Brett Kavanaugh

[Parkbandit]

ROFL

Yeah...I've literally worked on the Hill. You?

[Parkbandit]

There goes passive aggressive Richard again. Kind of making a statement but not really. No point to make but loads of sarcasm.

So.. you didn't understand his post?

You've been doing nothing but Chicken Littleing around here, saying the fucking sky is falling because your candidate didn't win the last election... saying our nation is in grave danger because Trump is just like Hitler.

And then you come up with the dumbest thing posted on the Internet today: "Even if he's innocent he needs to stand down for the good of the country."

If you really want a danger to democracy, it's "thinking" like that.

[Parkbandit]

The fact that Kavanaugh is going on Fox News is, itself, disqualifying IMO.

As a SCOTUS nominee, you're supposed to be above partisanship. First, no SCOTUS nominee has ever done any interviews prior to confirmation- as far as I've been able to tell. Secondly- you're doing it on a blatantly partisan network? Seriously? It would be like Sotomayer doing an MSNBC interview before her Committee confirmation vote.

This is just getting ridiculous.

PS The woman on the Kavanaugh nomination commercial just apparently pulled her name off of a statement supporting Kavanaugh over Ramirez.

You already lost the title match. You need to come up with something as dumb as "Even if he's innocent he needs to stand down for the good of the country." if you want another shot.

This is, on a scale of 0-retarded, like a really stupid.

Step up your game.

[Tgo01]

The problem for Kavanaugh, at this point, is that withdrawing is likely to be seen as a tacit admission of guilt. (which it wouldn't be) Meanwhile, Trump doesn't like to back down no matter what.

Congressional Republicans never seem to learn- hitching themselves to Trump's fate rarely ends well for them these days. They're now stuck in a lose/lose situation.

So you actually want to set the precedent that 30+ year old allegations with no witnesses is enough to say no to a SCOTUS nominee? Or will you suddenly have a change of heart when this happens to a Democrat?

[time4fun]

It would appear as though the suspicious timing of the Rosenstein meeting was, in fact, intentional:

For all the morning’s madness, there may have been an underlying logic. Over the weekend, as Brett Kavanaugh’s prospects appeared increasingly imperiled, Trump faced two tactical options, both of them fraught. One was to cut Kavanaugh loose. But he was also looking for ways to dramatically shift the news cycle away from his embattled Supreme Court nominee. According to a source briefed on Trump’s thinking, Trump decided that firing Rosenstein would knock Kavanaugh out of the news, potentially saving his nomination and Republicans’ chances for keeping the Senate. “The strategy was to try and do something really big,” the source said. The leak about Rosenstein’s resignation could have been the result, and it certainly had the desired effect of driving Kavanaugh out of the news for a few hours.

According to the source, Trump allies are imploring him to cut Kavanaugh loose for the sake of saving Republicans’ electoral chances in the midterms. The argument these advisers are making is that if Kavanaugh’s nomination fails, demoralized Republicans will stay home in November, and Democrats will take the House and the Senate and initiate impeachment proceedings. The end result: Trump will be removed from office. “The stakes are that high,” the source said. Another Republican adviser told me: “Trump is very worried now, and is finally waking up that it’s the end of his presidency if he loses the Senate.”

If Trump thinks this is a winning plan, he's even more inept than we thought.

[Wrathbringer]

It would appear as though the suspicious timing of the Rosenstein meeting was, in fact, intentional:







If Trump thinks this is a winning plan, he's even more inept than we thought.

You're inept.

[Tgo01]

According to a source briefed on Trump’s thinking

Let me get this straight. We can't listen to an anonymous source from NYT that discussed the current Deputy Attorney General working to spy on the president and try to get him impeached because, after all, they are anonymous sources who weren't even in the room, but we are going to listen to an anonymous source "briefed on Trump's thinking"?

Talk about a danger to our democracy.

[Wrathbringer]

ROFL

Yeah...I've literally worked on the Hill. You?

Yeah, right. You're retarded.

[Wrathbringer]

So much news is interesting today. It's a curse.

He needs to quit. Even if he's innocent he needs to stand down for the good of the country. SCOTUS doesn't need Brett so bad that we can afford this. Damage is being done which will outlast his nomination.

Gorsuch got through the process clean as a whistle. There must be another conservative legal mind that can check off the boxes the GOP wants while also being free of scandal.

damn you're stupid.

[RichardCranium]

It would appear as though the suspicious timing of the Rosenstein meeting was, in fact, intentional:







If Trump thinks this is a winning plan, he's even more inept than we thought.

Anonymous third hand information. Plausible, but I won't hold my breath.