Just before the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh, when it was clear that the smear campaign had failed, Dems all but abandoned the phony charges of sexual assault. In the last couple of days before their efforts collapse, the narrative shifted to “temperament.” As Cory Booker infamously stated, the charade was never really about Kavanaugh’s guilt or innocence. It was about the fact that he was seen as a judicial conservative.
Even the supposed conservatives in the ever-dwindling NeverTrump camp agreed
Booker, and other Dems, begged and pleaded: Just withdraw him, and select one of the other, more qualified, names from the President’s list.
Even the supposed conservatives in the ever-dwindling NeverTrump camp agreed: Who cares if it’s unfair to an innocent man? He needed to be pulled and replaced.
Fortunately, Trump ignored Kristol’s “destroying an innocent man’s life is good for the constitution” hot take. He stuck by his nominee and the rest is history. But, for the sake of argument, let’s ask the question. What if he hadn’t? What would have happened if Trump had acquiesced and chosen another name from his list?
If I had to vote today, I think I’d be a No. This may be unfair to Kavanaugh; and it sets a bad precedent re unverified allegations. But given where we are, wouldn’t a future Court with a different constitutionalist justice be healthier for the nation—and for constitutionalism?
There is no one – no one at all – that Trump could put forward who Democrats would have welcomed
I’ll tell you: The exact same thing.
There is no one – no one at all – that Trump could put forward who Democrats would have welcomed. If you suggest otherwise, you’re either shilling or you’re wrong. ANY strict constructionist judge would have faced the same media circus, some variation of the smear campaign, and the same outright hatred.
That’s because this was never about Kavanaugh – it was about the Democrats’ now-diminished ability to shred our founding document.
To make this point, Lindsey Graham appeared on Fox News Sunday with a copy of President Trump’s judicial nominee list. He dared Chuck Schumer to name 5, 3, or even just one judge that he and his Democrat minions would find acceptable.
Graham will never do this, because – as Graham correctly states – this is isn’t about qualifications. It’s about overturning the results and impact of an election.
Just before the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh, when it was clear that the smear campaign had failed, Dems all but abandoned the phony charges of sexual assault. In the last couple of days before their efforts collapse, the narrative shifted to “temperament.” As Cory Booker infamously stated, the charade was never really about Kavanaugh’s guilt or innocence. It was about the fact that he was seen as a judicial conservative.
