'Not knowing when the Dawn will come, I open every Door,' Trump No. 95

[lionheart]

From Emily Dickinson.

Old thread.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3356297-Freedom-of-the-press-is-not-just-important-to-democracy-it-is-democracy-Trump-no-94

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/christine-ford-gofundme-campaign-brett-kavanaugh-hearing-amount-donate-a8558676.html

www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/brett-kavanaugh-christine-blasey-ford-husband-statement-supreme-court-trump-a8556386.html

FFS.

talkingpointsmemo.com/news/trump-saw-himself-kavanaugh-performance-relished-opening-statement

Abby D. Phillip
@abbydphillip
WH officials fanning out on TV this morning to defend Kavanaugh: Sarah Sanders on GMA, Raj Shah on CNN, Mercedes Schlapp on Fox.
mobile.twitter.com/abbydphillip/status/1045629667666006016

Undecided
3 GOP
5 Dems

5 Dems!!!!

#MeToo:
John Dean
@JohnWDean
“Today, I have to say that I fear for the future,” Brett Kavanaugh said during his testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

“#MeToo,” Stephen Colbert shot back. I’m with Colbert!

Jill Wine-Banks
@JillWineBanks
I try to send something to make you sleep better, but tonight's cartoon may induce nightmares. Sace (sic) for the morning.
.(link: www.arcamax.com/politics/editorialcartoons/stevebenson/s-2128353) arcamax.com/politics/edito… #ArcaMax

Joyce Alene
Joyce Alene
@JoyceWhiteVance
It’s not just Mark Judge. It’s his former girlfriend. It’s the others allegedly at the party. Until everyone is interviewed under oath by FBI agents who can ask questions & follow up, we haven’t had the “fair process” Judge Kavanaugh insisted he wants.

Elana Schor
@eschor
Letter from Elizabeth Rasor, Mark Judge’s ex-girlfriend quoted in New Yorker article, to Judiciary Committee (first reptd in WaPo)
mobile.twitter.com/eschor/status/1045069479531749376/photo/1
mobile.twitter.com/JoyceWhiteVance/status/1045633961156923393

So the committee vote happens in about an hour. Political theatre all the way. The committee will rubber stamp their approval and take it to the full Senate for a vote tomorrow. That's where the real business will happen.

Gump the 5 Dems undecided could mean anything from wanting to give the appearance of non-partisanship whilst planning to vote 'no to the same 'Old Boy' mentality that appears to be a 'thing' world-wide with the 'elite' who attend private (public in the UK) schools and Ivy League (Oxbridge) universities. The Patricians 'hand together' for fear of the Plebeians realizing what they truly are. But we know, don't we?

The refrain that keeps going through my head this morning is the chant we were all chanting at the equality protests: "The whole world is watching".

Hang together, not hand! Although circle jerks do appear part of their modus operandi.

Dershowitz calls on GOP to postpone Kavanaugh vote until FBI can investigate
thehill.com/homenews/senate/408896-dershowitz-calls-on-gop-to-postpone-kavanaugh-vote-until-fbi-can-investigate

Per New Day, CNN, Bush43 is calling all the potential 'noes' this morning to pressure persuade them to vote for Kav.

Thanks for the explanation Across. I was taken aback that Dems would even dream of voting yes, not least because he betrayed a temperament that was far from suited to the SC. Though, while typing that I realise that 2 years ago we were saying something similar about Trump and yet ...

The whole world is indeed watching. I follow Le Monde on Twitter and they sent several tweets about the hearing yesterday.

Bollocks to Bush43

I haven't had time to look but I've seen somewhere (on here?) that the NYT and WaPo have editorials saying Kavanaugh should not be confirmed without the FBI investigating as does the American Bar Association.
That also seems to be the view of Morning Joe which has now pivoted back from being avidly pro Kavanaugh.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/sep/28/brett-kavanaugh-testimony-nominee-supreme-court?CMP=share_btn_tw

Marina Hyde on the hearings. She's funny, cruel and hones in on the key points sniffs

Anyone know what time the Senate Judiciary Committee vote will be? Not that I'm holding out much hope - I'd lay quite big money thay Flake will vote for him (while making a big deal about how difficult a decision it was for him), and the Senate will confirm after that. I'm pretty shocked at how these things are carried out - how can this be considered democratic, and in the service of justice, or even just an effective way of finding the best person??? (I never cease to be surprised by how politicised justice is in the US, and how that's just accepted as the norm.)

Flake is a yes according to MSNBC and a statement he has released.

Flame voting to confirm, statement just issued.

Flake ffs

It's happening now makerella and you are spot on about Flake.

Hardly a surprise mimi. He's well named.

Just call me Cassandra

What a shit justification, though - and how disingenuous to claim that it was about presumption of innocence when this wasn't a trial but a job interview. The issue wasn't whether to believe Kavanaugh or Ford, but whether K is the best person for the job, and is fit to serve on the USSC.

So now it's down to Collins and Murkowski? Because if only one of them votes yes (it if Manchin does, which he may well do now that Flake has), then it will be a tie and Pence will have the deciding vote, right? I bet none of them will have the backbone to vote no, so this is pretty much lost now

absent corroborating evidence is Flake's figleaf. Disgustingly dishonest process will get a disgustingly dishonest man appointed to the US highest court. All decency sacrificed on the altar of their political bigotry and in service of a corrupt and degenerate POTUS.

Watching the vote is awful.

Dems walking out while Grassley makes his self-serving statement. Feinstein is still there, but looked like Harris, Booker, Hirono and Blumenthal left.