Home | About | Donate

Here's "Something Bold" Democrats Can Do: Conduct the Kavanaugh Probe White House and GOP Refused to Have


Here's "Something Bold" Democrats Can Do: Conduct the Kavanaugh Probe White House and GOP Refused to Have

Jon Queally, staff writer

Following the final pronouncements by holdout lawmakers on Friday—namely Republican Susan Collins of Maine and Democrat Joe Manchin of West Virginia—that made it clear the U.S. Senate is almost assured to confirm Brett Kavanaugh to the U.S. Supreme Court in a vote on Saturday, outraged erupted among those who had opposed his nomination and vows to mobilize were issued to make sure that those who voted against the public interest would be held accountable in the upcoming mid-terms or in 2020.


I would welcome the Democrats finding both their spine and a modicum of integrity. But I’m not holding my breath. Paper tiger best describes what we laughingly refer to as the opposition party.

Their to constituents are the same as the of the GOP. Don’t expect bold from this lot of whimps, compromisers and appeasers. If there is no political or economic advantage to them personally, it won’t happen.

“The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it.”

  • George Bernard Shaw, author (1856-1950)


The boldest thing existing Democrats can do is Retire!


Total fantasy, here. The party establishment wouldn’t know bold if it bit them in their corporate asses. They can’t even convince their own Joe Manchin to vote against Kavanaugh. So much for bold.

Nope, the Democratic establishment isn’t going to continue to fight Kavanaugh for fear of alienating those mythical swing voters in the mid-terms. Yup, they’ll be chasing those same mythical swing voters - yet again - no matter how many times the strategy fails them.


“As what might be considered the first truly “illegitimate justice” on the Court, Fallon continued, Kavanaugh’s confirmation “will mark a point of no return for the Supreme Court’s reputation as the one, apolitical branch” of the U.S. government.”

While Gorsuch may not personally be as loathsome as Kavanaugh, his placement on the court was completely illegitimate. When the Republicans refused to consider the highly qualified Mr. Garland or even allow him a hearing, this country recklessly blew past the “point of no return for the Supreme Court’s reputation as the one, apolitical branch”. Along with Thomas and Alito (who doesn’t believe innocence should impede a person’s execution) we will now have FOUR sitting justices who are wholly unfit for their positions, and who should be targeted for impeachment as soon as the shift in the congress is accomplished.


Gray sez: “… Democrats might consider doing something bold, like publishing the results of an independent investigation into all the sources the FBI neglected to question …”

Oh, like O’Kavanaugh LLC? Hell, he’ll just plead the fifth.

Or drink it.


Coupling the word “Bold” with a picture of Schumer is hilarious!


Dems don’t have enough spine to hold their head up. That said, don’t stop calling. Jam the phone lines.


The time for bold action has passed. Brand D made no real effort to show Kavanaugh as the serial perjurer, war criminal and partisan hack that he is—likely because those charges could easily stick to more than a few of its leadership, Feinstein and Pelosi chief among them. A thorough investigation into his record would undoubtedly reveal D complicity with the crimes of Bush43/Cheney—“Let’s look forward, not backward.”


If it happens they could call it The Chuck Commission.


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA…oh…oops…sorry…I thought this was a piece of satire.


Yes. “Brazen” would have been more accurate.


Surely you set this up for someone so I’ll bite… “the UPchuck commission”! ha!


It would be great if it was the D party that held a comprehensive, complete set of interviews of everyone wanting to share. Later, after the election, some subpoenaed witnesses as well.
If the dem’s opt out, perhaps a news agency or private group.
We can look forward without ignoring past crimes in the wake.
The main theme here is for the left to take charge as best they can. not just stand with jaw dropped and hands in pockets.


Love the Shaw quote, thanks.


But I have to wonder whether, if Democrats held such a conference, whether the media would consider it news-worthy. I suspect they might just ignore it.


" Here’s “Something Bold” Democrats Can Do: Conduct the Kavanaugh Probe White House and GOP Refused to Have"

I don’t think the dems are going to do any of that. DiFi is prolly breathing a sigh of relief nobody started reakky digging into the Blasey Ford case. The original plan was the GOP would cave in right away and withdraw Kavanaugh with not many questions asked.


The Democrats aren’t in the majority and having an opportunity to have Justices that interpret what the Constitution says rather than what some people wished it says is the reason the people of this republic did not give the Democrats the majority.


I wish we could find another Franklin Roosevelt, who threated to increase the size of the Supreme Court when it was killing every proposal his administration made to bring us out of the depression by taxing the pigs at the trough their fair share in order to pay for the New Deal programs he proposed. Apparently there is no limit placed on the size of the Supreme Court by the US Constitution, so it seems logical that if these bastards in the GOP are going to play dirty politics to ensure their domination of said court, the Democrats would be perfectly justified to use this approach to even the playing field. Some updated New Deal programs would ensure that Democrats dominated our politics for a while to come. But, alas, for that to happen, one would have to assume that the Democrats actually gave a crap about “the Little People,” which they’ve made very clear they couldn’t care less for.


They did consider him and gave no action on that consideration. You can do that when you are the majority. You might note that they didn’t try to ruin the man. Did you know that he and Kavenaugh have voted together more than 90% of the time on appellate cases?