Brett Kavanaugh attempted-rape accuser Christine Belsey Ford has asked for an FBI investigation into her claims before she testifies. Unfortunately, but all too predictably, this will not go her way -- the bureau will not investigate unless directed to do so, which obviously won't happen, and if Dr. Belsey Ford doesn't show up next Monday, Chuck Grasshole and the rest of the He-Man-Woman-Haters Club will just say, "Hey, we offered."
There is so much bad faith baked into this whole process it's sickening, just layers upon layers of naked cynicism. Should Ford have come forth at some earlier stage in Kavanaugh's ascent up the judicial ladder? Absolutely. Do we perhaps understand why women might be reluctant to come forward with these sorts of accusations? If we don't, we should by now.
For all the hacks doubting her account, one thing should still be clear: liars don't typically ask the FBI to investigate their claims. Maybe it turns out to be bullshit, but no one knows yet, it deserves to be checked out thoroughly, and ferchrissake, you'd get dumped from an interview with Target or Walmart for this sort of thing.
Which makes sense, since the asshole-in-chief wouldn't last a day at a real job, at a company owned by anyone else. He wouldn't last a month even at the managerial or executive level of one of those companies, much less as floor staff. Those folks actually have to show up and work hard and behave themselves.
Perhaps most frustrating is that it's come to this point in the first place. Kavanaugh should have been disqualified or at postponed already regardless: he has very likely perjured himself in this and past confirmation hearings; he seems unable to give clear answers regarding his opinions on important privacy rulings such as Roe and Griswold; he has yet to explain how someone with his means spends a quarter-million dollars on baseball tickets, and then pays down the credit card debt with a suspicious quickness.
Then there's the matter of only ten percent of his documentation being released for senatorial review. It is somewhat difficult to fulfill an "advise and consent" role for this lifetime appointment when you're only being given a fragment of the record to review, and over 100k pages are being deliberately withheld from review, on orders of a lawyer who represents Kavanaugh, Don McGahn, and George W. Bush's administration. Small world.
Obviously, this is no longer about Kavanaugh specifically, or even filling a SCOTUS seat generally. (And let's not forget Anthony Kennedy's role in all this. May he rot in hell.) This is about power, and the naked exercise thereof. This is about Republicans scrambling to fill the seat before the midterms, because they know or at least believe strongly that they're going to take a hit in about six weeks. This is about Not Backing Down.
Face it, they obviously have a list of knuckle-draggers if this one doesn't work out. There is no reason not to cut bait on Kavanaugh and move on to the next one, no reason to die on that particular hill. Except they clearly feel that this is their last best chance, that shit's coming down soon, and they now don't have enough time to try to ram through another mossback.
The Democrats do not have to pitch their tent on this single issue, as awful as it is. As noted, there are several salient issues regarding Kavanaugh, any of which should be at least enough to hit the "pause" button and get more information. Hell, there would still be time to confirm him before election day, if it came to that.
Even if this had been a last-minute stalling tactic, so what? The Goopers are trying to push this guy through without a proper review for purely political reasons. Their hypocrisy re Merrick Garland is wide open, and defying you to call them on it. The other valid questions about Kavanaugh have been summarily brushed aside, questions that they would have spent weeks grilling an Obummer-appointed candidate on. And we all know it. Why is only one side allowed to play cutthroat rules? This is the game you wanted, assholes. Well, you got it.
But their real strike date for this is the end of next week. Because some of these shitbirds -- lookin' at you, "Ted" Cruz -- need to get back home and campaign in October, to try and keep their seats.
The fact that they've managed to keep Clownstick from twit-bashing Ford, and that the senators invited her to testify, clearly indicate that they're worried at least a bit. There's just the slightest stutter-step in their rush to ram Kavanaugh into his seat (giggity). This is a weakness that must be exploited as much as possible.
There has been some talk of future Dem court-packing, and that doesn't sound too thrilling either. Given how ludicrously compromised this process has become, it might be better to approach it from another angle, and set limits, albeit long ones -- say twenty to twenty-five years. This removes the "lifetime appointment" gambit that has become a cynical football, and it also reduces the chance of a judge going senile on the bench, having their clerks do all the work. No one should be working past the age of eighty or eighty-five, including Supreme Court judges and members of Congress. And no one needs to hold the same powerful position for more than a generation.
The trick is where to start, to cast some semi-random future date, say 2025 or 2030, after which appointments would be for the aforementioned 20-25 year term. But it's something to consider, and might even alleviate what has become a hopelessly cynical and debauched process.
There is so much bad faith baked into this whole process it's sickening, just layers upon layers of naked cynicism. Should Ford have come forth at some earlier stage in Kavanaugh's ascent up the judicial ladder? Absolutely. Do we perhaps understand why women might be reluctant to come forward with these sorts of accusations? If we don't, we should by now.
For all the hacks doubting her account, one thing should still be clear: liars don't typically ask the FBI to investigate their claims. Maybe it turns out to be bullshit, but no one knows yet, it deserves to be checked out thoroughly, and ferchrissake, you'd get dumped from an interview with Target or Walmart for this sort of thing.
Which makes sense, since the asshole-in-chief wouldn't last a day at a real job, at a company owned by anyone else. He wouldn't last a month even at the managerial or executive level of one of those companies, much less as floor staff. Those folks actually have to show up and work hard and behave themselves.
Perhaps most frustrating is that it's come to this point in the first place. Kavanaugh should have been disqualified or at postponed already regardless: he has very likely perjured himself in this and past confirmation hearings; he seems unable to give clear answers regarding his opinions on important privacy rulings such as Roe and Griswold; he has yet to explain how someone with his means spends a quarter-million dollars on baseball tickets, and then pays down the credit card debt with a suspicious quickness.
Then there's the matter of only ten percent of his documentation being released for senatorial review. It is somewhat difficult to fulfill an "advise and consent" role for this lifetime appointment when you're only being given a fragment of the record to review, and over 100k pages are being deliberately withheld from review, on orders of a lawyer who represents Kavanaugh, Don McGahn, and George W. Bush's administration. Small world.
Obviously, this is no longer about Kavanaugh specifically, or even filling a SCOTUS seat generally. (And let's not forget Anthony Kennedy's role in all this. May he rot in hell.) This is about power, and the naked exercise thereof. This is about Republicans scrambling to fill the seat before the midterms, because they know or at least believe strongly that they're going to take a hit in about six weeks. This is about Not Backing Down.
Face it, they obviously have a list of knuckle-draggers if this one doesn't work out. There is no reason not to cut bait on Kavanaugh and move on to the next one, no reason to die on that particular hill. Except they clearly feel that this is their last best chance, that shit's coming down soon, and they now don't have enough time to try to ram through another mossback.
The Democrats do not have to pitch their tent on this single issue, as awful as it is. As noted, there are several salient issues regarding Kavanaugh, any of which should be at least enough to hit the "pause" button and get more information. Hell, there would still be time to confirm him before election day, if it came to that.
Even if this had been a last-minute stalling tactic, so what? The Goopers are trying to push this guy through without a proper review for purely political reasons. Their hypocrisy re Merrick Garland is wide open, and defying you to call them on it. The other valid questions about Kavanaugh have been summarily brushed aside, questions that they would have spent weeks grilling an Obummer-appointed candidate on. And we all know it. Why is only one side allowed to play cutthroat rules? This is the game you wanted, assholes. Well, you got it.
But their real strike date for this is the end of next week. Because some of these shitbirds -- lookin' at you, "Ted" Cruz -- need to get back home and campaign in October, to try and keep their seats.
The fact that they've managed to keep Clownstick from twit-bashing Ford, and that the senators invited her to testify, clearly indicate that they're worried at least a bit. There's just the slightest stutter-step in their rush to ram Kavanaugh into his seat (giggity). This is a weakness that must be exploited as much as possible.
There has been some talk of future Dem court-packing, and that doesn't sound too thrilling either. Given how ludicrously compromised this process has become, it might be better to approach it from another angle, and set limits, albeit long ones -- say twenty to twenty-five years. This removes the "lifetime appointment" gambit that has become a cynical football, and it also reduces the chance of a judge going senile on the bench, having their clerks do all the work. No one should be working past the age of eighty or eighty-five, including Supreme Court judges and members of Congress. And no one needs to hold the same powerful position for more than a generation.
The trick is where to start, to cast some semi-random future date, say 2025 or 2030, after which appointments would be for the aforementioned 20-25 year term. But it's something to consider, and might even alleviate what has become a hopelessly cynical and debauched process.
No comments:
Post a Comment