeachable.
It’s a sad reminder that even at times like this, when the nation is burdened with a jerk as a President, the Democrats are still capable of their own nonsense.
11
It's rich that McConnell is complaining about Democratic opposition before a hearing. Isn't this what McConnell did to Garland?
19
If only the term "Democratic leadership" were not the oxymoron it seems to be at this time.
With strong party leadership, it's quite possible that democratic senators representing red states would have reason to vote against the Kavanaugh nomination.
With strong democratic leaders in the Senate, it's quite possible that Republican swing votes could be swung over into the nay vote column.
But we don't. McConnell, the country's de-facto president, refashioned the sword of Damocles to hang over the heads of Republican senators.
I wish Democrats even knew what that was.
8
Thank you, Times, for reporting on what senate Democrats are doing to fight this. We need to amplify their voices. Trump's voice is amplified 24/7. This is part of the reason he got elected. His circus act was free publicity.
Headlines are almost always focused on the destruction of the trump regime. We need to focus more on what is being done to fight it, and what we the people can do to aid in that fight.
Enough focusing on the problem (trump). I'm not saying we should stick our heads in the sand and not be informed of his damage. But let's also get serious about how to stop this madness. Let's move forward with some solutions.
5
Too bad for the Democrats. Trump won the election - they didn't - and promised to nominate conservative justices. Democrats should vote "yes" just as Republicans did for liberals Kagan and Sotomayor rather than whine and deliberately blocking an exceptionally qualified nominee..
14
Can you count to 3,000,000?
How about try to see all the way to the beginning of a line of voters that extends for over a thousand miles? That is what a single file line of 3,000,000 people looks like.
Any other country that appointed the loser, by 3,000,000 ballots would have been investigated by the UN.
Trump is as illegitimate as a rotted fish head in the cake box..
5
Sorry, but I am struck as to the degree of naiveté and (I hate to write this) ignorance Susan Collins has shown over the past 18 months with regard to Trump and McConnell's machinations. She was clearly hoodwinked on the Republican "tax reform bill", and she will certainly be snookered with respect to the Kavanaugh nomination. As a woman, shouldn't she understand from Kavanaugh's past decisions that, despite his profound love for his family, his wife and two daughters, he firmly believes that men should control a woman's body and take away her right to "choose" what to do with that body? Can't Sen. Collins fundamentally understand that voting to confirm him will bring us closer to the back alleys for minorities and poor women? Simply unbelievable.
11
Two thoughts. Loud and angry, both of them:
(1) It is beyond DESPICABLE--that Senator McConnell, having resolutely blocked President Obama's choice for the Supreme Court--for almost a YEAR!--has now donned robes of political purity. Excoriated the Democrats (!) for "playing partisan politics." "Knocking the poor guy even before he was NOMINATED."
Oh the shame!
To quote Mr. Welch--sixty five years ago during the Army-McCarthy hearings:
"Have you no sense of DECENCY, sir? At long last, have you no sense of DECENCY?"
(2) These ultra-right groups. My goodness! So inquisitorial! I was struck (a while back) by the bitterness displayed by Ms. Coulter when she broke with Mr. Trump.
Now--at long last!--the egregious Ms. Coulter "discovered" that our President was a loud, blustering "ignoramus." My goodness! Have the scales fallen from those right-wing eyes? You never SAW this before?
And now--some right-wing groups sailing into Mr. Kavanaugh. Most of us would find the gentleman--well--KIND of conservative. Conservative ENOUGH, maybe.
But no! Some point of doctrinal purity--some tiny lapse from the true faith. . . .
. . . .and lo and behold! He is not only an INADEQUATE choice. He's a downright BAD choice.
The sooner these latter-day inquisitors vanish from our political landscape. . .
. . .the better.
3
Did you ever watch a game and when there is a question of fact - like, was she out or safe? Everyone on both teams is always sure that their team is right - or, at least they act that way. No different in politics. And, it can be entertaining, except when it is vicious.
As I didn't mind the Rs trying to find some reason that Kagan and Sotomayor should not have been confirmed (arguably, Sotomayor, who was not a constitutional scholar, and did poorly in her testimony, should not have been - but I was for her confirmation, as the others) I don't mind the Ds trying with Kavanaugh. It also means we shouldn't take it seriously. What gets me is the occasional viciousness, such as that displayed with Justice Thomas and Justice Alito. They made Justice Alito's wife, who should have been overjoyed, cry. And, listen to Justice Thomas' remarks at the first hearing. Inspiring. The second hearing, angry and depressed. Over what? A couple of jokes or comments which so upset the Ds who would a few years later defend Bill Clinton, possibly a rapist, to the death. I defended Clinton too, b/c I can't stand when a president - B Clinton or Trump having to defend themselves is trying to do his job and the other side tries to destroy everything he attempts so that they can win the next election - or, tries to get him impeached. It's all nonsense. Hence, I watch, but try not to get upset at our two reprehensible parties.
There's nothing wrong with Kavanaugh.
4
McConnell attacks Democrats for announcing their opposition and intention to vote no, for which voters can hold them accountable. That’s how the system works. Hypocrite McConnell evaded accountability by refusing to hold a hearing and have an up or down vote on Merrick Garland’s nomination.
8
Before I cast my midterm election ballot in November, I'd like to cast a vote now for Sen. Mitch McConnell as "Hypocrite of the Century"...
7
Judge Kavanaugh embodies the very kind of dogmatic thinking—hewing to a quasi-religious bended-knee myth of the founding fathers—that is a danger to our hard-won individual freedoms and precedents.
“Original intent” and “framers” are the watchwords and cover for these types of religious-right arch-conservative judges.
“Original intent”?—that’s way back in the 1700s with a completely different country and world.
“Framers”?—they are long gone and out of touch with our times; why do they get to “frame” the discussion now?
9
“I say to my friends on the other side of the aisle, you’ll regret this,” McConnell, then the minority leader, told them. “And you may regret it a lot sooner than you think.”
5
The Democrats have yelled and screamed about fighting this before they knew the name , have not even interview or questioned a nominee
This is not politics , this is just pure raw closed minded blind hatred
11
They don't need to. His views are completely evident in his previous rulings (he is anti-choice, pro-gun, pro religious integration in government, and believes you cannot indict a sitting president). Also, the fact that Democrats anticipated a poor pick from Trump is not exactly shocking either. It doesn't exactly take a rocket scientist to see that Trump would eventually nominate a theocratic conservative.
2
Please, learn from McConnell.
Senators Heitkamp, Manchin, and Donnelly, is it realistic to expect Republicans to vote for you as a thank you?
8
Exactly. Trump will instruct this cult to vote against them; they can only gain by showing a spine
3
The "new wave" of democratic socialists will never play with centrist voters and may have moderate democratic voters turn away as well... That's a hill to far....
6
Schumer vows to fight Kavanaugh's appointment.
How do you plan to do that Chuck, when you're bringing a BB gun that only shoots blanks?
9
Maybe Schumer will reverse Harry Reid's decision to go nuclear and eliminate the filibuster for federal court nominees. That one decision by Harry Reid means Schumer can only shoot blanks and Trump gets his nominee.
As usual the Left is putting the horse before the cart. They should just calm down and go with the flow.
5
McConnell, the notorious offender of the Constitutional provisions, has absolutely no moral right to make any comments on what is and what is not proper with respect to judicial nominations. He has lost all honesty, dignity and shame.
20
Let me guess.. The Democrats are going to rally, march and protest the nomination! Didn't they do that last week over immigration- and the week before over #MeToo and week before over Guns?
11
The democrats are the ones losing votes. Desperation striking deep.
6
This is a wholly fraudulent Kangaroo court. Mcconnell blocked President Obama's Supreme court pick. Meanwhile Obama's administration was the most transparent presidency within our present generation.
It's no accident that even other republicans are asking voters
to just walk away in order to let the GOP fail, as it truly must.
It is corrupt with grubby hands - from soliciting cash money
from countries like quatar, who then kill all their own people.
It turns out that Trump was setting up laundry deals all along
to bribe his way to the presidency. He knows NOTHING about other countries -- or even where they are on a map. He is not smart, and went to a local commuter school where he got low grades, nothing more.
In a word, mcconnell and trump have made the GOP a party
of relentlessly cruel, self-dealing sociopaths. They haven't
served our constituents well, and instead lie to us about our trillion dollar debt, yet taxing us for this terrible boondoggle.
Welcome to the kangaroo court. Do you think you can get a
fair shake with a court filled with far right-wing politicians?
7
McConnell is unabashed in his galling hypocrisy because he knows he will get away with it for two important reasons:
1.) Fox Propaganda will repeat his words and spend countless hours talking about how political the Democrats are, completely ignoring the traitorous abuse of the Constitution committed by McConnell and the GOP two years ago. Low information viewers will lap it up.
2.) Actual media outlets, like this newspaper, can be counted upon to simply repeat his words, without pointing out the hypocrisy, in order to seem unbiased (as they did in this article).
Please, NYTimes, every time that man opens his mouth, you need to repeat how hypocritical he is, and that he did the same thing he's now "getting exercised" about (constantly repeat his tweet from the night Scalia died, if you have to)!
Otherwise, our nation is truly lost to his mendacious lies.
9
This headline gave me biggest laugh of the day. Thanks Democrats for getting us into this quagmire with your feckless leadership for the last 30 years. Now you come out swinging? Where have you been all these years while the country was imploding?
11
What Mitch McConnell really means is - "Do as I say...not as I do."
"This country is on the verge of becoming a fascist theocracy." - Frank Zappa (during the Reagan Administration)
12
The Senate should vote to confirm Kavenaugh next week. We already know more about him than almost any associate justice in history; we even already know what the strongly partisan vote will be. Just vote now and spare us months of Democrats whinging.
3
The sadist in me wants to let this recklessness government prevail and just have the whole thing collapse as a result... then I remember I'm not a Republican...
3
Has there ever been a more hypocritical politician than Mitch McConnell?
Ok, maybe Trump, or his primary opponents but that is really bottom fishing.
8
After the Republicans refused to even consider Obama's nominee, they are whining about Democrat opposition to theirs?
McConnell and the GOP, pure hypocrisy.
11
Kavanaugh thinks he can channel the FF of 231 years ago. It's silly and pretty much disqualifies anyone who claims to be an originalist as being full of baloney.
3
Good. Claws out, dems. Go low and play dirty just like a republican. Surely Kavanaugh or his wife have some skeletons in his closet. Delay until the November blue wave.
17
Mitch McConnell, cry us a a river, sir. Does the name "Merrick Garland" mean anything to you? Reap what you sow. I can't make up my mind whether you're really that delusional, narcissistic, cynical or hypocritical. I don't even care if NYT prints this. Did me a world of good to just write it.
14
Wasn’t Biden the one who came out with no Supreme Court judge on election year?
For the record:
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2016/mar/17/context-bide...
Outrage all you want, fellow democrats, but please make sure that your outrage culminates in mid-term victories, and not losses. Cheers.
6
It is incredulous that McConnell is accusing DEMs for deliberately blocking the expeditious appointment of a new supreme court justice. McConnell is the one who perfected the art of full scale obstruction for all of the eight years of the Obama presidency. It's pretty clear to everyone that he deservedly owns the current persistent gridlock in Washington..
6
The confirmation of Kavanaugh is basically a done deal unless something delays the vote beyond the mid-term elections. The Democratic Party will be on trial from this moment on to define itself to the nation and voters. Stop begging for money and begin giving a vision of new leaders and a path to recapture a progressive momentum around the US wherever it's possible to sow growth and reform. Stop playing "who's the next president" and start playing who's the next council leader, governor, school board, state legislator, etc. There is some grass roots momentum at this moment. What the Party does with this time might encourage or extinguish our hopes.
6
Given the likely bias making up the Supreme Court sooner rather than later and fears a conservative majority might bring as now the Judicial balance scales have shifted, Conservatives and Republicans across the country have made it clear which previous decisions and rulings they will be pushing forward to the Court in the hope of seeing a different ruling that reverses them.
For those that fear the loss of their rights (Roe vs Wade anyone?) will be coming soon after they are presented and accepted by the Court...the ONLY possible tactic to employ would be to find a way that stops any of these cases getting to the Court by whatever legal and /or public ways and means possible.
I would include marketing shame and hypocrisy as part of the actions that could be taken...couched in the right way but always with the truth which increases the potency of what is presented to the people and how, depending on how it impacts on the credibility of the Judges and Court if such cases were (as expected at some time) a new attempt to overturn what was previously ruled on.
That's when you make the biggest noise in media and to the public and pour sunlight on what is actually an embarrassment and display of Hypocrisy and strikes at the Courts fallibility and weakens its credibility
Shame them! If something is going to be able to be made that gives reason and cause ,Rub it in.
The fact that the Court might find itself reversing previous rulings/cases...does not help its credibility.
2
Democrats must be better at slogans. Between Pro-Choice and Pro-Life, the term Pro-Life wins 100% of the time to the uneducated.
Start with something for which there is no slogan, like health care. Dems should call themselves Pro-Health and label Republicans as Pro-Death. Then let them waste their time trying to explain that they favor life for the rich but the poor can’t afford. Watch them trying to reconcile Pro-Life and Pro-Death.
5
I am literally staggered by the hypocrisy of Mitch McConnell in telling the Democrats to treat Kavanaugh fairly. Remember how he treated President Obama's choice for Supreme Court judge. Hey McConnell, let the people decide this judge too! And also, why is Trump able to pick lifetime appointments to the Supreme Court when he is under federal investigation???
13
The more facts that come to light about Justice Kennedy's conflict of interest due to his son's Deutsche Bank relationship with Trump, combined with both Gorsuch and Kavanaugh being Kennedy clerks just doesn't pass the smell test.
It looks to me like this is truly Kennedy's plan and moment in history than Trump's. It is just too well laid out to be anything Trump came up with.
8
A question for the esteemed prospective judge: Exactly where in the Constitution does it say that the President is above the law?
6
The emerging option is a Congressional re-write of the law in unequivocal, bullet-proof language which the Supreme Court is obliged to follow. Congressmen and Women are, after all, called 'legislators'...they write and pass the law into the statutes. This is why the mid-term elections are so critical for the welfare of the nation. Changes are long overdue including removing the Electoral College - an anachronism which suits the ultra-Conservative movement just fine. The US Constitution is not inviolate - hence the Amendments. This is hardly a fine point in law - but will undoubtedly provide refuge for the likes of Mitch McConnell who seems to be untroubled by rank hypocrisy and self-contradiction. If the Congress fails in it's duty to protect and preserve American democratic rights, then it will fall to the states to make the amendments. One way or another - this needs urgent action and the power for change lies in the hands of the voters.
4
Is fierce opposition to this nomination the most effective strategy towards winning the 2018 election? What response to this particular nomination will increase DEM's chances of gaining congressional seats?
That's all that matters at the moment. DEMs should be functioning on that basis.
Frankly, Kavanaugh is not the worst of the bunch Trump was considering. DEMs have very little likelihood of permanently blocking an appointment until 2020, or even to Nov. 2018. So does attempting to block this nomination do anything to help their chances of turning currently GOP congressional seats to the DEM column this November?
I don't know. The answer to that question is what we should be discussing right now.
3
Make this ALL about Mitch, and the stolen seat. November, November, and November. Seriously.
7
"Chuck Schumer ... said..."
MORE ineffectual posturing from Schumer & co?
How about coming up with an agenda for the Democrats -- and the nation -- and using that to rally voters?
Or how about turning "up the heat" on the illegal and apparently criminal conduct of Trump and his gang?
Assert some active leadership and stop always "reacting" to Trump and defending your views (esp. when a majority agrees with them - sensible gun regulation, etc)
6
That McConnell would dare to criticize Democrats for declaring their opposition to Kavanaugh "before his nomination was even announced" simply reinforces the facts that he's a massive hypocrite and has absolutely no shame. Though it's a long shot, the Dems need to return the treatment the Republicans employed in refusing to even consider Obama's nominees for over a year until he was out of office.
While it's true that "two wrongs don't make a right", it's also true that not opposing wrong isn't right either.
5
I am tired of hearing that the nomination of Kavanaugh is inevitable and there’s nothing that can be done to stop it. Trump and McConnell are doing things that I thought never could or would be done in this country. They are both lying and bullying their way to get whatever they want. Isn’t it about time we fight fire with fire?
8
Joe Biden and Ted Kennedy invented this game. The vicious character assassination campaign that they waged on Robert Bork, laid the foundation for this deplorable partisan bickering.
5
It made me sick to see Kavanaugh grabbing onto his daughter in a bear-hold to show what a great family man he is. I kept thinking of all the young girls down the years who will be raped, and forced to bear the child in an America without Planned Parenthood, without choice. And somehow, after he gets Roe overturned, if that daughter of his ends up inconveniently pregnant, I have a hunch he won't make her carry the pregnancy to term, but will whisk her off to a private clinic for a discrete "procedure" only available to the rich.
11
Stolen elections have consequences.
14
Nominating a Clinton has consequences.
9
Surely there is at least one woman out there who was paid off by Trump to have an abortion. How I would love to see her emerge from the shadows and show everyone in the clearest possible terms how much of a phony this president really is. Of course, that would be wasted on the Trump supporters, because they would chalk that up to 'fake news.'
8
The monsters who made the monster, bludgeon their way, preening for the cameras, announcing their modesty.
Isn't it finally their turn, just like in softball?
Like how it used to be in America?
Aren't they just bringing back fairness?
Pence and McConnell feigning high values. Conservatives, republicans, who pretend that any act by Donald Trump is reasonable, when he can't be trusted to award the blue ribbon to a cow at a county fair.
Conservative thieves and gluttons hijack the Court, under the pretense that any division is over cultural issues like abortion and burning flags, when in reality the impact of this nominee, will be about economics and power and democracy.
How noble and peaceful and Christ-like, the decision for Citizens United. How American to ruin representational democracy.
It's only fair for conservatives to have a chance for once.
The press, even as it self consciously admits this failing, will treat this is a carnival! Trump was so well tempered as to avoid nominating a snake handler! Democracy in action! The fight ahead will be furious and fun, as though, short of hitting the nominee over the head with a tire iron, Democrats have a chance against kleptocracy.
But lots of ads will be sold.
Conservatives giggle in the cloakroom, insist that they are of a superior sort, when that dirty Trump boy says and does such awful things.
They aren't like him at all. They only profit from his every bellow and breach of decency.
2
Scalia's body hadn't cooled before McConnell stated he would refuse any nominee Obama chose. Now he expects decorum? He's got some nerve.
11
The “Supreme” court has always been a reactionary lot. It is a complete joke that we call them “Justices.” One hundred years after our founding we finally decided to end slavery, and only after killing 1.5 millions of our own people. Then it took another 100 years before we decided to give african americans the right to vote. We committed genocide against native americans. We imprisoned people for being Japanese and dropped 2 atomic bombs on Japanese civilian populations, something we would have never considered in white Europe. We bombed Vietnam to oblivion and lied about expanding the war into Cambodia and Laos. Then there’s Iraq. And throughout all these horrendous crimes, the “Supreme” court did absolutely nothing. They think they are the vanguards of justice, what a joke. As far as I’m concerned, you can hand the entire court over to the so called “conservatives.” Justice comes from people like MLK, not these phony do-nothings.
4
You are quite mistaken, Eric. The original purpose of the atomic bomb project was to drop it on Berlin.
@eric: thank you so much for stating some historic facts which are easily forgotten [or swept under some rug] for their bitterness. all this human suffering, shameless, endless violations of int'l. law - not just by the US but by most of the northern hemisphere. and those who, even remotely, tried to further global justice, fairness, equality [ghandi, lumumba, MLK, malcolm x., sankara, saro wiwa, to name just a few] had to die of unnatural causes ... it's such a rough battle and arm$ are distributed quite unevenly. but one of my favorite voices, swiss sociologist jean ziegler, says: today, opportunities have never been better for advocates and enthusiasts to change laws that halt the global inequality machine.
Mitch McConnell is the last person who should talk about "cheap political fear-mongering". He's the one who rewrote the Constitution to suit his own selfish political agenda two years ago by denying a hearing to Merrick Garland. Now he sounds like a man drowning in his own pool.
6
Senate leader McConnell refused to consider Obama's supreme court nomination arguing that a year remaining in his presidential term was insufficient time. He also argued that a Clinton presidency would be treated the same way if she was still under FBI investigation. But he had no problem ramming through trump's nomination even though this president is under FBI investigation. There's something deeply appallingly amiss here.
…………..
All you have to do to see where Mitch McConnell's priorities lie is glance at the statistics about the state he has helped govern since the mid-1980s. By any measure, Kentucky is a mess*. It is poor, unhealthy, under-employed, non-competitive, poorly educated, addicted, and despairing. While Mitch has been off playing tactician, his state has continued to sink. McConnell is a heartless, cold, ruthless man who is out for himself. Maybe the chickens are finally coming home to roost.
* Kentucky:
/ #46 in Educational attainment..
/ #46 in Poverty.
/ #43 in Employment.
/ #43 in Medicare quality.
But #1 in obstructionist politicians.
17
The Democrats in Congress will put up the illusion of a fight. Their health care, their mistresses or wives or daughters' ability to access abortion will never be in danger.
5
Why is a fight that will be lost because of the numbers illusory, Martha Shelley? I sure hope that all kinds of democrats, independents, progressives, radicals, and anyone else who cares about the future of the country starts showing support for the opposition soon, or it will become even more futile.
3
Don't waste your time and energy on the Complicit Sisters. No matter how
" concerned " or " thoughtful " they profess to be, watch how they VOTE.
Women, get to work. November is coming. Finally.
5
Confirmation is a forgone conclusion. Schumer well knows this and just needs to put on a show for the faithful. He also knows that the Supreme Court is lost for the foreseeable future. As a lifelong Democrat, I am tired of 50 years of political malpractice by the leaders of this party. I have switched my registration to Independent.
2
He's pure evil. Reject all Trump nominations. Only a 9th circuit justice is acceptable.
3
This is about two different events, students.
First, Chuckie Schumer USED to at least be original with his propagandizing of the poor little tools in the streets. He actualy used relevant terms and you almost believed that he meant it for a moment.
But the Senator from the Wall Street banks was getting his message from the same place everyone else was last night, and none of it even made sense. You'd think with millions of progressive oligarch's dinari at stake they'd have a more coherent approach.
But the second example from last night should leave you either laughing or in tears.
http://freebeacon.com/blog/liberals-are-furious-over-the-nomination-of-i...
The robotic dolts-in-the-street were sent out with blank places on their signs because no one was sure who the nominee was going to be, so you had stuff like, ''M- (fill in blank here) is going to end all human life on the planet!''
The poor things didn't even know the gender of the object of their everlasting hatred until the call from Denver or whever came in.
This is the approach of a political party that could ONCE show some coherence, even when losing. Not so much now.
If anyone doesn't think this country isn't at war with itself, I invite you to open your eyes and your ears. The barricades are calling, which side will you be on?
3
Do McConnell and the GOP think that we are stupid?
Of course he does. And he would be right. We as a citizenry have never punished Republican lies, hypocrisy, and wholesale trampling of our political norms and traditions, all in service of their highest principle: Party First!
Maybe 2018 will be different. But I doubt it.
2
As Republican birthers claimed just a few years back, any appointments of an illegitimate president should be summarily impeached. They are a stain on the rule of law.
7
McConnell is a con man, a hypocrite, and a true danger to democracy. It is clear that he would choose party over country every time . That pattern is already obvious.
1
Wow, Chuck Schumer with his glasses off; he must really mean business!
4
McConnell, how the heck do you sleep at night. And how the heck can your family stand you. We certainly cannot.
3
The New York Times terms of use prevent me from telling the "ordinarily staid" Mitch McConnell exactly where he can stick his faux outrage.
2
any chance rand paul's neighbor might drop by mcconnel's anytime soon?
2
Anything Mitch McConnell says about the U.S. Supreme Court nominating process- is not worthy of printing. Please stop insulting us- NYT.`
4
In the photo I’m glad Schumer is losing the crazy schoolmarm half-glasses.
It’s time to fight!
1
Demo’s on the attack...T. God as the youngsters would say! Let’s roll!!!
1
Looking forward to a hair on a Coke can with this guy someplace.
3
Apparently, what's good for McConnell's goose is not for his gander. Was he fair to Merrick Garland? Nope. What a hypocrite.
2
Never mind that the guy he is replacing was a Ronald Reagan pick. I'm not sure what democrats expect to accomplish here as it is a fait accompli. At least it will be an impartial judge unlike that moron Sotomayor who "colors her judgements with her Latina experience". She doesn't know the meaning of impartial. And absolutely nobody is buying the fear mongering about Rowe/Wade and that other drive that the Times and Democrats are peddling. What tripe.
1
He will be confirmed, and that will be the second-last nail in the coffin of American democracy. The last will be our own "Reichstag Fire" a terrorist attack most likely (and possibly a false flag event) that will provide an excuse to cancel the 2020 election. And then we may have the hot civil war that so many on the right seem to slaver over.
2
The commentary presumes the Court to have its largest domestic impact, but think of global business, rights, warranties, bankruptcies have frequently shown up in New York law, its law governs much of international commerce and finance. In a case that got too little media notice, Argentina lost a default appeal to Elliott Management and other private equity, forcing the President of Argentina to fly commercial for the UN opening, fearing Elliott, et al. would attach the national plane as they had tried to do with the DC embassy. Finally, Argentina was forced to pay, all caused by a legal loophole its advisers overlooked.
Trump wants to shift trade decision-making from an fairness-for-all model like the WTO, to one that can be controlled through a single legal gateway, US courts, by US legislation. This pick/his credentials is the key appointment that will shape global growth, its legal controls.
In the absence of TTP, the pressure to void or abandon (or rewrite) every other agreement means US courts would play a new, highly important role in world trade, its liability, its capital, its safety and wages. This pick will touch every worker in the world.
3
Or other countries will want to either their own or use a third party country law's for trade. Just because a company is based in the US does not mean the contracts are governed under US law. Multinationals sign contracts every day using the domicile in which the work is being performed, not where their headquarter is. Yes, US companies do like NY law for business as it has very established case law and therefore precedent has generally be set. Individuals contracts for trade, if not done under a uniform set of rules like the WTO, will become an expensive headache for many individual business and farmers.
Battle is the word. Clash. Confrontation. Warfare.
Wow. Everything a country should be, right? Exemplary of sound leadership, right?
Someone posted yesterday on another site that the choice of Kavanaugh is God’s Word! An Evangelical in her own words.
Some of the rest of us are just trying to find a quiet reprieve from the everyday production of battle, chaos, fiasco under this administration. But we can’t really rest in that reprieve because we know our future generations are in the hands of a man who is swayed by trying to prove his own popularity, that somehow, somewhere he is liked, even loved, and always followed with loyalty. And perhaps a choice in the US justice system may always assure him of his personal freedom, no matter what he’s done or been involved in.
Gone are the days of right, rights, equality. Here are the days, yes, of battle.
3
Ulysses S. Grant was arrested on M Street in the District of Columbia, while serving as President of the United States.
He paid a fine for his infraction of the law.
http://wjla.com/news/local/d-c-police-once-arrested-a-sitting-president-...
https://www.google.com/search?q=ulysses+s+grant+speeding+ticket&rlz=...
In my opinion, Mr. Trump's curious legal notion that, as President, he can't be indicted, convicted and sentenced, is simply fantasy. In the United States, the President is not above the law.
11
No vote on the next Supreme Court Justice while the President is under investigation and he and his party are attacking the FBI and the President is attacking investigative journalists. Trump's conflict of interest is so public and evident he cannot make a believably independent decision. Of course he picked a candidate who has previously speculated that the President cannot be indicted while in office. The Supreme Court will be tainted by such a mockery of the Constitution, which specifies an independent judiciary.
9
By outsourcing to the Federalist Society the screening of candidates and by their shameful treatment of Judge Merrick Garland, the Republicans have turned the nomination/confirmation process into a political battlefield.
9
Trump's first legitimate Supreme Court nomination. There are now two Justices with 'the asterisk', just like Maris. And one Senate Majority Leader who will go down in history as abrogating the Constitution and the traditions and honor of the Senate for political power. Sad.
4
Thank you Harry Reid for making this moment possible.
Thank you Democrats for likely getting Donald Trump re elected.
Progressives must stop and consider the long term consequences of there actions and speech.
3
Why is it always Progressives who must stop and think? We've been thinking; it's why we're Progressives. Meanwhike, the GOP says the most outrageously racist, sexist, myopic, etc things and still get voted in. Trump says the first thing that comes to his mind however stupid, contradictory, or nonsensical and he's president. No, Progressives are done being told to sit up and shut down. The war is here and we will not lay down and watch as 80 years of hard fought progress is wiped out by oligarchs and the facist hangers-on who do their bidding for a modicum of power and wealth.
211
Really? The GOP holds all the cards...and the votes -- how to proceed? Here is a thought:
November 6, 2018. That's the date on which 33 senate seats, all 435 seats in the House of Representatives, and 14 governorship's will be up for re-election. Put it on your calendar now and be prepared to be an informed voter. If you are worried, concerned, angry, disappointed about the direction the government is going this is the most effective way to make a change, stop complaining and start planning. Remember the president is only one cog in the government machine, and you can make effective change through voting for your local and state representatives, this is the check that can balance this situation. Pass it on…. I was told to pass this on so this people is very important. Be prepared.
The Constitution says very little about laws, except that only Congress can create them.
Because the Constitution is so short, basically a job description for the three branches of government (although the Bill of Rights and other Amendments do evoke certain inalienable rights),
the Supreme Court votes based on existing laws and precedents.
There is a rich history of case precedent, and laws, Americans have commonly accepted. But when a law is challenged before the Supreme Court, the justices have only precedent to turn to, and their personal notions of constitutionality.
We learned in the 2016 election that experience, or lack thereof, did not make a difference to the American electorate. I can see you like Trump, I liked Bernie. Your guy won. Truth is not his thing, nor respect for the law. But really, you have to blame his election on the 52% of voters who didn't bother to vote.
Kavanaugh's experience means little. Years on the bench don't equal impartiality. You will like him if you agree with him.
As to Kavanaugh's "notion" that Presidents should not be distracted with indictments, the Constitution is very clear on the impeachment of Presidents.
The House is to call for it, the Senate, with the Chief Justice presiding, tries the case. Punishment is limited to removal from office, however, the Constitution says the person impeached "shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law."
Where are the strategic thinkers in either party? This reality TV tit-for-tat immediacy, to keep the viewers tuned in, is getting dangerously out of control.
Once again, I fear the Democrats will be "too nice" and lay down to Republicans in the name of "civility," and the GOP will win, as usual. Why, why, why did Obama not stand up to them more over Garland?
9
To those who are saying this is bad for Democrats, why? They aren't going to pick up red voters by acquiescing. They aren't going to retain core blue voters by caving (again). That leaves the mythical independent, who, after 2 years of Trumpism has almost certainly picks a side. No, the Democrats have to put up a fight, because 8 decades of progressive advancements in civil rights are on the line
8
Question for the lawyers: could Trump's nomination of someone with Kavanaugh's views of executive immunity to investigation be construed as attempted obstruction of justice?
4
This is everything that is wrong with the Democratic party. Members simply can't understand that it is not all about them, and that the purpose of our political system is not designed to perpetuate one set of views.
Sure. The Progressives are think so much that they got behind Hillary and lost to the worst candidate of all time. Maybe they should focus less on the quantity of their thinking and more on the quality.
While I'm glad to read that Democrats are "coming out swinging," I have to ask: where were these fighting Democrats (including Obama) in 2016, when McConnell was in the process of stealing a Supreme Court seat? THAT was the time to fight!
6
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is a disgrace to the Senate and indeed to his Country. (Perhaps not so to his right wing base and the big money supporting that base.) McConnell displayed blatant disregard of tradition and fair play in denying the courtesy of a hearing, and a vote, on President Obama's nominee Merrick Garland.Yet McConnell now cries foul when the Democrats are preparing to question President Trump's nominee, Judge Brett Kavanaugh. Both Garland and Kavanaugh are distinguished and able jurists, and it is a travesty that both the former and now the latter are treated as political footballs. The security of our Nation depends in large part on the integrity of our courts. This Administration is more interested in short term political gains than the long term implications that McConnell and his GOP colleagues in the Senate seem insensitive to.
3
A lot of political posturing, as expected, but as one who didn't bother to listen to the Showman's announcement last night, I already know what the outcome will be: Kavanaugh will win approval and assume his position on the Supreme Court.
More important to me will be how Kavanaugh does or does not answer questions about a.) the integrity of the Senate hearings process after Gorsuch and his refusal to answer any pertinent questions about past cases and precedents, and b.) the integrity of the Supreme Court itself, which appears to be headed toward the same partisan predictability as Congress.
Judge Kavanaugh, in other words, should directly comment on his thoughts regarding past court cases. He should also speak to the survival of the judicial branch as a viable "check and balance" as it was conceived by the Constitution. This in an age where the Court is being unbalanced by money and powerful partisans. This in an age where the successfully-place judges appear unwilling to show even occasional independence from the sponsors who place them on the bench.
In other words: Is it going to be country or conservative groomers, Mr. Kavanaugh? Will you vote lockstep or conscience once you don those robes for life? This is what regular Americans care about, and would if the sides were reversed, too.
2
The Democrats have only themselves to blame for not working together to elect their nominee for President last November. The Bernie or bust segment of the party helped ensure the victory of Mr Trump. The Democrats had their chance and blew it during the last election.
Judge Kavanaugh has impeccable credentials and is a well respected judge. He appears extremely well qualified to sit on the Supreme Court. They should not go for the bait by attacking a well qualified jurist.
The Democrats need to save their energy for the upcoming midterm elections. They should avoid staging a fight that they can not win. An ugly fight will only alienate voters they need to capture for the upcoming election. The Democrats need to recognize that they are being played.
2
This is a done deal. All Dems can do is make noise. I will be turning the TV off and enjoying the summer breeze.
2
The Republicans are treating this as a scruffy cage fight. I want the Democrats to do the same. I am tired of them being mild mannered and not fighting for us. This Supreme Court seat is the fourth or fifth one that will selected by a President who did not win the majority vote of Americans. How democratic is it then? The Court is therefore not reflective of majority of us. The backlash will come Mitch. I will enjoy it.
2
Both major political parties and their supporters have begun to sound like "W" parties. Republicans=Winning; Democrats=Whining. I may not like it but that is what it sounds like.
2
Sadly, yes. Unless and until Democrats can vote and show whether they do have a majority that counts, a lot of this is just whining. I'm more than tired of it - can't wait until November, '18, '20, ... the only times that seem to count any more. I
1
I don't get it. What, exactly, do you think the Democrats could accomplish - now in 2018, and then in 2016? The Republicons have the power that counts, and they are using it. Yes, it is party before everything else, but them's the marbles we're playing for now, it seems
1
Bravo. Except, please just substitute Merrick Garland for the name Kavanaugh. Thanks - that should do.
2
Once again the democrats are pushing too hard. This will probably backfire on them.
3
As yesterday's Op Ed penned by Akhil Reed Amar, entitled A Liberal's Case for Brett Kavanaugh, explains, Judge Kavanaugh is a well regarded jurist by all parties. He is extremely well qualified. There is no doubt that if Hillary Clinton had prevailed in 2016, she would not have nominated Judge Kavanaugh. However that is not the test for Senate confirmation. It is hard to recall that just a generation ago, Justice Scalia, whom everyone knew was extremely conservative, was confirmed almost unanimously. This sanguinary battle over nominations, with Democrats refusing to endorse any nomination, runs the real risk of damaging this country's institutions, including the judiciary. If Brett Kavanaugh cannot is unsuitable for confirmation, every nomination is suspect.
3
Excuse me, you say it's the Democrats refusing to consider nominations? Recall that Mitch "the Traitor" McConnell refused to have any hearings for Obama's pick for 9+ months. Democrats have learned two years late that they have to fight back.
3
If Justice Kavanaugh were to say anything about a future roe/wade case he would have to preclude himself from the case as prejudiced. Didn't whats his name, and whats her name justices just recently have to do that?
1
Mitch McConnell excoriating Democrats for their actions around a Supreme Court justice nomination, now that's rich. Mitch McConnell, the man who refused to even consider the legitimate nominee of a sitting President. A man who has done more damage to democracy than any person in my lifetime, domestic or foreign. A man who has put party before country for years. A man with no principles, just the naked desire to hold onto power. A man who cannot possibly be trusted at any level on any subject. His rant about Democrats behavior would be laughable, if the consequences of his actions were less dire.
2
Democrats need to immediately announce their plan to primary Collins in purple Maine with the most electable candidate they can find.
4
Indeed, Senator McConnell. And while Democrats are busy forgetting about things, you surely hope they forget about Merrick Garland.
5
There is no way the DEMs can stop this. It is far more important to retake the House and Senate. The DEMs need to use this to their advantage for the mid terms and if a red state DEM must vote for him to keep their seat so be it.
2
Pence is wrong to say that Mr. Kavanaugh is “the most deserving nominee to the Supreme Court in the United States today.”
That distinction belongs to Merrick Garland.
19
Doesn't Mr. McConnell realize that emulation is the sincerest form of flattery? The only difference between now and earlier is that his denial of Obama's opportunity to name a judge was seditious. What the democrats are doing is mere futile grandstanding.
2
"Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, excoriated Democrats for engaging in what he called “cheap political fear-mongering,” and for declaring their opposition to Judge Kavanaugh even before his nomination was announced."
Mitch--so upright, so principled. Don't attack before he's even nominated. Follow the Constitution...and refuse to consider him at all. That's the American way!
3
Mitch should have reviewed Garland.
2
Come on people, it’s so obvious ... trump picked Kavanaugh because of the judge's view that a sitting president cannot be indicted, to wit (his words) "the country loses when the President’s focus is distracted by the burdens of civil litigation or criminal investigation and possible prosecution.”.
It’s a tacit assertion that the President is therefore above the law!
6
McConnell has the unmitigated gall to say the Democrats are being unreasonable! He's the reason we're here and the reason the system is so broken.
VOTE RESPONSIBLY IN NOVEMBER.
5
You omitted the word JUSTIFIED and no need to paint Kavanaugh as an arch-conservative, his record speaks for itself. | “Senate Democrats, facing an uphill struggle to reject the nomination of Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court, opened a JUSTIFIED broad attack on Tuesday, painting him as an arch-conservative who would roll back abortion rights, undo health care protections, ease gun restrictions and protect President Trump against the threat of impeachment.”
4
An open letter to Senator Mitch McConnell.
Dear Senator,
Try as I might, it is very difficult for me to give you any credibility as you rant against the Democrats for engaging in what you called "cheap political mongering." I guess you would have MORE credibility with me if you weren't such a blatant hypocrite with a fairly extensive track record of being an Obstructionist. You know, the old "we're going to limit President Obama to one term" thing, like right after he won both the popular and electoral college vote.
But no point in dealing with trifles. Oh, I almost forgot - that Merrick Garland thing, where you parlayed your power as Senate Majority Leader to deprive President Obama, a duly elected second-term president, his nomination for Justice Scalia's seat.
So it's difficult for me to get worked up when you claim the Democrats are playing politics. But do enjoy your majority status while it lasts these next couple of months. I predict you will be in for a rude awakening come November 6th.
13
As a citizen it was an outrage that Obama's pick was blocked by the GOP. That was pure politics. Now a President under investigation by the FBI is politically attacking the FBI and calling the NY Times and CNN and any media that offends him "Enemies of the people". "Oddly", he picked a candidate who has argued the President cannot be indicted. As a citizen this is an outrage that has nothing to do with Party and nothing to do with the qualifications of Kavanaugh. it is an attack on the Constitution and the independence of the Judiciary. No vote on a Supreme Court Justice until Mueller is finished investigating.
8