Dems wage war on Kavanaugh, court: New battles over legitimacy, impeachment, recusal

[dukkha]

The narrow confirmation of now-Justice Brett Kavanaugh over the weekend marked a major political victory for President Trump – and the beginning of a new battle for Democrats, who are now shifting their message to threaten possible impeachment against the newest high court justice and question the legitimacy of the Supreme Court itself.

After a grueling confirmation fight that included graphic sexual misconduct allegations which the nominee denied, Kavanaugh was confirmed Saturday on 50-48 vote. His ceremonial swearing-in will be held Monday evening.

But as he joins the court, replacing retired Justice Anthony Kennedy, prominent Democrats signal the fight over his seat and the court itself will extend well beyond next month's midterms.

"Now, they want to impeach him. ... It's an insult to the American public," Trump said

Monday, still fuming over the confirmation process and predicting Republican candidates would only benefit from the controversy in the midterms.

Democrats, though, maintain the fight is energizing their core.

"We will not stop marching, we will not stop fighting," DNC Chairman Tom Perez said in a statement.

Over the weekend, former Attorney General Eric Holder said the court’s legitimacy should be brought into question with the addition of Kavanaugh.

“With the confirmation of Kavanaugh and the process which led to it, (and the treatment of Merrick Garland), the legitimacy of the Supreme Court can justifiably be questioned. The Court must now prove—through its work—that it is worthy of the nation’s trust,” Holder tweeted, referring to former President Barack Obama's Supreme Court nominee whose confirmation process was blocked by Republicans in 2016.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., top Democrat on the judiciary committee, also tweeted that confirming Kavanaugh "in the face of credible allegations of sexual assault that were not thoroughly investigated, and his belligerent, partisan performance in last Thursday’s hearing undermines the legitimacy of the Supreme Court."

Some in the media advanced another argument to question the court's legitimacy under its current makeup. Newsweek wrote that Kavanaugh is now the “fourth out of nine justices nominated by a president who did not initially win the popular vote”—referring to President Trump and former Republican President George W. Bush.

Whether the court's legitimacy really comes into question will be seen when major decisions start coming down. More immediately, though, some Democrats are hinting at impeachment efforts should they win the House in November.

Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., said the option of impeaching Kavanaugh should not be ruled out and said he would support further investigation into the newest justice.

“If there is conclusory evidence that shows unequivocally that he lied to a Senate committee, that is a crime and he should be held accountable for those criminal acts,” Booker told Yahoo News on Sunday in Iowa, suggesting a probe into whether Kavanaugh perjured himself before the Senate.

He said, though, that Democrats first need to focus on taking back the Senate majority.

“I think that after the dust settles on the night of [November] 6, I think that’s where we start to evaluate … what is the best thing for us to be focusing on in terms of what’s best for America and the American people,” Booker said.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said over the weekend that if the Democrats take back the majority in the House, they will launch a separate investigation into Kavanaugh’s potential perjury and alleged sexual assault.

“It is not something we are eager to do,” Nadler told The New York Times Friday.

“But the Senate having failed to do its proper constitutionally mandated job of advise and consent, we are going to have to do something to provide a check and balance, to protect the rule of law and to protect the legitimacy of one of our most important institutions.”

He added: “We have to assure the American people either that it was a fair process and that the new justice did not commit perjury, did not do these terrible things, or reveal that we just don’t know because the investigation was a whitewash.”

Some Democrats even called for considering the impeachment of Justice Clarence Thomas, over sexual harassment allegations he fought off during his 1991 confirmation.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dem...chment-recusal

[Irish Exit]

Even chattering this nonsense hurts the DNC in the midterms. As In indicated in my Blue Wave is over thread, Harvard polling showed that a super majority of people felt Feinstein mishandled it all, and well over 60% of people felt that he should have been seated if the investigation didn't turn up anything. The DNC's SJW agenda is completely out of touch with main stream America's idea of fairness and justice. It is going to bite them in the ass.

[Rune]

About fucking time the Dems do something.

[Oneuli]

The narrow confirmation of now-Justice Brett Kavanaugh over the weekend marked a major political victory for President Trump – and the beginning of a new battle for Democrats, who are now shifting their message to threaten possible impeachment against the newest high court justice and question the legitimacy of the Supreme Court itself.

After a grueling confirmation fight that included graphic sexual misconduct allegations which the nominee denied, Kavanaugh was confirmed Saturday on 50-48 vote. His ceremonial swearing-in will be held Monday evening.

But as he joins the court, replacing retired Justice Anthony Kennedy, prominent Democrats signal the fight over his seat and the court itself will extend well beyond next month's midterms.

Monday, still fuming over the confirmation process and predicting Republican candidates would only benefit from the controversy in the midterms.

Democrats, though, maintain the fight is energizing their core.

Over the weekend, former Attorney General Eric Holder said the court’s legitimacy should be brought into question with the addition of Kavanaugh.

“With the confirmation of Kavanaugh and the process which led to it, (and the treatment of Merrick Garland), the legitimacy of the Supreme Court can justifiably be questioned. The Court must now prove—through its work—that it is worthy of the nation’s trust,” Holder tweeted, referring to former President Barack Obama's Supreme Court nominee whose confirmation process was blocked by Republicans in 2016.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., top Democrat on the judiciary committee, also tweeted that confirming Kavanaugh "in the face of credible allegations of sexual assault that were not thoroughly investigated, and his belligerent, partisan performance in last Thursday’s hearing undermines the legitimacy of the Supreme Court."

Some in the media advanced another argument to question the court's legitimacy under its current makeup. Newsweek wrote that Kavanaugh is now the “fourth out of nine justices nominated by a president who did not initially win the popular vote”—referring to President Trump and former Republican President George W. Bush.

Whether the court's legitimacy really comes into question will be seen when major decisions start coming down. More immediately, though, some Democrats are hinting at impeachment efforts should they win the House in November.

Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., said the option of impeaching Kavanaugh should not be ruled out and said he would support further investigation into the newest justice.

“If there is conclusory evidence that shows unequivocally that he lied to a Senate committee, that is a crime and he should be held accountable for those criminal acts,” Booker told Yahoo News on Sunday in Iowa, suggesting a probe into whether Kavanaugh perjured himself before the Senate.

He said, though, that Democrats first need to focus on taking back the Senate majority.

“I think that after the dust settles on the night of [November] 6, I think that’s where we start to evaluate … what is the best thing for us to be focusing on in terms of what’s best for America and the American people,” Booker said.

Rep. Jerrold Nadler, D-N.Y., said over the weekend that if the Democrats take back the majority in the House, they will launch a separate investigation into Kavanaugh’s potential perjury and alleged sexual assault.

“It is not something we are eager to do,” Nadler told The New York Times Friday.

Some Democrats even called for considering the impeachment of Justice Clarence Thomas, over sexual harassment allegations he fought off during his 1991 confirmation.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dem...chment-recusal

The issue isn't just the way the newest scumbag on the court drags the reputation of the court further into the mud. It's also the precedent that Republicans have set. It used to be that Supreme Court justices were supposed to be above reproach, to the extent that they couldn't even be confirmed in the face of a filibuster. Then the Republicans went nuclear on that and are now using power to enforce their will even when all they have are the narrowest of margins. That's a two-way street. With Republicans having basically set the rules such that they'll do anything they have the votes to do, Democrats will want to do the same, when the wheel spins and it's their turn. If some day they have the votes to impeach Kavanaugh, why not do so? If they have the votes to stack the court, why should they hold back? If the Democrats keep trying to fight Marquis of Queensbury rules, while Republicans fight with every dirty trick they can, the Democrats will keep getting mauled. The only way to counter-balance the right-wing shift is to use every dirty trick to push to the left when the Democrats have a narrow majority. It'll be a race to the bottom. But the alternative is unilateral disarmament.

[Cypress]

If you stood on the sideline cheering when the SCOTUS stopped the Florida recount and handed the presidency to popular vote-loser George Dumbya Bush,

If you giggled and did cartwheels when the GOP senate put Merrick Garland on ice....

Then you are never, ever, under and circumstances, nor at any time, allowed to write posts complaining about politicization of the Supreme Court.

[Fentoine Lum]

The issue isn't just the way the newest scumbag on the court drags the reputation of the court further into the mud. It's also the precedent that Republicans have set. It used to be that Supreme Court justices were supposed to be above reproach, to the extent that they couldn't even be confirmed in the face of a filibuster. Then the Republicans went nuclear on that and are now using power to enforce their will even when all they have are the narrowest of margins. That's a two-way street. With Republicans having basically set the rules such that they'll do anything they have the votes to do, Democrats will want to do the same, when the wheel spins and it's their turn. If some day they have the votes to impeach Kavanaugh, why not do so? If they have the votes to stack the court, why should they hold back? If the Democrats keep trying to fight Marquis of Queensbury rules, while Republicans fight with every dirty trick they can, the Democrats will keep getting mauled. The only way to counter-balance the right-wing shift is to use every dirty trick to push to the left when the Democrats have a narrow majority. It'll be a race to the bottom. But the alternative is unilateral disarmament.

America has no social values as a society. The goal of fascism is to destroy economic politics, corporatists side with politicians who use fascist tactics because they are trying to divert people’s attention from the real forces that cause the genuine anxiety they feel. When you see the dominant group made to feel like they’re the victims in the face of all the facts, that’s when you know fascist politics is taking hold. The Powell Memorandum, it's all in there.

[Fentoine Lum]

If you stood on the sideline cheering when the SCOTUS stopped the Florida recount and handed the presidency to popular vote-loser George Dumbya Bush,

If you giggled and did cartwheels when the GOP senate put Merrick Garland on ice....

Then you are never, ever, under and circumstances, nor at any time, allowed to write posts complaining about politicization of the Supreme Court.

Sure ya can, we've already seen senators involved in all that, do just that. It's the Reality Ameica Show.