No, the title doesn’t refer to the tardiness of this week’s open thread. I had no time to prepare it on Saturday, since we were hosting a very special birthday party for one of my sisters. And then, of course, I had to sleep off all the booze.
Instead, it’s about Kavanaugh and his long-delayed confirmation. Because that’s all we’ve been talking about for weeks. Here’s to the last Kavanaugh post! I hope so, anyway.
In a way, it’s been the perfect story for everything surrounding American politics and culture since 2016. You’ve had the fierce political division, the #MeToo Effect, the cloud of an FBI investigation against a public figure, the urgency of saving SCOTUS seats, and Trump himself. If only Russian trolls had gotten more involved and we’d have it all. They were too busy ruining the Star Wars franchise, or some shit.
Because of how perfectly the Kavanaugh nomination expressed what is at stake in the midterms, and how much it dominated news coverage, the American public is as engaged as it possibly could be with high voter enthusiasm. In theory, I think a high degree of engagement is a good thing. It’s good to see Americans being civic-minded.
Problem is that these aren’t largely well-informed or well-meaning people. They’re each getting half the story from their preferred news outlets. They’re enraged at each other, not simply the politicians they’re planning to vote against. I’m not sure if we’ve ever seen such a thing as “rage voting” by both sides at once in a national election but this seems to be it.
For some time last year, I had believed that maybe it wouldn’t be the worst thing if the Democrats took over at least one house of Congress. They would have had a stake in government again, which might lead them to start behaving rationally for the first time in two years. They could also force Trump to compromise and this could bring about some positive bipartisan legislation, if both have the wisdom to try.
Post-Kavanaugh, I don’t feel that way anymore. The behavior of the Senate Democrats and their activists over Kavanaugh and other events has driven that notion out of my head in terror. I don’t think they want to work within our institutions anymore. They’re willing to break them if it means “stopping Trump”, and they’ll personally ruin the life of anyone if it is useful to do so, no matter how unlikely it is to succeed.
From the perspective of national Democrats, I suppose what was done to Kavanaugh looked rational to them. They demonstrated that they’ll fight and kept themselves from being primaried while also boosting fundraising. However, they also needlessly agitated and animated GOP voters for the effort and guaranteed the demise several red-state Senate Democrats. They’ve made it even worse by vowing to investigate and impeach Kavanaugh after they win the House back, further motivating Republicans to stop them.
It was needless because Kavanaugh’s confirmation shouldn’t have been a life-or-death issue for Democrats. They were bound to lose since there is a Republican president and Senate majority, and the Democrats had already stupidly triggered the Senate Majority Leader to eliminate the filibuster during their last totally needless struggle against a Trump nominee. They didn’t have any real options and could have simply voted “no” without making out the replacement of a Republican Justice with another Republican Justice to be the End of All Things.
Not only did they fail to keep the seat open, but they’ve assured that Senate Republicans will show no mercy to fill future seats with any conservative jurist they want and won’t be dissuaded. There are no parliamentary tricks they can use nor are there any baseless smears that will work.
Democrats made a disagreement into a battle, disgracefully took it into the gutter, lost, and now have the shame of lying beaten in that gutter. It was totally self-inflicted and pointless. They keep repeating the same mistakes. They get angry, wage unnecessary fights, lose, and then become angrier. Thus repeating the cycle.
Winning the Senate majority isn’t happening for the Democrats, nor should it. They don’t deserve it after what they’ve done to the Senate and Justice Kavanaugh.
PS: CMNZ reported that he was having some trouble posting comments in recent weeks. If you’ve been experiencing any site problems, please contact me at ridiculousvikingstuff@protonmail.com and I’ll see if zoom or I can get it fixed.
So let’s see. Democrats have used violent rhetoric against Republicans, doxxed representatives, called for mobbing them when they go to restaurants, launched baseless allegations against officials to ruin their careers and lives, and otherwise done their best to tear the country apart.
But they’re worried that they’re not vicious enough. Yeah, go with that.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/10/07/kavanaugh-confirmation-democrats-anger-221089
So women aren’t all in it together:
https://dailycaller.com/2018/10/07/liberals-attack-white-women-brett-kavanaugh/
Suddenly, it seems, gender does matter to the Left, when they’ve been trying to erase it in names, clothing, and bathroom distinctions. And just where are we headed if this is the new political normal? Fuming at each other in silence when we’re not online? Snubbing each other in the street? The next civil war won’t be televised-it’ll be tweeted.
Did anyone read Senator Collins’s statement? I’m not only surprised that she voted for Kavanaugh, but that she so perfectly articulated why he deserved to be confirmed.
https://www.collins.senate.gov/newsroom/senator-collins-announces-she-will-vote-confirm-judge-kavanaugh
This part was especially rich:
So Collins decided to go with the woeful doppelganger option (Ford was assaulted but it was a case of mistaken identity). I guess she figured it was the least worst thing to pretend to believe. Pretty sure she actually believes it was Kavanaugh.
So this Supreme Court Justice, who switches the balance of power for a decade or more (because he replaces the swing voting Justice) was nominated by a POTUS who came second in the vote (46%, more than 2% behind) and then confirmed by Senators who represent 44% of the population…..amazing really, and that’s without all the controversy (which is only partly which is about multiple sexual assault allegations). Roberts is going to have his work cut out making people believe the court has legitimacy and isn’t just another political arm. I see Sanders immediately betrayed the ‘I just call balls and strikes’ lie with her tweet
https://twitter.com/PressSec/status/1048687047400218624?s=19
Why bother with all the pretence, that’s what puzzles me. Is that what provides the legitimacy? Everyone just pretends to believe in the pretence? I mean, the biggest decisions in the land are determined by whoever had the luck of being in power when a Justice dies. Is it really any more complicated than that?
Just more evidence that the USA has already relocated onto a different planet.
https://twitter.com/bendreyfuss/status/1048983625927155712?s=19
“I was hit by a car”
“I believe you. Something happened”
“I was hit by a car”
“You have bruises. Internal injuries. You are compelling”
“Car hit me”
“But I can not say if a car hit you”
“It did”
“Maybe you fell out a tree”
“Car”
“Off a bike”
“A car hit—”
“Point is: I believe you”
I don’t think she does. Murkowski probably does, but Collins wouldn’t have voted for him if she thought so. She went to great lengths to explain why Ford isn’t credible (without bluntly saying so). The conversation is more like this:
“I was hit by a car.”
“When?”
“Thirty something years ago.”
“What year?”
“I can’t remember.”
“Did you report it to police or go to a hospital so that your injuries could be documented?”
“No.”
“Where exactly did it happen?”
“I can’t remember. Was twenty miles from my home.”
“How did you get home after being hit by the car?”
“I don’t know.”
“Did anyone see it?”
“Yes. Here are four people who witnessed it.”
“They all say that they don’t know what you’re talking about.”
That’s really what sank Ford’s credibility: the fact that the witnesses SHE named couldn’t back up her account. I’d argue she didn’t do herself any favors by lying about her fear of air travel either.
Yes, because we are not a direct democracy. We’re a constitutional republic and that is how we define the process. We can introduce amendments to the Constitution to change all that, but they are the rules and there’s no point in complaining about it when it doesn’t go the way you’d prefer.
Me personally, I think that the makeup of the Court wouldn’t matter so much if SCOTUS wasn’t so powerful and wasn’t injecting itself into cases that should be settled by the states or Congress. As long as it appoints itself as the unelected arbiter of all social issues, then idealogues on both sides are always going to try to load SCOTUS with their partisans.
You’re right about that. Problem is that the Court has been divided into two political wings for so long that one side or the other was bound to eventually get a majority.
In my opinion, I think the Court can regain legitimacy by not making any more highly divided rulings on Culture War issues. Seek consensus, use the Constitution, the letter and spirit of the law, and stare decisis as the basis for decisions rather than hoped-for outcomes.
There is some room to be hopeful. The Christian wedding cake baker case back in June was a good example of what can happen when the Court sticks to the Constitutional fundamentals and doesn’t overreach.
http://www.ridiculousvikingstuff.com/2018/06/04/no-im-not-baking-your-cake/
Instead of a 5-4 decision that would have radically altered the entire concept for all of the states about who Americans are required to provide services to, we got a much more sound 7-2 decision that said that agencies responsible for enforcing those state laws must be fair, consistent, and abide by the First Amendment.
Roberts’s SCOTUS will be evaluated for its legitimacy according to its actions, not the Senate’s circuses.
Perhaps it would be less puzzling if you didn’t insist that it was pretense. Just because you personally believe Ford’s admittedly well-played act, it doesn’t mean everyone else does or should. There was simply no evidence to back up her story. Her own witnesses failed to back up her claims, which includes her lifelong friend Leland Keyser. And due process dictates that the burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused. That’s just the way the system works, whether you can understand it or not.
He came in first — 304 to 227. If he came in second, he wouldn’t be President right now.
https://youtu.be/cFL6k5yOAFM
This may be part of an image makeover, but it’s a good move on his part:
http://dailycaller.com/2018/10/08/brett-kavanaugh-black-women-law-clerks-ginsburg/
Meanwhile that didn’t take long:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dems-wage-war-on-kavanaugh-court-new-battles-over-legitimacy-impeachment-recusal
I’m sure I’ll catch hell for saying it, but if I went through what he just did, the LAST thing I would do is surround myself with female employees. If I did hire any, I’d be following the Mike Pence rule with all the suspicion a Saudi guy has for cooties.
This is exactly the sort of thing I would want them to say if I wanted to maximize GOP turnout in November.
Nope. I know you’re tired of hearing this, but it’s not a trial, it’s an assessment of appropriateness for a role. Not whether or not he ‘did it’. That’s why the word ‘credible’ keeps being used.
So you have a nominee for a lifetime appointment to a job that basically has the job description ‘be the most impartial, even handed, dispassionate person in the country’.
And this person has been credibly accused of assault by multiple women, has multiple stories of drunken behaviour, including a memoir written about him by his best friend. He also said multiple things that were demonstrably untrue and when confronted with the accusations, in a prepared statement he got very emotional and angry, and threatened revenge on the Democrats.
This isn’t someone who should be a supreme court justice – even if it’s great to own the libs.
Sorry –Are you saying that you disagree? That he should not be held accountable for any criminal acts?
I’m absolutely saying that. There’s zero reason why he should be subject to a kangaroo court operated by the same Democrats who publicly outed an alleged sex crime victim and smeared him in the name of a political agenda. GOP voters see this for what it is, they don’t want it either, and that’s why it is yet another act of self-destructive #Resistance rage.
He’s on the bench for life. If he gets drunk and molests Kagan during deliberations, sure, let’s impeach him. Otherwise, Democrats should stop blundering into colossal defeat after defeat with these futile hate-filled revenge ploys.
I want to get this 100% straight. You’re saying that if there is conclusory evidence, beyond any doubt that a Supreme Court Justice committed a crime – that Justice should get away with it, because you don’t like the Dems.
That your partisanship is now stronger than your respect for the law, your sense of right and wrong, and your respect of personal responsibility.
That the Trump administration has persuaded you that no one on the right can possibly have done anything wrong – even if there is unequivocal evidence – because the other side are engaged in a conspiracy.
“What you’re seeing and what you’re hearing is not what’s happening.”
Let’s just hope that the GOP and the Trump administration don’t take advantage of your total abdication of accountability for your elected officials and use it to try and get away with anything criminal or unethical. Luckily the current administration are famously honest. At least you’ll get to own the libs eh?
I find it refreshing that we’re finally in agreement that there should be conclusory evidence, beyond any doubt, that any negative action should be taken against a Supreme Court Justice or nominee instead of a mere accusation. Good to have that back in fashion.
Is there any such evidence about Kavanaugh after 7 background checks? No…
I care less how Senate Democrats want to construe anything he said into a lie. They’ve established that someone is perfectly credible even when she can’t remember details about the Most Traumatic Thing That Has Ever Happened To Her, lies about being too scared to fly even when she does it extensively, and her own identified witnesses don’t agree with her version of events.
Applying the same rationale as Senate Democrats, I’m going to say that I don’t care if Kavanaugh can’t remember how many beers he drank on October 2nd, 1989 or whatever. His qualifications are not in doubt and he has been sufficiently placed through the wringer, more than any successful nominee in history that I know of. I’m not playing the fuzzy recollections vs lies game anymore.
It’s over.
If the Democrats wish to be sore losers about it, they will continue to be losers. If they really want to put impeaching Kavanaugh on the ballot, I sincerely hope they do. It will work as well for them as obsessing about tax returns, Russia, Stormy Daniels, and every other attempt they’ve made to soothe their grief over the 2016 election has.
Again: Kavanaugh’s confirmation was not worth fighting over, it was stupid to make it as destructive as it was, and they’re only going to make it worse for themselves by continuing to push what was always a losing fight by starting another one.
Don’t forget the double door escape hatch which somehow also works as a rental unit for interns. Personally I think some foreign leftists raped her and I can back it with the same amount of evidence that’s been provided so far. Why let these pervs post here? Do the right thing William and don’t be a woman hater. There are new rules to follow so why not start now?
I get what you’re saying and I may have snickered about how people miss the point about how damaging unfounded allegations can be, not just for high-profile figures like Kavanaugh but even for normal schlubs.
But what I want to point out here is that I don’t want to “own the libs”. I want the libs to be good. I like it when liberals are intelligent, compassionate, peace-loving, and rational as they’ve always claimed to be. That describes many of the good liberals I knew growing up, the way they were until the 2016 Election sent them off the deep end.
Please see that I haven’t been gloating in this post. Everything I’ve been saying is that what the Democrats have done is harmful and destructive. They’re destroying themselves, the harder they work to destroy Trump. I’m not saying that because I’m happy to see them get destroyed.
Instead, I’d like to see them start becoming useful again. Offer a competing vision, champion some real arguments, and quit defending the indefensible. Stop approving of threats against public officials, street violence, suppression of free expression, and character assassination, among other awful acts done in the name of #Resistance.
I want people who disagree with me to post here. The reason is that I am going to give them a real discussion. Not a flamewar, not attacks, not hatred. It’s not what I’m after. I don’t want to “own” anybody. I already win when I prove that we can still have a rational conversation these days.
Just saw this. Tucker makes a similar point to mine. Liberals these days aren’t liberals. They’re behaving more like hateful drones.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLLmIJgi6ew
This. And that’s what I’m trying to do. I’m trying o explain that opposing Kavanaugh isn’t about proving he assaulted Dr Ford – it’s about showing a pattern of behaviour and the temperament of a person who is seeking a lifetime appointment. In my opinion, the sheer number of factors – even if half of them are bullshit – point to someone who is entitled, partisan, temperamental, dishonest and disrespectful – who refuses to take any accountability for his actions.
He wasn’t on trial for a crime. He was facing a vote about his suitability for the job and his temperament – which is an entirely subjective thing.
You don’t need to tell me about this.
OK. And in return it would be great if the right would start becoming responsible again. Offer some skepticism of what the Government tells you, champion accountability for those that act in bad faith or show corruption, and show some skepticism when you’re consistently told that you’re the real victim of a situation and you should really be hating XYZ group.
But you can’t just point to baseless accusations of multiple women who have been coached to say such-and-such and say, “Ah ha! It’s a pattern of behavior!” The plural of anecdote isn’t “fact”, as the saying goes.
Come on. One of the accusers basically said that she knew full well she was going to high school gang rape parties when she was college age and her only response to it was to….not…drink the punch. Seriously?
Why can’t we look at his service as a federal judge? Why no mention of the positive character references from dozens of women, including the Obama-appointed Justice Kagan? What could speak to his temperament better than the 96% of times he concurred with Judge Merrick Garland, of all people?
These are actual, documented testimonials to his fitness. How do you push all that aside, all those years of building a solid reputation as a judge based on the allegations of a woman who refuses to turn over her therapist notes and lies about being afraid to fly when she does so extensively while pursuing her hobbies?
And I see that he’s a capable jurist, widely respected, and at one time served under the very Justice he has replaced. Democrats could very easily have voted against him without trashing his good name. They should have, for their own sakes.
Well, an impeachment is a trial. I do not trust the Democrats at all to objectively conduct it after the depths they’ve sunk to.
I’ll probably cause jaws to drop by saying this, but we’re not generally known for being the responsible ones.
You say “the Government”, but what does that mean? I don’t trust the government, but the government is also at war with itself. The DC bureaucracy is “the Government” and I think it is fully unaccountable and out of control. The Democrats in Congress are “the Government”. Donald Trump is “the Government” since he’s president, but he’s actively challenging the bureaucracy and the Democrats in Congress.
I’m currently supporting the president who is slashing onerous regulations, appointing judges who respect the Constitution and the rights of the people and states to live under the laws that they or their legislatures vote for, and serves as the head of the party that is reducing taxes and the control government has over my life in Congress. What more can I do to be skeptical of government than to support that? Sure, they could do more but the other party isn’t any alternative, is it?
As for accountability, I do favor it. However, I also am not naive enough to think that it should only be enforced against Republicans. For example, I don’t believe for a minute that Senator Franken would have been pressured to step down merely on the word of his accuser, do you? It was the photograph that did him in.
As I’ve said before, I believed some of Roy Moore’s accusers based on their testimony and his own behavior even though him losing the seat for the GOP wasn’t exactly my preferred outcome. What more do I need to do to demonstrate my commitment to accountability? I often wonder if anything will ever be enough and if I should even bother.
And what does the part about showing skepticism instead of blaming groups mean here? You mean we shouldn’t blame Russians when the worst candidate to run for the US presidency loses because of her own flawed campaign strategy? Perhaps we shouldn’t castigate white women for doubting the allegations against Kavanaugh and call them “gender traitors”? Maybe we shouldn’t applaud late night comedians who call those who support Trump a bunch of stupid hillbillies? Or suggest that those who think Kavanaugh is a fit and capable judge are a bunch of raving misogynists.
Yeah, I’m down with that. We should all be extraordinary.
Look, I’m never going to convince you that Trump is great for America or the world. I’m not even going to try. All I can do is explain what I want and why I approve or disapprove of what’s going on. Some people could read more into my intentions than what I say. I can’t control that. However, I’m not about hating anybody. I’m too old and tired for that.
Instead, I want what’s best for my country. I want an Executive branch that doesn’t wage stupid, destructive wars that aren’t in the interests of the American people. I want a Congress that takes its oversight and governance role seriously as directed by the Constitution. I want a judiciary that respects the will of voters and always adheres to the plain letter and intent of the Constitution.
There’s nothing evil or hateful about any of it.
I want women and girls to be safe from abuse and violence and I want those who harm them to be prosecuted under our laws. I believe that minorities should have full protection under the law to live as I do and free to make their own choices. I’ve even written that we should accept refugees and give them the opportunity to become great Americans to completely repudiate our enemies who disagree with everything that I want.
I can’t speak for everybody. I’ll just say that anyone who reads my writings will find that my angry writing is directed entirely at those who harm, bully, lie, abuse their authority, and try to further tear America apart. I’m against the Party of Hate, not sensible liberals who also want peace, justice, and fairness. Arguing with them is just a matter of policy. The vicious creatures we’ve seen running wild for the past two years are something that has to be repudiated, fought, and knocked down at every opportunity.
WTF? Kennedy from MTV has a Fox News show? When did this happen?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yrL04SlLVic
Junk science.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/health/2018/10/07/republicans-who-believed-ford-doubted-her-memory-relied-junk-science-researchers-say/
Not sure why it has to be some weird psychology thing to say that she identified the wrong guy. However, it’s way easier just to say she is a liar who made it up. So I’m going with that.
Congressional hearings and the presumption of innocence
He certainly has been accused, but not “credibly” so. Not by a long shot.
If one are sincerely seeking a “pattern of behavior”, then one doesn’t place emphasis on uncorroborated hearsay claims about the accused’s high-school and college years while ignoring the public record of the accused’s exemplary adult record and behavior.
I’m with William on this one. I won’t claim she “misremembered” anything. I’ll just say she lied through her teeth, even if it was a convincing act. But an act is all it was.
Wow, ok. Further down the rabbit hole we go. So what was her motivation? Her life was going so badly and she’s such a hardout and unhinged extreme partisan that she decided to throw it all away so a replacement conservative judge would be confirmed instead? No? Walk me through it….
I obviously can’t prove anything, but stopping the Trump agenda at any cost might qualify. She did contribute to Bernie’s campaign, her lawyer contributed to the DNC and Hillary’s campaign, so their opposition to Trump is a matter of public record.
But somehow I doubt you’d be receptive to anything I might suggest, regardless of any facts I point out.
“Throw it all away”? You’re kidding, right?
She comes from a bastion of left-wing thinking, Palo Alto CA and Stanford U. She’s now a cultural icon for the left, the lone “survivor” who went up against the evil Trump machine. She already has a GoFundMe account dedicated to her that is overflowing with hundreds of thousands of dollars. No doubt she has speaking engagements and book deals lined up already. She has a lifetime of praise and adulation ahead of her.
But sure, it’s all just a rabbit hole. Her motives are pure. You believe her. My cynicism really doesn’t matter.
She wanted to sink the nomination. Worth noting here that she tried to do it anonymously. She wanted to leave the allegation without being identified. It would have been no-risk for her, except somebody leaked her name because Feinstein didn’t want to push it without her being identified.
Ford wasn’t trying to “throw it all away”. She was trying to get the best of both worlds: damage the nominee and take no damage for it.
Prevent the nomination. id have to guess she didnt expect to be outed by Feinstine, so she just went with the flow. oh and that Go-Fund_me page of hers im sure helps her a bit, then it will be the awards, interviews, book deals.. ect ect.
I was listening to it on the radio show i was tuned into. i was impressed. i did not know she had that in her, i figured she would fold.
What, so this was all carefully planned when she told her therapist years ago, in anticipation that this would happen? She knew (helped organise?) a GoFundMe page to get rich, because it’s worth all the abuse and threats from the right? She wrote the letter asking for confidentiality knowing it would be leaked so she could then get all the attention but claim she never wanted it? Did she leak it?
Do you think she even went to that school? Even lived in the same state? I know some people think it was Amy Schumer in disguise, do you guys believe that?
I need more, this is fascinating.
Cress, do you know David Cormack?
https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=12139957
Oh I see, she was a Bernie supporter, so she did this as revenge for….Hillary.
Of course.
No, you don’t.
Look, you’re welcome to be as ridiculous as you want to be. Nothing we said is unreasonable, but everything in your response is. I said you wouldn’t be receptive and I was right.
You don’t know what she told her therapist.
We don’t even know what’s in the therapist notes or what was shown to the media or anybody else. Only thing that has been reported for sure is that the notes don’t specifically mention Kavanaugh. Ford has refused to provide the real notes. Do we even know who her therapist was?
Again: She did not want to be publicly identified and tried to avoid it. Ford tried to find some way to put the allegation out there without exposing herself and having her credibility challenged. As I’ve said before, in the #MeToo era, an allegation is considered sufficient by itself.
That’s what she was counting on. Ford wanted confidentiality because she didn’t want to face real scrutiny. She wanted to play by college campus Title IX rules that let an anonymous accuser destroy a man’s life .
Ford wasn’t bravely putting herself out there and risking the hatred of the Right to get her story out. She was trying very hard not to put herself out there and has refused to provide evidence (such as the mythical therapy notes) to support her story.
I don’t think so. She had shopped her story around when Kavanaugh was first nominated. The media outlets and Democrats who received it didn’t want to run with it because they knew it wouldn’t be credible coming from an anonymous accuser. That’s why Feinstein suppressed it for a couple of months.
My theory is that a Democratic staffer or Senator was frustrated with Feinstein for not using something they felt was a kill-shot on Kavanaugh and leaked her name so that there would be no reason not to push her claims. I don’t think the leak came from Ford. I’m not ruling out her Democratic loyalist legal team as the culprits though.
Maybe. She lied about her fear of flying causing reluctance to fly out to DC to testify about her accusation, so who knows what else she lied about.
Worth pointing out once more, CM. Ford says there were four people at the party, including Kavanaugh, when Kavanaugh assaulted her. All of them agree that not only did they see Kavanaugh assault her, but that there was no party at all.
If you want to engage in conspiracy thinking, then come up with an explanation for why all of the witnesses identified by the accuser refuse to support her version of events. The simple answer is that the party didn’t happen. The weight of evidence does not support Ford’s accusation and it never did.
The Dragon Energy Summit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8O-Q1xGC_iA
My mind is blown.
Lovely thread. Definitely demonstrates the bias we all view political things through.
I just can’t seem to give any F’s. Just got back from my surgery. Ow.
I hope you get to feeling better soon, Zurvan. You’re more fun when you give a fuck. Hey, this might cheer you up.
https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1050794829482008576
Quality….
https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/412473-julia-louis-dreyfus-knocks-kavanaugh-while-accepting-mark-twain
Oh that’s right, I forgot that the quality of advice on politics and ethics is determined by what jobs people have. Good reminder.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/37637/nbc-sat-information-undermined-brett-kavanaugh-ashe-schow
Ahh, the good ole’ unbiased media.