Skip to comments.The GOP Approach for Brett Kavanaugh (VANITY)
Posted on 09/25/2018 7:40:30 AM PDT by Alberta's Child
After watching the events of the last 7-10 days unfold I really feel a need to post something to get some things on the table here. Some of the posts I'm seeing here reflect a lot of venting without a lot of thought, and the references to various media reports and TV "talking heads" make it obvious to me that a lot of folks should step back and think about a few things related to this Kavanaugh nomination process.
I'll lay this out as a list of items that are either factual or are probably strongly likely to be true:
1. The Democrats have probably lined up quite a number of so-called "victims" with accusations against Kavanaugh. This was probably done months ago -- and the process may have started YEARS ago when Kavanaugh began his career on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.
2. This approach was modeled on the Anita Hill charade from 1991, and even now you can see an almost identical chain of events unfolding.
3. The list of credible accusations probably got very short very quickly. And after a lot of thorough vetting, the Democrats and their special-interest groups probably came up almost completely dry.
4. The Christine "Buzzy" Ford allegation was clearly a last-ditch attempt to delay -- or even derail -- the nomination ... just as the Anita Hill allegation was.
5. The allegation that Buzzy Ford has made dates back so far, and her story has so many holes in it, that it would have been laughed out of the HR office of any company in America.
6. Up until a couple of days ago I believed the Democrats were trying to delay the process and string it out for weeks, months, or indefinitely. Maybe they were at one time, but now I believe they have TWO main objectives: (A) Keep Buzzy Ford (or anyone else) from ever making a formal allegation in anything that constitutes a legitimate legal process (testimony, sworn affidavite, etc.), and (B) Get Kavanaugh confirmed as quickly as possible.
7. Item 6(B) sounds outlandish but it suddenly became important for the Democrats to do this. This is because Buzzy Ford is losing credibility by the hour as a formal witness but will be given tremendous credibility as an "aggrieved victim" in interviews to be carried on 60 Minutes, the Today show, Loser Holt's Dateline NBC, etc.
8. See Item #7. I suspect the interviews with Ford have already been taped. They probably have 4-6 hours of interviews that are ready to be cut up into 10-20 segments on network news shows like the ones I listed above. But these interviews can't be broadcast on TV until AFTER Kavanaugh is confirmed ... because they can't air an interview on TV and then have Ford's story shredded in a Senate committee hearing under cross-examination.
So if you are President Trump, Mitch McConnell and Charles Grassley, what is the best strategy for playing both the formal Senate process and the parallel political process play out?
I believe we are already seeing how this is being deployed. It is a two-pronged approach from two different angles: by attacking the Democrats on procedure and defending Kavanaugh politically.
Look at the Senate for an example of the procedural approach. Everyone seems to think Grassley is botching this thing because they're impatient about the process, but his role is to make sure the process plays out correctly and attack the Democrats and Ford's legal team over their violation of procedural protocols. It's IMPORTANT to remember this, folks: It's not the Senate's job to "defend" Kavanaugh. It's their job to carry out a legitimate confirmation process and publicly maintain a very high level of impartiality.
The procedural side of this actually provides a lot of political cover for the second angle of approach, which is the personal defense of Kavanaugh as a man and as a nominee. This is not the Senate's job, but the job of President Trump. Kavanaugh is simply a tool in his own defense, but he is TRUMP's nominee, not the nominee of the Republicans in the U.S. Senate.
I think the Republicans are actually playing this perfectly. Despite all the ventilating we're tempted to do about Grassley and his committee management process, he's actually doing exactly what he and McConnell need to do to facilitate Kavanaugh's confirmation while shielding themselves from damaging political blowback -- especially from moderate/independent women voters.
With this in mind, I'd say that confirming Kavanaugh quickly might be the WORST thing the Republicans can do right now.
Instead, the best course of action is to lay low, give as much credibility to the "victims" as necessary, and drag the process out until it becomes more and more clear that the whole thing is a charade and NONE of these "victims" are really willing to testify. In the meantime, the only thing the Democrats can do is call to delay the process because they already know their "victims" will be easily shredded if they DO testify. In the meantime, the 5-6 weeks of endless attacks in the media from weeping "victims" who were allegedly denied a chance to tell their story to the Senate Judiciary Committee never happens.
If Kavanaugh is an eminently qualified man and has an outstanding personal reputation that will shine through in any televised process ... and this assorted group of Mos Eisley-like mutants who have been assembled on the Democrat side to attack Kavanaugh are peddling accusations that have no credibility ... then the best course of action for the GOP is to have the accusations debunked in a very public way AS CLOSE TO ELECTION DAY AS POSSIBLE.
Y'all might think I'm nuts, but I'd love to get some input from all the good folks here on FreeRepublic ... including the ones -- no, ESPECIALLY the ones -- I've managed to piss off with all my venting on this subject over the last week or so.
I think this line of thinking has merit. Kudos!
It’s alright, I think everyone has been doing some venting here lately.
All I can say is that I absolutely f***ing despise the US senate, everyone in it and the entire US media.
I cannot believe that this poor man had to go on national TV and admit that he was a virgin.
What the actual f*** is going on in this country?
If you are right, it still doesnt hurt for us to complain, as it helps Kavanaugh on the political side and shows the GOP to be sticking to protocol despite complaints from the base.
They should just have her arrested and thrown in a tiny cell. There she can give statements and swear to them. If no one stops up to corroborate her story then she is fined and jailed for perjury and obstructing the vote of a SC justice.
McConnell’s speech on the floor yesterday concurs. He made sure to give Grassley props for doing things the proper way. What does anyone expect him or McConnel to do? Just try to ram it through like the dems would? That would end up with 47 YAY votes which means Kavanaugh would NOT get confirmed. Should we be mad at Grassley and McConnel because Collins and Murkowski are squishy girls or because Flake is a vindictive neverTrumper?
I called my Louisiana Senators Bill Cassidy: (202)224-5824, and John Kennedy: (202) 224-4623, and told then both to vote yes on Kavanaugh.
Here are the remaining idiots. that make up the 10:
Maine Senator Susan Collins: (202) 224-2523
Louisiana Senator Bill Cassidy: (202)224-5824
Louisiana Senator John Kennedy: (202) 224-4623
Tennessee Senator Bob Corker: (202) 224-3344
Arizona Senator Jeff Flake: (202) 224-4521
Wyoming Senator Michael Enzi: (202) 224-3424
Oklahoma Senator James Lankford: (202) 224-5754
Kansas Senator Jerry Moran: (202) 224-6521
Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski: (202) 224-6665
Nebraska Senator Ben Sasse: (202) 224-4224
Well reasoned but I am of the opinion that Justice Kavanaugh needs to be confirmed this week, so he can sit at the beginning of the new SCOTUS session.
Also, I believe that the threats to the Judge, his wife, and his two children are severe and dangerous. Keeping this process going will only increase the probability a whack-job lefty will do something violent.
For these two reasons, my view is that confirmation should be completed this week.
Clarence Thomas' nomination was actually in serious jeopardy when "Round 2" (the post-Hill allegation) of the hearings began. Thomas himself even came right out in his testimony and said he never would have accepted the nomination if it was made right at that moment in time. But he insisted on coming back and facing a second round of questions because he wanted to tell the Senate committee Democrats and their media partners to GO F#%& THEMSELVES.
By the time that second round of hearings ended, public support for Thomas was off the charts.
Just think about that, folks. Do you want Kavanaugh's public support to peak this week, or in early November?
Decent argument. What we really need is to rid the GOP of people who care what the Democrats/MSM thinks about them.
In retrospect, Grassley is the wise old owl I always thought he was. He and Mitch know the rules. They’re pounding this out on the ground, and President Trump is providing surgical strikes from the air. That being said, this can’t be dragged out forever, but I do think that having the final vote about 1 month from the election will be the perfect outcome.
Great approach. You’ll certainly get justice, but you’ll lose a whole bunch of close elections in November.
When you are on the side that needs to succeed, you must do everything the right way. (REPUBLICANS)
When you are on the side that has nothing to offer except to block the success of the other side, you don't give a sh!t about protocols and just act like a bunch of monkeys throwing feces around in a cage. (DEMOCRATS)
At what point does Kavanaugh and his family tire of being falsibly dragged through the mud? That’s a concern.
Also getting the confirmation out of the way will deflate the Dems bubble. You can only keep people impassioned for so long on one thing before they move on to the next thing.
If he’s confirmed promptly, I doubt Dems can ride the inflamed masses all the way to the election.
Also, recall that early voting is underway or will be soon in many states. A Kavanaugh confirmation can sway those early voters.
I think you better rethink that as being an objective of the Democrats. What do they gain by doing so? Nothing that I can come up with it. It doesn't help them in the midterms, or with controlling the Supreme Court.
Well, a lot’s going on behind the scenes that we can only conjecture about.
CASE IN POINT: The other day Democrats whined that porn lawyer Avenatti’s “proveable accusations” was not helping “their case.”
Today we learn Avenatti has made his Twitter account private.
Shucks, now we wont hear about Avenatti’s next proven witness,
a trans/homosexual pedophile’s adventures with Kavanaugh in schoolyards at recess.
Dam it all. I’m bummed.
Agreed, as long as the wobblies on the GOP side are game and won’t succumb to media pressure.
Our system of jurisprudence has always been based on the tenet of the presumption of innocence. The accuser must meet the burden of proving the accusation is true.
As a Justice on the Supreme Court, would you have had me rule that the burden was on Dredd Scott to show why he should be an American citizen, or should that burden have been on Sandford to demonstrate why Mr. Scott should not be a citizen?
Should the burden have been on Oliver Brown to show that the separate school his daughter was forced to attend was not equal to closer white-attended schools, or should that burden have been placed on the Topeka Board of Eductation to prove that "separate but equal" schooling was necessary?
Should I rule that the burden was on Ernesto Miranda to know his full legal rights when he was arrested, or should Arizona police have to inform Mr. Miranda of his right to an attorney when they arrested him?
Should Norma McCorvey have to justify to the state why she needed an abortion? Should Fred Korematsu have to prove his loyalty to the United States? Should women have to demonstrate their competency to sit on juries? Should the Cantwell family have to prove that their public expression of religion was not a breach of the peace and a public disturbance?
In our system, the accused has a right to know the specific charges and factual evidence against him or her. It is a mockery of our judicial system to suggest that a sitting federal appellate judge, or anyone else for that matter, has to prove his innocence against vague, unspecified, and suddenly recalled allegations, when the very essence of being a judge is to balance the rights of the accused with the rights of the accuser. The burden of proof is on those who make the claims, not on those who are their targets.
I think you give the Republicans too much credit. They were no more prepared for this than with Hill. Impartial is past, time to step up and act like Republicans, support Trump’s nominee.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.