quote:

Originally posted by justjoe:
I had a summer home in Maine for more than a decade, so I give Collins a bit of leeway as a senator from that... strange... state. My home was up as far north as Bangor, but on the coast. If you drive up that much of Maine, you are convinced you are in the most patriotic state in the Union. Flags and bunting are everywhere, and not just on the 4th of July, but all the time. I think Maine has the highest proportion of military enlistments in the country. The 20th Maine is one of the legendary regiments of the Civil War.

But driving up you also see little artists' shops everywhere. And small bookstores. Little "artists' colonies." Painters, sculptors, potters (especially!), musicians, writers, poets are everywhere.

So, despite the patriotism, there is a very widespread population of social liberals. Eccentrics. Yes, even kooks. Collins had to signal to them that she was taking Ford very seriously, giving her every benefit of the doubt, sympathizing with women who are sexually assaulted.

But I think that when the chips are down she will vote "yes" on Kavanaugh and always intended to do so.

I was born in Maine. Half the state is my family. My uncle was just inducted into Hall of Fame for Maine in coaching, 2nd uncle to be honored. All that, have pretty good insight into the politics and unfortunately have drifted to leftist from the classical Democrat/middle of the road Republican . I have little faith Collins will vote Y because the transplants from Liberal Enclaves and “my generation” are all way left these days.

Regardless - Grassley and Mitch will get this done.

All the babbling on the cable shows. Screaming back and forth.

Not a word about the role of Monica McLean.

Her FBI background. Her proximity to Ford.

And her lawyer David Laufman, straight from the DoJ National Security Division that was smack in the middle of the Russia collusion investigation.

The judicial wars are just getting started.

National Review
Matthew Continetti

When President George W. Bush nominated John Roberts for the Supreme Court in 2005, the judge was confirmed by a vote of 78–22. Half of the Democrats voted with all of the Republicans in a display of bipartisan advice and consent. It was a touching moment of comity and civility — the sort of thing lauded in the abstract by Washington elites at the recent funeral of John McCain. It didn’t last six months.

Early in 2006, Samuel Alito was confirmed by a vote of 58–42. When the next Republican president made his first Supreme Court pick in 2017, Neil Gorsuch was confirmed by a vote of 54 to 45. As I write, the maximum number of votes Brett Kavanaugh can receive is 52 (all of the Senate Republicans plus Joe Manchin). That would put him in a tie with Clarence Thomas, who received the lowest support for a justice of the Supreme Court in postwar history. It is possible Kavanaugh could set a new record.

Why the narrowing margin? Not because W. and Donald Trump nominated unqualified candidates. With the exception of Harriet Miers, withdrawn before a hearing was convened, their nominees have been eminently qualified. Nor is it entirely because of scandal. True, Anita Hill may have put a ceiling on Thomas’s support. But Kavanaugh was on his way to a narrow confirmation even without the last-minute uncorroborated accusation from Christine Blasey Ford.

The reason for these increasingly hard-fought and closely decided Supreme Court battles is that the last four nominees have been originalists and textualists who threaten the progressive doctrine of the Living Constitution. The Left’s hold over the Supreme Court is under threat. The Democratic party and its affiliated interest groups, always eager to appease foreign adversaries, have in this case responded with force. They understand that the Supreme Court effectively rules the country. Any restoration of constitutionalism and of the separation of powers depends on control of the Court.

Which is why, given a closely divided Senate, the next originalist nominee will be confirmed with fewer votes than Kavanaugh. No mystery why: Since Thomas’s confirmation, no Republican president has replaced a Democratic appointment to the Court with one of his own. With Kavanaugh’s investiture, W. and Trump will have replenished Ronald Reagan’s appointments, as well as one of Nixon’s. Imagine the outcry should one of the seats held by Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Elena Kagan, or Sonia Sotomayor becomes available under a Republican president — especially if that president is Donald Trump.

All of the trends showcased by the Kavanaugh fight are about to intensify. The polarization of judicial confirmations is just one of them. Another is the opening up of spaces previously thought closed to public scrutiny. Kavanaugh’s confirmation will signal to Democrats that they cannot attack a nominee’s conduct as a minor without political consequences. That doesn’t mean they will be reluctant to do so when the legacy of the Notorious RBG is up for grabs.

If you are Amy Coney Barrett or Joan Larsen or Diane Sykes, you are frantically reviewing your exploits in high school, middle school, heck, elementary school for any embarrassment the Democrats might seize upon. And why stop there — because the Feinstein gang was more than happy to indulge in guilt by association when it came to Brett Kavanaugh’s social circle, you might also want to ask your husbands and sons if they have any skeletons in the closet.

You know that you will not be able to rely on a fair process when Dianne Feinstein kept Ford’s accusations from her Republican colleagues and from Kavanaugh for weeks even as she secured Ford legal representation. Nor can you expect to have anything approaching a normal life if you are nominated for the Court, thanks to the harassment of mobs and lunatics abetted by the Democrats.

Nor is there even the slightest chance that the media elite will cover the next originalist nominee objectively. In the last two weeks, baseless and anonymously made allegations have been reported as breaking news by NBC, The New Yorker ran two stories in which all of the parties contacted could not confirm the salacious account of Deborah Ramirez, the wild and ever-changing story of Julie Swetnick initially was given kid-glove treatment, the New York Times granted an opinion journalist a news byline to report on a bar fight 30 years ago in which Kavanaugh threw ice at someone, then published the letter that Kavanaugh wrote to his friends in high school about an upcoming beach trip, all as reporters studied yearbooks for the hidden and nefarious meanings behind high-school slang. So lost in the Devil’s Triangle have these reporters become that they did not even attempt to investigate the various allegations against Kavanaugh with the same incredulity and skepticism they apply categorically to male students of private schools.


The Kavanaugh affair has been an embarrassing debacle for our most prestigious sources of “news.” It also has reemphasized the fact that judges are a winning issue for the Republican party. Just as Trump’s alliance with the Federalist Society played an important role in his 2016 victory, the vilification of Brett Kavanaugh has contributed to an upswing in Republican enthusiasm for 2018. Both Republicans and Democrats are alive to the fact that the future of the Court and the future of the country are inextricably linked. That is why we have just experienced one of the most gut-wrenching and sectarian episodes in American history. And why the next episode will be even worse.

Link

Flake says he will vote yes to confirm

“unless something big changes,”

seen on Fox

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

NBC News tells the protestors where to go:

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/u...m-daughter-s-n917066

That is a level of evil vindictiveness that is beyond the pale.

quote:

Originally posted by TigerDore:
What power does this fascist hold over Murkowski that the Senate Leader of her own party does not hold?

Perhaps some status if she votes "correctly" and then switches party to flip the leadership? I don't know what the rules are for doing that, but wouldn't put it past Schumer to make such a deal. Didn't Specter do that?

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Flake says he will vote yes to confirm

“unless something big changes,”

seen on Fox

Well, he was the one I was most worried about so that's some comfort.

Jesus, I can't wait for this mess to be over with...at least this stage of it.

quote:

Flake says he will vote yes to confirm
“unless something big changes,”

Isn't that pretty much what he said the morning of the Judiciary committee vote?
And then a couple of leftists got in an elevator with him... and he suddenly needed more investigation.

quote:

This information about the "private family event," was available to anyone who is familiar with weddings, and knows how to use a search engine. The family posted the information publicly on the website The Knot. Which is quite common, and was available to anyone who cared to know long before the press said anything about it.

Yeah, but NBC News didn't have to publish it and make it more widely known. They knew what they were doing.

If the Daines family had any idea Sen. Daines was going to be in the national spotlight and would have to be whisked away immediately to get back to Washington for a crucial vote they surely wouldn't have posted the information publicly on the website The Knot.

Well, good luck protesting in Montana. Somehow I don't think that would fly like it would in a blue state.

Tony.

If we discovered that Brett was anointed by G-d,the Dimwits would find something to bitch about.

quote:

Originally posted by benny6:
Well, good luck protesting in Montana. Somehow I don't think that would fly like it would in a blue state.

Tony.

Don’t be too sure about that. There’s plenty of red from Helena down through the Bitterroots.

quote:

Originally posted by oddball:

quote:

Originally posted by chellim1:

quote:

Flake, Collins, Manchin Yes
Murkowski No
adding this is for cloture, not the final vote

Wait and see if she comments today on her reason for voting against cloture. She may be trying to have it both ways.

Simple. She caved (posted earlier)

She caved ...
Murkowski: Kavanaugh "Not The Right Man For The Court"

Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) - the lone GOP "no" vote during Brett Kavanaugh's Friday cloture vote, told reporters Friday that she thinks Kavanaugh may be a "good man" but that he's "not the right man for the court at this time."

"[I] took the very, very difficult vote that I did. I believe that Brett Kavanaugh is a good man. I believe he is a good man it just may be that in my view he's not the right man for the court at this time," said Murkowski.

Murkowski says that she's been "wrestling" with the Kavanaugh decision - calling it the "most difficult" she's had to make in her political career.

Perhaps adding to her internal strife was a chat she had with Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) in which she appeared to be crying in a hallway as Feinstein browbeat her. Perhaps the 85-year-old Feinstein was helping Murkowski wrestle.

https://www.zerohedge.com/news...-not-right-man-court

Laura Ingraham for Senate!

Laura Ingraham ✔
@IngrahamAngle

I like Alaska...a lot. Maybe it’s time to run for Senate after all. @lisamurkowski has abandoned all principles of due process and fairness. Disgraceful. “#ConfirmKavanaugh

quote:

I believe he is a good man it just may be that in my view he's not the right man for the court at this time," said Murkowski

What a pathetic statement.

quote:

Originally posted by sdy:
Flake says he will vote yes to confirm

“unless something big changes,”

seen on Fox

Right, like a sudden 'big' 7-digit increa$e to the bottom line profitability of his 'consulting' company that is incorporated in the Cayman islands or elsewhere, perhaps?!
__________

quote:

I believe that Brett Kavanaugh is a good man. I believe he is a good man it just may be that in my view he's not the right man for the court at this time," said Murkowski.

"At this time?" What does that even mean? Either he's qualified for the court or he's not. It's actually not a very difficult decision at all. Coward!

quote:

Flake says he will vote yes to confirm
“unless something big changes,”

Flake is now set up to be "the decider", ala John McCain. Stay tuned.