The Commentariat -- October 1, 2018
Late Morning/Afternoon Update:
** Peter Baker & Michael Schmidt of the New York Times: "The White House has authorized the F.B.I. to expand its abbreviated investigation into sexual misconduct allegations against Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh by interviewing anyone it deems necessary as long the review is finished by the end of the week, two people briefed on the matter said on Monday. The new directive came in the past 24 hours after a backlash from Democrats, who criticized the White House for limiting the scope of the bureau's investigation.... The F.B.I. has already completed interviews with the four witnesses its agents were originally asked to talk to, the people said.... 'The F.B.I. should interview anybody that they want within reason, but you have to say within reason,' Mr. Trump told reporters in the Rose Garden after an event celebrating a new trade deal with Canada and Mexico. 'But they should also be guided, and I'm being guided, by what the senators are looking for.'" ...
To be a good judge and a good umpire, it's important to have the proper demeanor. Really important, I think. To walk in the others' shoes, whether it be the other litigants, the litigants in the case, the other judges. To understand them. To keep our emotions in check. To be calm amidst the storm. On the bench, to put it in the vernacular, don't be a jerk.... In your opinions, to demonstrate civility -- I think that's important as well. To show, to help display, that you are trying to make the decision impartially and dispassionately based on the law and not based on your emotions.... There's a danger of arrogance, as for umpires and referees, but also for judges. And I would say that danger grows the more time you're on the bench. As one of my colleagues puts it, you become more like yourself -- and that can be a problem. -- Federal Judge, speech in 2015 ...
Wow, too bad Brett Kavanaugh never considered anything like that. Somebody should have shared that advice with him before he went in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee &, even in prepared remarks, had a big, wacky, whiney, rude, partisan, sobbing, shouting temper tantrum. -- Mrs. Bea McCrabbie
The Secretary is Out. Tanya Snyder, et al., of Politico: "Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao's day-to-day calendars are filled with large swaths of time blocked out as 'private,' according to Politico's analysis of newly released records -- a pattern that several former DOT officials called unusual. In total, Chao clocked more than 290 hours of appointments labeled private -- the equivalent of about seven weeks' vacation -- during her first 14 months in ... Donald Trump's Cabinet, based on a review of documents provided under the Freedom of Information Act. That total does not include any private hours that occurred on nights, weekends, days marked as vacation or federal holidays. Mrs. McC: Chao has job security as long as her husband Mitch does.
Alan Rappeport of the New York Times: "President Trump hailed a revised North American Free Trade Agreement as a victory for the United States, Canada and Mexico on Monday, saying his get-tough approach to trade, including his use of tariffs, was bringing results. 'This landmark agreement will send cash and jobs pouring into the United States and into North America,' Mr. Trump said in remarks at the White House. 'Good for Canada, good for Mexico.' Mr. Trump portrayed the new agreement as the fulfillment of a campaign promise to terminate Nafta, saying he had made good on his plan to rip up 'the worst trade deal ever made' and help American businesses and workers."
Heather Long of the Washington Post has a rundown of what's in the "new NAFTA." BTW, Trump has named the deal "USMCA." Rolls right off the tongue, doesn't it?
Megan Keller of the Hill: "Sen. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.) said Sunday that there's 'not a chance' he would have called for an FBI investigation into the allegations of sexual misconduct against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh if he were running for reelection. 'Not a chance,' Flake said when asked on CBS's '60 Minutes' if he would have asked for the investigation if he were up for reelection in the November midterms. 'There's no value to reaching across the aisle,' Flake said. 'There's no currency for that anymore. There's no incentive.'" ...
... Mrs. McCrabbie: This is disingenuous. The fake Flake "investigation," unless the FBI ignores the White House's constrictions, does nothing but provide a cover for Senators -- like Flake -- who want to vote for Kavanaugh but find it politically expedient to pretend they've fulfilled their Constitutional responsibility to vet the candidate. What Flake is saying, too, is that a Republican running for re-election would be committing political suicide to fulfill that duty. This is an admission that Republican legislators have no intention of doing their jobs, at least during any period in which they may run for office again. ...
... Harry Litman, in a New York Times op-ed: "... by Sunday the Democrats were dismissing the investigation as a farce -- and rightly so. Thanks to the White House and Senate Republicans, not only is the F.B.I limited to a weeklong investigation -- a constraint the former F.B.I. director James Comey called 'idiotic' in these pages -- but, far more important, the bureau is seriously limited in terms of who it is allowed to interview.... The Times has reported that Senate Republicans identified a list of just four witnesses.... Such constraints are very unusual, if not unprecedented for such an investigation.... The nucleus of agents' work in a background investigation is to pursue leads and widen the circle of witnesses.... The fact that witnesses do not know the universe of others that the bureau will be talking to serves as a kind of truth serum: They are deterred from lying by the prospect that they could be contradicted by another unknown witness."
*****
Alan Rappeport of the New York Times: "The United States and Canada have reached a last minute deal to salvage the North American Free Trade Agreement, according to people familiar with the negotiations, overcoming deep divisions to keep the 25-year-old trilateral pact intact. The deal came after a weekend of frantic talks to try and preserve a trade agreement that has stitched together the economies of Mexico, Canada and the United States but that was in danger of collapsing amid deep divisions between President Trump and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. The 11th-hour agreement was punctuated by a frenetic Sunday, with Canada's leaders teleconferencing throughout the day with top American officials in Washington. Mr. Trudeau convened a 10 p.m. cabinet meeting in Ottawa to brief officials on the deal, as Jared Kushner, one of Mr. Trump's closest advisers, and Robert E. Lighthizer, the president's top trade negotiator, hashed out the final details. Mexico's under secretary of foreign trade, Juan Carlos Baker, was expected to present the texts of the agreement to the Mexican senate just before midnight. Text of the agreement was expected to be presented to Congress as early as Sunday evening. The deal represents a win for President Trump...."
"I'm starting to think that men might be too emotional for the Supreme Court." ...
It Depends on What the Meaning of "Limits" Is. Mike DeBonis of the Washington Post: "The White House has not placed any limits on the FBI investigation into claims of sexual assault leveled against ... Brett M. Kavanaugh but is also opposed an open-ended 'fishing expedition' that could take a broader look at Kavanaugh's credibility, two Trump administration officials said Sunday.... [Sarah] Sanders said on 'Fox News Sunday' that the White House is 'not micromanaging this process' but also said an open-ended probe into [Julie] Swetnick's claims and whether Kavanaugh may have misled lawmakers in his Senate Judiciary Committee testimony would not be acceptable.... The order to the FBI was signed by Trump but has not been made public, while the White House has sought to lay responsibility for the details on the Senate." Emphasis added. (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ...
... Mrs. McCrabbie: These remarks get this week's Doublespeak Award. Both of these things cannot be true: (1) there are no limits; (2) certain lines of inquiry "would not be acceptable." The whole purpose of Flake's demand for an "investigation" was to give him & other senators cover for putting a lying, unbalanced, (alleged) violent sex offender on the Supreme Court. ...
... Ken Dilanian, et al., of NBC News: "The FBI has received no new instructions from the White House about how to proceed with its weeklong investigation of sexual misconduct allegations against ... Brett Kavanaugh, a senior U.S. official and another source familiar with the matter tell NBC News. According to the sources, the president's Saturday night tweet saying he wants the FBI to interview whoever agents deem appropriate has not changed the limits imposed by the White House counsel's office on the FBI investigation -- including a specific witness list that does not include Julie Swetnick, who has accused Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct in high school. Also not on the list, the sources say, are former classmates who have contradicted Kavanaugh's account of his college alcohol consumption, instead describing him as a frequent, heavy drinker. The FBI is also not authorized to interview high school classmates who could shed light on what some people have called untruths in Kavanaugh's Senate Judiciary Committee testimony about alleged sexual references in his high school yearbook." ...
... Here's How That's Working Out. Jane Mayer & Ronan Farrow of the New Yorker: "As the F.B.I. began its investigation this weekend into allegations of sexual misconduct by Brett Kavanaugh..., several people who hope to contribute information about him to the F.B.I. said that they were unable to make contact with agents.... Roberta Kaplan, an attorney representing one potential witness, Elizabeth Rasor, a former girlfriend of Kavanaugh's high-school friend Mark Judge, said her client 'has repeatedly made clear to the Senate Judiciary Committee and to the F.B.I. that she would like the opportunity to speak to them.' But, Kaplan said, 'We've received no substantive response.'... Debra Katz, the lead attorney for [Christine Blasey] Ford, said that her client, too, had been willing to coöperate with the F.B.I.'s investigation, but as of Sunday the F.B.I. had not contacted her, despite Ford's central role in the controversy.... A Yale classmate attempting to corroborate Deborah Ramirez's account ... said that he, too, has struggled unsuccessfully to reach the F.B.I.... Leah Litman, an assistant professor of law at the University of California, Irvine, said the severe restrictions on the scope of the investigation made it 'a joke.' She asked, 'What kind of an investigation into an assault that happened under the influence of alcohol doesn't include investigating the accused's use of alcohol?'" ...
... Michael Shear & Robin Pogrebin of the New York Times: "A Yale classmate of Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh's accused him on Sunday of a 'blatant mischaracterization' of his drinking while in college, saying that he often saw Judge Kavanaugh 'staggering from alcohol consumption.' The classmate, Chad Ludington, who said he frequently socialized with Judge Kavanaugh as a student, said in a statement that the judge had been untruthful in testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee when he had denied any possibility that he had ever blacked out from drinking. Mr. Ludington said that Judge Kavanaugh had played down 'the degree and frequency' of his drinking, and that the judge had often become 'belligerent and aggressive' while intoxicated. Other former classmates have made similar claims.... Mr. Ludington said ... that he planned to 'take my information to the F.B.I.'" ...
... The story has been updated. New Lede: "The F.B.I. moved on Sunday to quickly complete an abbreviated investigation into allegations of sexual misconduct against Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, even as Democrats demanded more information about the inquiry's scope, warning that its apparent constraints could make it a 'farce.'" Mrs. McC: I guess so: "Officials said the F.B.I.'s 'limited' supplemental background check of Judge Kavanaugh could be finished by Monday morning.... The F.B.I. was directed by the White House and Senate Republicans to interview just four people: Mark Judge..., P.J. Smyth..., Leland Keyser ...; and Deborah Ramirez...." ...
... Here is Chad Ludington's full statement, via the New York Times. Mrs. McC: Needless to say, repeating "I like beer" 10 times doesn't cover it. Kavanaugh should not be allowed to judge the neighborhood kids' dogs-in-costumes show. AND you know how he whined he'd never be able to coach girls' basketball again thanks to the Clinton cabal? Well, I hope not. I wouldn't allow my young daughter anywhere near the guy. ...
... Mihir Zavari of the New York Times: "Kellyanne Conway, an adviser to President Trump, said on Sunday that she was a victim of sexual assault and that the Supreme Court confirmation proceedings of Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh should not become a broader 'meeting' of the #MeToo movement, suggesting instead that victims hold their assailants directly accountable. Ms. Conway made the personal revelation during an interview with Jake Tapper on the CNN program 'State of the Union' during which she largely derided the 'partisan politics' of Judge Kavanaugh's hearing on Thursday." ...
... Kris Schneider of ABC News: "The leading Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee said that if Brett Kavanaugh is confirmed as a Supreme Court justice, 'the House will have to investigate' allegations of sexual assault and perjury if the Senate doesn't 'properly' do so through this week's limited FBI probe. Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., told ABC News Chief Anchor George Stephanopoulos on 'This Week' Sunday, 'We can't have a justice on the Supreme Court ... who has been credibly accused of sexual assaults, who has been credibly accused of various other things ... including perjury.'... 'I was astonished at his -- at his rant,' Nadler said. 'He's a judge; he's a sitting circuit court judge. He's supposed to be nonpartisan.'" ...
... Mrs. McCrabbie: Don't be silly, Jerry. The Senate is knocking itself out on some aspects of the Kavanaugh "investigation":
... Jacqueline Klimas of Politico: "Sen. Dianne Feinstein's office will be investigated to determine whether it leaked a confidential letter from one of Brett Kavanaugh's accusers, Sen. Tom Cotton said Sunday. Cotton, an Arkansas Republican, also said lawyers recommended to Christine Blasey Ford by Democrats will face a Washington, D.C., bar investigation for telling her that Senate Judiciary Committee staffers would not travel to California to interview her about her sexual-assault allegation." ...
... AND Naomi Lim of the Washington Examiner: "Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., vowed Sunday to launch a thorough inquiry into Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee to find out whether there was any wrongdoing in how they managed the sexual misconduct allegation Christine Blasey Ford leveled at ... Brett Kavanaugh. 'We're going to do a wholesale, full scale investigation of what I think was a despicable process to deter it from happening again,' Graham said during an interview on ABC News' 'This Week.'... Ryan Grim, the journalist from the Intercept who first reported on the letter, said on Twitter last week that he did not receive it from [Sen. Dianne] Feinstein's staff." ...
... James Comey in a New York Times op-ed: "Although the process is deeply flawed, and apparently designed to thwart the fact-gathering process, the F.B.I. is up for this. It's not as hard as Republicans hope it will be.... Unless limited in some way by the Trump administration, they can speak to scores of people in a few days, if necessary.... Agents have much better nonsense detectors than partisans, because they aren't starting with a conclusion.... They know that obvious lies by the nominee about the meaning of words in a yearbook are a flashing signal to dig deeper." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ...
... Colin Kalmbacher of Law & Crime: "Alumni from Georgetown Prep are calling on their fellow graduates of the elite preparatory school to come forward with information about Brett Kavanaugh if they have it. The self-described 'call to action' comes in light of the FBI's re-opened background investigation into the embattled Supreme Court nominee -- which is reportedly only focused on two sexual assault allegations leveled against him by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and former Yale acquaintance Deborah Ramirez.... The letter also explicitly calls for anyone with knowledge of Kavanaugh's alleged sexual assaults to provide that information to the FBI on their own volition -- perhaps particularly relevant in light of NBC News' bombshell report that ... Donald Trump personally intervened to severely limit the scope of the FBI's inquiry into Kavanaugh." ...
... Jonathan Swan of Axios: "For the White House, it's Brett Kavanaugh or bust. They have no Plan B and there's not even discussion of one, according to five sources with direct knowledge of the sensitive internal White House talks.... 'He's too big to fail now,' said a senior source involved in the confirmation process. 'Our base, our voters, our side, people are so mad,' the source continued. 'There's nowhere to go. We're gonna make them f---ing vote. [Joe] Manchin in West Virginia, in those red states. Joe Donnelly? He said he's a no? Fine, we'll see how that goes. There will be a vote on him [Kavanaugh]. ... It will be a slugfest of a week.'" ...
... Jennifer Rubin of the Washington Post: "As he yelled at Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee, it was not hard to imagine that [Kavanaugh] would be less than evenhanded if they were a party in litigation. 'With his unprecedented attacks on Democrats and liberals, Kavanaugh must now likely broadly recuse himself from matters including those groups,' says ethics guru Norman Eisen. 'It may wipe out a substantial portion of his docket should he be confirmed. We have a rule of thumb in government ethics: When recusals are so broad that the nominee can't do his job, then maybe he shouldn't be confirmed to the position....'... [Laurence Tribe says,] '... Judge Kavanaugh could not credibly cast a vote or participate in any way as a Supreme Court Justice in any of the very substantial number of cases that court decides each year involving litigants, whether individuals or organizations, that Kavanaugh evidently blames for orchestrating what he sees as an outrageous attack on his integrity, his decency, and his very life as well as the life of his family.'... This is a man soaked in the Clinton wars, who delivered dozens of speeches thrilling conservative activists at the Federalist Society and now lets on that he harbors rabidly hostile views of the Democrats. It's inconceivable someone so biased, someone who vowed revenge ('What goes around, comes around,' he shouted), could be elevated to the Supreme Court. And yet, he might." ...
... Once upon a Time. Jim Fallows of the Atlantic: "By the rules of previous, pre-Trump-era politics, neither [Trump nor Kavanaugh] could possibly have made this final career step -- Trump to the presidency, Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. Each has done things and revealed traits that would have been automatically disqualifying in the world as it existed before 2016. Donald Trump nominated Kavanaugh; Trump's example is also shaping him. By the pre-Trump rules of presidential campaigning, Trump's prospects would have come to an end numerous times along the trail[.]... In Kavanaugh's case, his afternoon before the Senate Judiciary Committee revealed three traits that previous nominees who sat in that chair have carefully avoided, because they would have been considered so damaging. They were: temperamental instability; open partisan affiliations; and a casual willingness to tell obvious, easily disprovable lies. These are apart from the underlying truth of the multiple sexual allegations about Kavanaugh, which may not ever be provable." ...
... Nathan Robinson of Current Affairs does a marvelous job of cataloging the lies Brett Kavanaugh told Thursday. " I can prove quite easily that Kavanaugh's teary-eyed 'good, innocent man indignant at being wrongfully accused' schtick was a facade. What may have looked like a strong defense was in fact a very, very weak and implausible one." This is a long piece, but it's easy to read. Many thanks to Keith H. for the link. (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ...
... Mrs. McCrabbie: As safari pointed out in yesterday's Comments thread, there's another lie in this clip. Kavanaugh claimed under oath he did not have connections to get into Yale. In fact, he was a legacy admission. It was an unforced lie and completely irrelevant. But Kavanaugh, like many elites, particularly conservative political ones, have to believe not only that they deserve a place at the top but that they earned it. The last four Republican presidential nominees -- Trump, Romney, McCain, Bush -- were all legacies. Trump was not an elite, of course, but he got his nest egg (and probably his place at U. Penn) thanks to the old man's money.
The Children's Warehouse. Caitlin Dickerson of the New York Times: "In shelters from Kansas to New York, hundreds of migrant children have been roused in the middle of the night in recent weeks and loaded onto buses with backpacks and snacks for a cross-country journey to their new home: a barren tent city on a sprawling patch of desert in West Texas. Until now, most undocumented children being held by federal immigration authorities had been housed in private foster homes or shelters, sleeping two or three to a room. They received formal schooling and regular visits with legal representatives assigned to their immigration cases. But in the rows of sand-colored tents in Tornillo, Tex., children in groups of 20, separated by gender, sleep lined up in bunks. There is no school: The children are given workbooks that they have no obligation to complete. Access to legal services is limited.... The tent city in Tornillo ... is unregulated, except for guidelines created by the Department of Health and Human Services." (Also linked yesterday afternoon.) ...
... Lolita Baldor of the AP: "Stricter Trump administration immigration policies have stymied Pentagon plans to restart a program that allowed thousands of people with critical medical or Asian and African language skills to join the military and become American citizens, according to several U.S. officials. The decade-old program has been on hold since 2016 amid concerns that immigrant recruits were not being screened well enough, and security threats were slipping through the system. Defense officials shored up the vetting process, and planned to relaunch the program earlier this month. But there was an unexpected barrier when Homeland Security officials said they would not be able to protect new immigrant recruits from being deported when their temporary visas expired after they signed a contract to join the military, the U.S. officials said."
Coral Davenport of the New York Times: "The Trump administration has completed a detailed legal proposal to dramatically weaken a major environmental regulation covering mercury, a toxic chemical emitted from coal-burning power plants, according to a person who has seen the document but is not authorized to speak publicly about it. The proposal would not eliminate the mercury regulation entirely, but it is designed to put in place the legal justification for the Trump administration to weaken it and several other pollution rules, while setting the stage for a possible full repeal of the rule. Andrew Wheeler, a former coal lobbyist who is now the acting administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, is expected in the coming days to send the proposal to the White House for approval."
Cristiano Lima & Jeremy White of Politico: "The Justice Department is suing California to block a recently signed law restoring net neutrality rules that the Federal Communications Commission discarded last year, setting up a high-stakes legal bout between the Trump administration and the nation's most populous state. The announcement comes immediately on the heels of Democratic California Gov. Jerry Brown's decision to sign the bill into law. Brow had until midnight on Sunday to approve the measure, which was passed by the state's legislature in August." More on California legislation below. Mrs. McC: California is becoming a country unto its own, & it's far better than the one the rest of us inhabit.
Ryan Lizza has a long piece in Esquire about Devin Nunes's family farm, which secretly moved from California to Iowa in 2006. "... the family has apparently tried to conceal the move from the public -- for more than a decade. As far as I could tell, as of late August, neither Nunes nor the local California press that covers him had ever publicly mentioned that his family dairy is no longer in Tulare[, California].... Other dairy farmers in the area helped me understand why the Nunes family might be so secretive about the farm: Midwestern dairies tend to run on undocumented labor.... In the heart of Steve King's district, a place that is more pro-Trump than almost any other patch of America, the economy is powered by workers that King and Trump have threatened to arrest and deport.... The absurdity of this situation -- funding and voting for politicians whose core promise is to implement immigration policies that would destroy their livelihoods -- has led some of the Republican-supporting dairymen to rethink their political priorities."
Annals of "Journalism," Ha Ha Ha. Oliver Darcy of CNN: "The Washington Times on Monday issued a lengthy retraction and apology for an editorial it published in March about Aaron Rich, the brother of the slain Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich whose unsolved murder became the basis for conspiracy theories on the far-right. 'The Column included statements about Aaron Rich, the brother of former Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich, that we now believe to be false,' read part of the retraction. The retraction added, 'The Washington Times apologizes to Mr. Rich and his family. All online copies of the Column have been deleted and all online content referencing the Column has been deleted to the extent within The Washington Times' control.' The retraction came as part of a settlement Aaron Rich reached with The Washington Times after he filed a lawsuit against the conservative newspaper -- and others -- in March, his attorney Michael Gottlieb told CNN. Gottlieb declined to discuss other terms of the settlement, but said that Aaron Rich had accepted the newspaper's apology.... The Washington Times' initial article, which the lawsuit said was published both online and in print, stated that it was 'well known in intelligence circles that Seth Rich and his brother, Aaron Rich, downloaded the DNC emails and was paid by Wikileaks for that information.' The article cited no evidence to support the assertion." ...
... Mrs. McCrabbie: Apparently the paper, besides being "conservative," is aimed at the semi-literate. "[They] was paid"???
Election 2018
Florida State-wide Races. Marc Caputo of Politico: "Puerto Rico Gov. Ricardo Rosselló is expected to endorse Sen. Bill Nelson (D.Fla.) and gubernatorial candidate Andrew Gillum on Monday in the heart of Florida's Boricua community, giving both Democrats' campaigns a potential lift with this crucial demographic. Rosselló at 10:45 a.m. will make a 'special announcement' with Nelson by his side, according to Nelson's campaign. And at 1:15 p.m., Gillum's campaign says, he'll stand beside Gillum for another press conference in Kissimmee.... [Gov. Rick] Scott[, who is challenging Nelson,] had hoped to score Rosselló's endorsement. Florida's governor has flown to Puerto Rico eight times since the hurricane and stood side by side with Rosselló." A moderate, Rosselló is the leader of Puerto Rico's New Progressive Party (and not a Democrat, as Caputo writes).
Texas Senate Race. Madlin Mekelburg of the El Paso Times: "Roughly 55,000 people stood crammed together at Auditorium Shores in Austin on Saturday for the Turn Out For Texas rally, watching as U.S. Rep. Beto O'Rourke sang 'On the Road Again' with country music legend Willie Nelson. Attendees at the free concert, which included performances from Leon Bridges and local Austin artists like Tameca Jones, waved 'Beto for Senate' signs and chanted the Democrat's name as he addressed the crowd. 'Let tonight be a message to the future,' O'Rourke, D-El Paso, said to cheers."
Beyond the Beltway
AP: "California has become the first state to require publicly traded companies to include women on their boards of directors, one of a series of laws boosting or protecting women that Gov. Jerry Brown signed Sunday. The measure requires at least one female director on the board of each California-based public corporation by the end of next year. Companies would need up to three female directors by the end of 2021, depending on the number of board seats."
Amy Wang of the Washington Post: "Track Palin, the oldest son of former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, has been arrested on domestic violence charges for the third time in about three years. Alaska State Troopers responded to a home in Wasilla around 11:30 p.m. Friday after a report of a 'disturbance,' according to the Alaska Department of Public Safety. Once there, investigators said they found that Track Palin had assaulted an unnamed 'female acquaintance.' When the woman tried to call police, Palin allegedly took her phone away to keep her from doing so. Palin physically resisted troopers while being placed under arrest, according to the Alaska DPS. The 29-year-old was charged with fourth-degree assault, interfering with the report of a domestic violence crime, resisting arrest by force and disorderly conduct, according to court records." ...
... Mrs. McCrabbie: Well, Track doesn't have a law degree so he might not be the best candidate for a job on the federal bench, but surely Trump can find some high government position for this now well-qualified candidate.
Curt Prendergast of the Arizona Daily Star (Sept. 28): "An off-duty Border Patrol agent was holding a gender-reveal celebration for his wife's pregnancy last year when he accidentally started a 47,000-acre wildfire, his attorney said. The incident will cost Dennis Dickey $220,000 in restitution after he pleaded guilty Friday in federal court to a misdemeanor charge of causing a fire without a permit. Nearly 800 firefighters from various agencies battled the Sawmill Fire for about a week in April 2017, at a cost of about $8.2 million. The wildfire began when Dickey shot a target that contained Tannerite, an explosive substance designed to detonate when shot by a high-velocity firearm, U.S. Forest Service Special Agent Brent Robinson wrote in an affidavit filed Sept. 20 in U.S. District Court. The explosion was caught on film by a witness. Tannerite is a legal compound that has been linked to wildfires in several other Western states." Mrs. McC: Border Patrol agents are not the brightest bulbs on the tree. Unfortunately, we authorize them to make life-and-death decisions.
Way Beyond
Christina Anderson of the New York Times: "A Swedish court on Monday found Jean-Claude Arnault, the man at the center of a scandal that led to the cancellation of this year's Nobel Prize in Literature, guilty of raping a woman in 2011. The court sentenced Mr. Arnault to two years in prison, the minimum term for rape.... Mr. Arnault, a French photographer, was long seen in Sweden as someone who could make or break a career in the arts. He and his wife, a member of the Swedish Academy, owned the Forum, a popular cultural venue that received support from the academy.... In November last year, the Swedish daily Dagens Nyheter reported that 18 women had accused Mr. Arnault of sexual assault or harassment. Many said they had been mistreated at the Forum or at academy-owned properties in Stockholm and Paris. The accusations covered a period of 20 years...."
News Lede
New York Times: The 2018 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine was awarded on Monday to James P. Allison of the United States and Tasuku Honjo of Japan for their work on unleashing the immune system's ability to attack cancer, a breakthrough in developing new cancer treatments."
Share Article
Reader Comments (23)
Isn't it possible that the FBI 'investigation' of Kavanaugh is actually comprehensive (for DJT's/McGahn's ears only,) but that 'limited' information will be provided to the SJC and the public?
@Keith Howard: Not if it took them only two days to complete it, which is what the Times is reporting.
I've been waffling a little, but I'm now convinced that Kavanaugh will be pushed through no matter what. We'd need photographic proof of Brett's virgin penis smashed on a poor girl's face to get McConnell to back down. That (likely) won't happen, since cameras weren't omnipresent during his days of debauchery.
And assuming Belligerent Brett would ever recuse himself because of his blatant partisanship is a really bad fucking joke. Oh course he won't. Ever. Recusing is for liberals. Recusal is one of those old terms used back in those days when norms were respected and a recusal meant something.
I truly hope McConnell goes down in history as THE architect of the dismantling of American democracy. Surely historians will emphasize his "hardball tactics" and "bending norms", but his breaking norms, extreme partisanship, open political sabotage of Obama's entire presidency, aiding and abetting Russian interference, aiding and abetting Trump's entire corrupt administration...
The whole GOP, with McConnell at the helm and Movement Conservatives covering his back, has all but abandoned democratic norms and worked tirelessly to singe their claws into the systems of power as a minority party throwing sand into the majority's priorities.
Kavanaugh will sneer and snarl at us all from atop the highest legislative perch in the land, pissing down more of the trickle-down prosperity bible bullshit as he and Neil flatulate themselves in front of their raving crowds of Believers.
McConnell will see to it.
Memo to Brett Kavanaugh:
A strong nation, like a strong person, can afford to be gentle, firm, thoughtful, and restrained. It can afford to extend a helping hand to others. It is a weak nation, like a weak person, that must behave with bluster and boasting and rashness and other signs of insecurity. -Jimmy Carter, 39th US President, Nobel laureate (b. 1 Oct 1924
I'm afraid I agree with Safari. More and more people are coming out of the woodwork to call KavaNO a drunk, a liar and a bully. We all saw that. I think he might still be those things. This is a hell of a thing. Gd McConnell IS the worst.
So, what, the FBI "investigation" is complete? Over? Done? E finito? In record time, it seems.
But, I suppose if you're only allowed to talk to four people and the questions are limited to
A. What's your favorite ice cream flavor, and
B. True or false, Paul McCartney was in another band before Wings,
then it shouldn't take long.
Grassley will be announcing the results shortly. Here they are:
A. Chocolate -- 2, Vanilla -- 1, Ben and Jerry's Cherry Garcia, -- 1.
B. True -- 3, Who's Paul McCartney? -- 1.
All of which means (ding-ding-ding-ding) Bart O'Kavanaugh is going to the Supreme Court!! Yay! Let the Revenge of Bart begin!
So here's how Trump ratfucked this investigation (he's getting better at the ratfucking, maybe Putin chimed in on this one too). First, disallow looking into anything connected to the fitness of the nominee for the Supreme Court if it can in any way be proven, such as his serial lies under oath.
Make sure the "investigation" (giggle-giggle) is limited to stuff that would be impossible to prove by talking to two people over a 24 hour period.
Calling this a farce is unfair to true farce. I'm not even sure what to call it. How 'bout.....hmmmm....I dunno.....Obstruction of Justice?
Yeah. That's about right. Obstruction of Justice. Something Trump is very, very good at.
A sad day to be an American.
Looks like Ms. Mitchell was worth the cost of bringing her East!
Republicans do it again.
Evidence doesn't support claims against Kavanaugh, hired questioner tells Senate Republicans
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/evidence-doesn-t-support-claims-against-kavanaugh-judiciary-committee-prosecutor-n915236
And even if the FBI doesn't find anything (and they won't), there's still the problem of temperament.
Bart has shown himself to be a frothing at the mouth loony. He lies, he screams, he yells, he makes outrageous assertions with zero connection to reality, he breaks down sobbing then takes off screaming again.
As I asked the other day. Seeing all of this, is your first thought "Hey why don't we put THAT guy on the Supreme Court?"
It's not at all unlike sitting in a waiting area outside an operating room. You mother is on the table waiting to have a tumor removed. Suddenly, at the end of the hall, the doors bang open, and a man comes storming down the corridor, yelling and screaming and bellowing about death rays from space controlled by his ex-wife. You ask a nurse who this crazy person is. "Oh, that's your mother's doctor"
"Fuck that. C'mon ma, we're goin' home."
I don't care if the guy graduated from Harvard Medical School and has three degrees from Johns Hopkins. I wouldn't let a guy that unhinged take my mother's temperature.
And as wild as this scenario seems, it's not at all inappropriate when considering Bart going to the court. A guy with that terrible temperament has no business judging a pie eating contest. And worse, the crazy doctor would only be killing or maiming one patient at a time. Bart will damage millions in one fell swoop. And I do mean fell.
Even if he tried to slow down his meanness and obvious sense of victimhood and incipient vindictiveness, he would still be unsafe at any speed.
Chad Ludington, a professor at N.C. State U., a friend of Brett's at Yale speaks out about the belligerent, angry displays of Brett while extremely drunk and ends with this:
"“It is truth that is at stake, and I believe that the ability to speak the truth, even when it does not reflect well upon oneself, is a paramount quality we seek in our nation’s most powerful judges.”
I think by now we are convinced that Brett drank to excess, and lied about the effect it had on him. I said before that watching his testimony I felt he was fighting off his own demons––and I am wondering what they are. Having had plenty of experience with people drinking to excess and seeing some pretty amazing personality changes because of it , I am convinced that this smart, athletic, calendar keeping son of the same, had something gnawing at him, something that could be released after all that beer consumption.
And I share somewhat safari's "I'm convinced now that Kavanaugh will be pushed through no matter what." I'm only convinced that the royal slaves and knaves of the Trumplebupple clan will do their dam nest to make it happen. I hope for miracles–-I hope for sanity–-I hope for TRUTH.
And it should also be noted that Trump has officually brought his taint down onto the backs of the FBI now as well. We, the people, are supposed to believe that the greatest investigatory agency in the world took a full weekend to sham "investigate" Blowhard Bret and now they'll conveniently declare him peachy clean?
I'm supposed to believe the FBI is apolitical when they give obvious political cover for a wholly corrupt Republican administration which has incessantly tore at the fabric of their very own cherished institution.
Republicans will stop at nothing for political power over all of us, institutions be dammed. They don't give two fucks.
And the FBI cracks under the weight of Trump's bullahit.
Thanks Comey. Now shut the fuck up will ya?
@MAG: Yeah, I saw a couple of stories on Mitchell's "conclusions." They're bogus. Let's say you're a real prosecutor, the way Mitchell is supposed to be. A woman in your jurisdiction files a complaint that a drunken acquaintance tried to rape her while a mutual friend was watching. Police officers interview the alleged perp and he screams, "I'm innocent I went to Yale for Pete's sake."
Case closed? I didn't think so.
MAG,
Such obvious pandering.
First, wasn't it Mitchell herself who maintained that that particular format was a terrible way to assess the veracity of a sexual abuse charge? But now she's absolutely sure that Kavanaugh is innocent? She said, categorically, that the best way to gauge the situation in a case involving charges of sexual assault, is for a trained professional to sit in a quiet room with each party and listen for a long period of time, asking pointed questions now and then, and that, this was quite clearly not what was happening.
So which is it? This format is terrible, or it gives you everything you need to make a rock solid decision? It can't be both.
Well, I suppose it can if you get a call from Sean Hannity.
These people are all such pandering liars. The committee panders to Trump, Bart panders to the committee, Mitchell panders to her party.
She had a chance to burnish her reputation as a prosecutor but then, when she has another opportunity to get on a couple of Fox shows, suddenly, she's gulping the Kool-Aid with both hands like Bart and PJ and Squi during Beach Week.
You wouldn't hire a security guard with this joke of a background check. But an opening for a supreme court justice making life and death decisions for millions of Americans over the next three decades or more?
Meh.
And they're getting away with it.They really don't care what people say, they don't care about ethics or morality, or common decency. They see a chance to fuck with women, minorities, immigrants, workers, liberals, gays, and students, and man, they are not gonna miss it.
PD,
They can't handle the truth. Truth is the enemy of the Trumps and McConnells and Bart O'Kavanaughs of the world. It is the antiseptic to their lies and schemes and dirty tricks. They avoid it like the plague.
But then again, truth, as the saying goes, is the daughter of time.
I most certainly hope that Democrats stick to their plan to investigate Bart the Boozer even if (oh, who am I kidding? it's WHEN) he gets his seat on the court.
He can make up shit in a hearing room backed by a majority of liars but sooner or later, your bad acts come calling.
This is my fervent wish. Maybe they'll never be able to remove or impeach him, but they can make sure he carries a scarlet letter on his back for the rest of his time on the court and that that letter impugns the integrity and authority of every bad, hyper partisan decision he joins or writes. (Can't wait for the first Supreme Court majority opinion in which the author states, three or four times, that, by the way, in addition to the particulars of this case, "I really, really like beer.")
@Akhilleus: I agree. Unless there are photos & video of a "stumbling-drunk" Brett jumping Melanie on the steps of the Supreme Court building, Kavanaugh won't be removed from either post, and he probably won't even be impeached. But Blasey Ford's believable testimony & Kavanaugh's unhinged Trumpy performance will serve as a massive Pig-Pen cloud over Brett's head for the rest of his natural life & into the history books.
So even tho Blasey Ford rued having to upend her life for a done deal, her testimony (and his) will have as much -- or more -- effect if & when Kavanaugh is confirmed. Senate Republicans' decision to confirm that lying bag of booze no matter what will reflect on them, on Trump, & on the Supreme Court every year Kavanaugh is wearing a robe instead of a jump suit. Clarence Thomas didn't hurt Republicans as much as Kavanaugh will because Democrats (men) colluded with Republicans to confirm Thomas. Besides, what Thomas did was creepy, not criminal (at the time). (I'm not defending Thomas by any means, but I think a young woman should feel safer working alongside him than beside Kavanaugh.)
Every time Kavanaugh colludes in a 5-4 ruling against ordinary people, ordinary people will be reminded of all this anew. Ford's testimony by no means was a wasted effort. It led to an expose' of the Republican party.
Remember back in March 2016 when Trump told Hannity and his audience, "...I can be "....so Presidential"? Well, we know how that has turned out.
Remember late September 2018 when Brett Kavanaugh told the Congressional panel (and the rest of the watching public) "I can be so judicial." ?
Nope, he didn't actually say that...because his belligerent and teary performance made it obvious that would be a lie.
A Supreme Court with a Sulky Sam, Coke-Can Clarence, Nasty Neil and Beach-Party Brett is truly alarming to consider.
Marie,
Quite. And I agree that the Thomas case is different than O'Kavanaugh's. In both cases, however, there is the continuing problem of the lying. But then again, Roberts and Alito lied during their nomination hearings as well when they talked about settled law (Roberts went so far as to say that he's just a simple umpire here to "call balls and strikes", which is funny because I never saw an umpire run down the line and kick foul balls hit by his favorite team back into fair territory.)
Hard to say that Gorsuch lied because he didn't say much of anything. He was too cagey to get caught in a lie. He just nodded his head and waited them out. Of course now that he's on the court, everyone realizes that he was just a hyper partisan hack all along. Bart will be even worse because now he has hatred and vengeance in his heart to go along with his Bush era partisanship.
Wingers will try to suggest that Democrats are no difference, that Obama put liberal partisans on the court, but looking at their voting records (and prior histories), there is no way anyone can seriously aver that Kagan or Sotomayor (or Merrick Garland, for that matter) were or are hacks.
Trump? That's a different kettle of stinking fish. Being a hack himself, and with the possibility of his future fate resting on a Supreme Court decision or three, there is no way anyone would expect him to put anything but a reliably safe rubber stamp on the court.
Oh, and "Pig Pen cloud"? Good one. Eminently swipable. One of those tropes I can say I wish I had thought of. And besides being visually evocative, it neatly encapsulates the nature of a perpetually dirty nominee.
The Conway Problem
I know, I know, you're thinking "The Conway problem? There's just one?"
Good point, but put that aside for a minute.
What's up with this revelation that she too (Me Too?) has been the victim of a sexual assault? If so, I certainly feel for her, but what's the purpose of this announcement now? It doesn't feel like she's doing it to effect some form of solidarity with Ford and Ramirez. In fact, quite the opposite.
After her statement, Jake Tapper, who expressed his sympathy for her experience, asked an entirely logical (not just logical, necessary) question. If sexual assault had such an impact on her life, why is she working for a master of sexual assault? A self-confessed pussy grabber? Conway, outraged, instructed Tapper not to "conflate that with this", meaning, talk about the Donald's pussy grabbing is off-limits, so just shut up about that.
It's hard to accept anything these people do or say on its face. There's always an angle, always a gimmick, always a con. If Conway's gambit is to try to defuse anger at Trump and Kavanaugh, hoping that other victims of sexual assault will say, "Well, gee, that nice Kellyanne was attacked too, I guess we can forget all about being pissed at her boss and that Bart O'Kavanaugh", I'm not sure that will work. It may result in the opposite effect, voters interpreting Conway's actions as self-serving and offered as a prophylactic for Trump's and Kavanaugh's bad (alleged in Bart's case, self-confessed in Trumpy's) acts.
I dunno, these people are all such cynical, conniving scammers. The feeling I get, after initially feeling sorry for anyone who has gone through such an experience, is one of icky distrust. It feels like she's donning the mantle of a victim of sexual assault in an effort to neutralize the multiple charges directed at Kavanaugh (and her boss), which is despicable, if true.
What'choo you guys think?
When I read Mrs. Bea’s observation:
“Kavanaughh’s unhinged Trumpy performance will serve as a massive Pig Pen cloud over Brett’s Head for the rest of his natural life & into the history books.”…I couldn’t help but think of Al Capp.
Perhaps Bret will become the Republican Joe Btfsplk, spreading chaos and ill fortune to his immediate surroundings.
On another subject: I hope the Mexicans and Canadians understand that the new NAFTA (USMCA) should be branded as the UTR, short for "Until Trump Reneges". Today this is the greatest thing since Nacho bowls and Lobster but he may get a wild hair tomorrow.
"It led to an expose' of the Republican party."
True, but they've been walking around without cover now since 2010 and still there are enough people to keep voting them back.
I hate to say that a goodly portion of our electorate doesn't care. Until something bites them on the ass.
Demeanor on the Bench
That 2015 (bullshit) speech that Bart O'Kavanaugh gave is proof of how easily so many of these creeps can play the pretend game. Bart, no doubt, was trying to play the Solomon Card, pretending that he understood, and in all cases, the necessity of implementing the sort of judicial temperament required to judge other human beings.
Unfortunately, reality has set in.
It's pretty clear now that, were Bart in Solomon's shoes, adjudicating that famous Biblical case of the women claiming to be the mother of a baby, he'd have gone right ahead and sliced the baby in half, especially if the real mother was poor and not a member of his country club.
And here's the real problem. There are plenty of people out there who know how they're supposed to act. Bart is not a stupid person. He clearly, based on this (bullshit) speech, understands what's expected of a judge. The problem is can he do it in the real world?
I once had a high school coach who preached a certain kind of approach which sounded, to anyone who cared to listen, that he was a determined adherent of a new style of coaching that left behind the cro-magnon punishment and retribution style of the 40's and 50's. That was, until he got pissed. Trying to demonstrate the proper way to our quarterback to take a snap from center, he called for the center (me) to snap him the ball. Unfortunately, he forgot the proper way quarterbacks should place their hands when taking a hard, banging snap from center. I snapped him the ball and almost broke his fingers because he didn't have his hands positioned correctly.
His response? He walked around the line and kicked me flush in the face as hard as he could, with a fair number of expletives to go along with it.
I guess he taught us all lesson. Just probably not the lesson he intended. Or maybe that was the lesson. Make me look bad--even if it's my fault--and I'll kick you in the face.
A Bart O'Kavanaugh if I ever saw one.