I’m not an optimist, and it was not optimism that led me to predict that Brett Kavanaugh would be out by the end of the week – it was pragmatism. Any pragmatic view of this tortured nomination process would show that Kavanaugh should be hung out to dry by both parties. Instead, the Republican caucus is bullying ahead with these ill-advised and asinine hearings. But those old, white Republican men are too cowardly to fulfill their constitutional requirements and question Dr. Christina Ford Blasey directly: they really are hiring a woman to do it.
Senate Republicans have hired a female attorney to use as a questioner of Christine Blasey Ford at Thursday’s high-stakes hearing on a sexual assault allegation against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh but are declining to release her name.
Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) told POLITICO on Tuesday that “we aren’t announcing the name for her safety.” Asked if Republicans have received any indication of threats to the attorney they’re preparing to use, Grassley said: “I don’t know, but I guess we’re just being cautious.”
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) – described by one Republican as “fired up” – was already warning his colleagues that he would keep the Senate in all weekend in order to have a final confirmation vote on Kavanaugh by early next week. The new Supreme Court term starts on Oct. 1.
“I’m confident we’re going to win, I’m confident that he will be confirmed in the very near future,” McConnell told reporters on Tuesday.
The Senate Judiciary Committee will vote on Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court at 9:30 a.m. on Friday, according to a notice sent out by the panel. The committee will choose whether to approve Kavanaugh’s nomination fewer than 24 hours after Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford appear before the panel to discuss Ford’s allegation that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her more than 30 years ago.
After several hours of bickering and fake secrecy, Grassley did release the name of the “questioner”: Arizona prosecutor Rachel Mitchell, who is the chief of the special victims division of the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office. I have to think that even thought Mitchell is a Republican, she too finds this whole process shady and idiotic, especially given that she has put in 26 years in the sex crimes division. The complete abdication of responsibility from the Republican men is something too, isn’t it?
Meanwhile, the Republicans are still blocking the FBI from investigating the new Kavanaugh accusers. Debbie Ramirez has told media outlets that she’s been trying to speak to the Senate Republicans about ALSO testifying, and they haven’t answered her calls. The Republicans on Judiciary are going to ram through a committee vote on FRIDAY and then McConnell swears up and down that the full Senate vote will be this weekend. And there is a legitimate chance that Republicans IN JUDICIARY might not have the votes, and that Kavanaugh won’t have the votes in the full Senate vote. Basically, the rest of this week is going to be a painful exercise in bulls–t.
Photos courtesy of Getty.
YOU DONT HAVE THE VOTES. YOU DONT HAVE THE VOTES. YOU’RE GONNA NEED CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL AND YOU DONT HAVE THE VOTES.
I really don’t think they have the votes. Or rather, I think McConnell is scared to death that the longer this drags on, the less likely he is to have the votes, so he wants to get it over and done with. I think Murkowski may already be a no, and I think Collins and Capito are pretty close to being a no (Capito went to Holton Arms, so I imagine this is all a little personal for her.)
Love it. I hope you’re right. Not so sure about Murkowski. Interesting piece in 538 yesterday about how opinions on this break down by party lines more than gender. It’s party before everything nowadays, wonder if these three can buck that trend.
and what’s truly sad is that it shouldn’t be a party thing OR a gender thing.
It should be a COMMON DECENCY thing. but the GOP ditched that a LONG time ago.
@whatwhat? If I had to pick one word for 2016’s tombstone it would be “should” 😢
I don’t see why anyone thinks Collins is a NO. She repeatedly has made it very clear she’s okay with Kavanaugh’s stance on Roe v Wade and other issues affecting women. She won’t do anything to jeopardize her new friendship with Princess Nagini. She’s a YES.
I think so too, LP.
Agreed. Maine is my home state. Her words usually represent the opposite of her actions.
Don’t count on collins for any clear thinking..she sez he told her he wouldn’t overturn roe v wade and she believes that..ignoring the fact that he has been groomed by a group for the job that have promised is to do just that. I hope Dr Ford points out how disrespectful it is for these antiques to refuse to speak to her..and remind them they work for us.
Well, he doesn’t plan to overturn Roe v Wade. He plans to overturn Griswold v Connecticut, which precedes Roe and is far broader. Our rights to any type of birth control are under fire.
Lightpurple it’s terrifying. Remember Paul Ryan gave that speech where he said that the birthrate is too low and we need to do something about it? What he really meant is that white people aren’t having enough babies to counteract the census Bureau’s assessment that white people will no longer be a majority by 2040. My question is, how are they going to force white women to have babies while simultaneously stopping POC from having babies? We’ve already seen them throw brown babies in cages, so NOTHING they come up with will surprise me. I’ll be horrified, but not surprised. We have to stop them now, before it’s too late.
Juls–I wouldn’t be surprised to see them start awarding extra points to potential immigrants who agree to be sterilized. Not sure how they will address POC who are American born citizens but I have no doubt they will find a way.
@ LP-Doesn’t the NASTY Women Act protect right to an abortion in Massachusetts?
@BoredBlonde-Permision to steal “antiques” to refer to these ancient old fools from this point on.
I’ve been so stressed out about Kavanaugh that can’t sleep. VOTE! Midterms are looking positive for Dems but we musn’t take anything for granted. We can rid the country of this horrific cancer but we MUST vote.
@ Kitten Yes, that law preserves the right to abortion in Mass if Roe is overturned. Without federal protection of the right to abortion, discretion will fall to individual states. Massachusetts made sure that current state law protects the right to abortion, with or without federal protection (Roe). Unfortunately many states never got rid of their antiquated anti-abortion laws once Roe made it a federal issue, thereby nullifying the state laws. Without Roe, some states will automatically go right back those antiquated laws. It would be a total sh*tshow.
And even worse, 4 states have done the opposite of what MA has done. Louisiana, Mississippi, North Dakota, and South Dakota have prepared for the overturning of Roe v. Wade with “trigger laws” that would automatically, instantly ban abortion in those states.
@stumpycorgi (aw corgis!) Thanks for all that info. I am so terrified for women in those states. It’s not just access to abortion but access to healthcare that is at risk of being taken away. Sigh…I’m a broken record but all I can say now is VOTE!
@ Kitten of course! I too am terrified. You are right. Overturning Roe would just be the beginning of a slippery slope into hell (and we are on that path already). I am enraged, I am in despair, I am overwhelmed. People still won’t wake up! It is a nightmare! Like you, all I can do is say vote like your lives depend on it, because they do! Sending good wishes is pretty pointless, so I will hope for more corgis and kittens in both our futures! 🤷🏻♀️👊🏻
This just keeps getting more deplorable by the day. Meanwhile, Bigly is on Twitter telling everyone to pray for Kavanaugh. And I had to cancel my own uncle who I went to visit last weekend because he supports Kavanaugh.
Also let me add that part of me is enraged they are outsourcing her questioning, to a prosecutor, and part of me is heartened by it because it tells me they know how good Kamala Harris is at this, and if Harris is going to do some questioning, they’re going to bring their own prosecutor.
I do think the fact that she is a prosecutor is turning people off, but if she’s a prosecutor, it means she’s used to going after the perps, and being gentle with the victims. I think she knows, if she wants to continue her career, she cant blatantly attack Ford. As a sex crimes prosecutor, she has to know the myriad of reasons why women don’t report.
I hope, at any rate.
I don’t think her being a prosecutor has anything to do with them being afraid of Kamala Harris. I think they bringing in a female prosecutor because they know their questions are going to be outrageous and they won’t look so bad coming from a female prosecutor as they would coming from themselves. I think it’s a sign they are really going to attack her.
That is why they are bringing in a female (which is ludicrous in itself, don’t get me wrong.) But at first they were talking about using their assistants or staff members to do the questioning. Someone must have realized THAT was a disaster waiting to happen.
I was a lawyer for +20 years. IMO, bringing in a female prosecutor to question Ford is all about optics. The GOP types aren’t afraid to question Ford but they think having a woman do it will make them look like (1) they aren’t anti-women (as if!) and (2) they are more compassionate than they really are generally (another as if!).
I don’t know anything about this prosecutor but I am generally surprised she would take on the job. And I’m not talking about any sisterhood forever thing. The job looks like it will be entirely distasteful and petty in how the task will have to be done (i.e. her instructions from her client, the GOP). A prosecutor can always tell themselves that they are on the side of the angels protecting innocent victims but what the hell is she telling herself in defending rich, white misogynists?
I say the GOP should wear their true colours for better or worse at this hearing (we’re rich, white males and we’re not going to take it anymore!) and not send in a woman to do their dirty work. But hey, she volunteered.
That’s what I was worried about. The GOP is notorious for using women in this way.
It infuriates me that my tax dollars are being used in this matter. Those misogynists collect nice salaries at our expense and this is their job. They’re bringing in a token woman from outside because they know they can’t be trusted to not ask piggy questions with the CSPan cameras rolling. And for Grassley to think he could keep the name of someone being paid with our tax money secret is absurd. Who the hell does he think he is?
Rachel Mitchell worked for Joe Arpaio. Don’t expect compassion or kindness or decency from her. Those pigs know who they chose.
She worked with Arpaio? Barf.
Yeah, I’m afraid the fix is in with this prosecutor. It’s beyond infuriating.
As someone said on Twitter, if they need to bring a woman in for this, maybe they should just have women do their entire jobs for them. Made me feel better…for about a minute. And then despair set in, knowing whose side she is on.
And it’s insulting to both women that they do this.
They’re 19th century slaveholders who try to project an image of ‘protecting the ladies’ from harsh treatment but in reality they’re cruel bastards who’ll whip anyone that dares defy them.
Choosing someone who worked for Sheriff Joe – bet she put her hand up first for the assignment.
She didn’t work for Arpaio. Arpaio was a sheriff. Mitchell is a prosecutor. Prosecutors don’t work for cops.
I sincerely hope this backfires of the Republicans and that this woman will do her job unbiased.
She has been working with victims of sexual crimes for almost 3 decades. She has seen her fair share of perverts and hardcore criminals.
She’s a follower of Arpaio.
@ Lightpurple : Well, Arpaio IS a pervert and hardcore criminal.
There is no reason to trust her. This is exactly what Grassley wants: to project an image that they chose someone who is what you say.
The very fact that they chose HER — and that she said yes –makes me mistrust her.
If they chose a sex-crimes expert who worked for, say, a Democratic DA from Massachusetts … then I’d have a better feel about it. But it would still be all wrong. The format is wrong. The message is wrong. I’m not going to watch because I’m cringing for Dr. Ford already – they have done their best to set her up.
She was a prosecutor for Maricopa county, though. I can pretty much guarantee she doesn’t GAF about victims rights. AZ is infamous for a reason…
This is a win-win situation for the GOP and for this prosecutor. If she does what they want, which is to eviscerate Dr. Ford, Kavanaugh will be approved. He will strip women’s rights away with glee. Victims nationwide will see that they have to worry about the prosecution ripping them to shreds in addition to the defense attorneys, so even less women will report sexual assaults, so perps will be more emboldened to assault with less fear of reprisal. This prosecutor will no longer be trusted to handle cases in AZ, sure. But she can go into private practice defending sexual assailants, make a lot more money than she does now, and tout her experience from the prosecution perspective to help her clients win cases. Sorry to be a Debbie-downer, I hope I didn’t terrify everybody.
I said something very similar below, but… I would not take any comfort from the fact that she has extensive experience handling sex crimes. Her expertise could very well make her an effective villain. Yeah, she most likely knows a lot about how trauma works, how the justice system re-traumatizes victims, the power and destruction of rape myths, sleazy intimidating tactics used against victims at trial, etc…. and that knowledge may be what makes her a very effective enemy of victims. Prosecutors are not the “good guys.”
Personal anecdote: My ex specialized in environmental law. He got hired by a huge corporate law firm with a huge salary (after f*cking the recruiter, BTW), because of his specialized knowledge. He works for the bad guys now.
Let’s not make any assumptions about this woman without the facts.
Well what I think is going on is that the Republicans know they don’t have the votes.
They also personally don’t want Kavanaugh confirmed as the Supreme Court Judge. However, the Republican bass is almost 100 percent behind Trump so the Republican Senate cannot publically refuse to try and confirm Kavanaugh.
This way, Kavanaugh won’t be confirmed and the Republican base will be enraged to go out and vote in November. This will show Republican Senate as heroes but Democrats as villains for them.
Either way, Republicans are going to be vanquished this November as the remaining population are finally ready to vote. The silent majority will come out in force as they saw the consequences of not voting or voting third party in 2016.
Avenatti also confirmed his client is impeccable and evidence of the rape. Kavanaugh is finished either way and if Republicans confirm him, they are doomed in November as well.
After 3 years, karma is finally here for those vile Republican Senators especially McConnell the Satan.
I think they do have the votes. I don’t see who is going to vote NO. Flake always votes party line and Collins is pretty firmly in Kavanaugh’s corner.
I agree. Collins has consistently betrayed herself and her constituency; she is a right-wing Republican with an increasingly bad image problem. Flake said he’s ready to go ahead. This is bad.
They absolutely do, Susan Collins is already trying to justify why she will vote for him.
Avenatti is showboating, it’s making me mad because he is distracting and producing no one and nothing! He needs to get his person out there today if he has someone.
Agree about Avenatti, I am so done with him. And I used to like him.
But Maya may be right about them not having the votes. Politico reported yesterday that they don’t, but McConnell is pretending he does, bluffing and blustering his way through, because if he let’s it be known he doesn’t have the votes, that will embolden shaky yes’s to peel off. I don’t know though. So much bad reporting surrounds us right now. A lot of planted stories.
If Avenatti does not have the client that he said he has, then his “career” in politics will – and should – be over. He’s a big risk taker and we have to hope he didn’t go over the edge on this one.
I think he would have been out there with this client, and these “multiple witnesses” already. I think he got taken.
He just released something. If true it’s really, really bad.
Hold on – he just posted the information about his client and she is very real!
Say what you will about Avenatti, he always produces – and he’s the only person Trump has never taken a shot at on Twitter. Why is that?
Wow, looks like he does have a client.
It does. And it’s a horrible, disqualifying story, and honestly, this man should be in jail. I did lose faith in Avanetti, because he is a showboater, and I have lost faith in all white men, basically. But I now eat my words.
I can handle his showboating for now, because he’s the one who has been poking holes in everything publicly while Mueller works quietly on the Russia front. So far, he’s not been wrong. And, the fact that Trump has never called him names leads me to believe that the Cheeto is afraid of him. Good.
He dropped the receipts. DAYUM.
I have really mixed feelings about Avenatti but I wouldn’t be surprised if he was intentionally timing the release of the victim’s allegations. I mean, it doesn’t invalidate her accusations–it’s just smart lawyering.
And, on another note, how are all these guys such a 1980s preppy movie villain stereotype? It’s like they all came off the same boat shoe/sweater vest/sex pest conveyor belt. *shudder*
Calling James Spader and Billy Zabka…time to dust off the polo shirts for the inevitable HBO or Netflix series.
WOW, that affidavit. Wow. So he’s a Bill Cosby, drugging girls and raping them.
The first two victims’ stories were attempted sexual assault. This one is rape. With drugging. Of multiple girls.
I’m not surprised, but ug. Wow. He really is as sleazy and evil as I first suspected.
I read an a several weeks-old article about MA yesterday, and it seemed to restore my gut feeling that he really does have a longstanding desire (fire, actually) to help the underdog. His first wife described him as someone so driven that she didn’t think he ever really relaxed. He seems to have remained the course throughout his legal career.
Not that he is infallible, but he does seem to deliver. And he plays the media game far better than Bigly.
Let’s face it, showboating is what it takes today. “When they go low, we go high” doesn’t work any more (I cried watching that speech btw). The game has totally changed. While Avenatti’s timing MAY be strategic, let’s not forget that this entire timeline is designed by men for men. Many survivors need decades to process their trauma, to feel able to speak, and have their own totally valid reasons to come forward or not, whenever they are ready. The GOP was fine with leaving that SC seat open for a year. The only reason it’s so “urgent” now is because they want to push it through before more of Kavanaugh’s skeletons come to light, and because they are afraid of the blue wave. Their urgency demanded urgent retaliation. This on them.
@stumpycorgi–Yeah exactly. His showboating is a big part of what makes him such a perfect foil to narcissistic, bloviating Trump.
@ Christin-That is reassuring to hear. I follow him on Twitter and I’m really attracted to him (I can’t help it!) but I never really took the time to research his career so I basically only know what he’s been able to accomplish in the Trump era. Anyway, he’s doing some amazing work so for now at least, I’m Team Avenatti for sure.
Please.
I mean, they are too chickenshit but really all this is is window dressing again. Because a female couldn’t POSSIBLY be hard on other women. They remember, because apparently everyone else forgot, how many women voted for 45.
If they’ve handpicked her, it’s because they know they have nothing to worry about. Kavanagh is going to be confirmed on Friday and they will do anything to make that happen.
@ grabby hands : I agree. The GOP are bringing in a closer they can count on, someone who has no moral qualms about what is involved. I firmly believe that many women do not vote (or act) based on gender but vote (or act) based on class (upper class, lower class, middle class). This prosecutor will do what she believes is “necessary” to get the job done.
Yep. She’s a PROSECUTOR above all. The mere fact that they believe it’s appropriate to bring in a prosecutor — who will question only the accuser, not the accused — says it all.
I agree this is a disgusting and unprecedented manipulation of the confirmation process. The fact that this woman is a prosecutor is not really material IMO. Both prosecutors and defense attorneys have the same job to do, though prosecutors have huge advantages. Prosecutors have the discretion to pursue or drop certain charges, which gives them a lot of power in the criminal justice system. Combined with broad police discretion, these two issues are a huge foundational flaw in our justice system IMO. Prosecutors have the full support of the police. So no, she did not work FOR Arapio, but she worked with him. If she decided to pursue cases based on his unethical investigations, that is a huge red flag. I would look at which cases this prosecutor has chosen to pursue, and how she pursued them, to get a sense of who she is.
I would not take any comfort from the fact that she has extensive experience handling sex crimes. Her expertise could very well be the opposite of what we hope. Yeah, she most likely knows a lot about how trauma works, how the justice system re-traumatizes victims, the power and destruction of rape myths, sleazy tactics used against victims at trial, etc…. and that knowledge may be what makes her a very effective enemy of victims.
The republicans have the votes. The press is giving Susan Collins, Lisa M, and Jeff Flake too much credit. These 3 always vote the same way as the other republicans. The press is once again failing us. Collins, Lisa, and Flake have no intention of doing the right thing.
The democrats are playing too nice with Chuck. Why do they keep letting him get away with so much? Chuck keeps going on about how the Democrats are causing problems, but no one mentions how Chuck and Lindsay Graham wrote the recommendation to bring charges against Christopher S for writing the dossier. There is a reason why Chuck withheld BK’s documents from the Democrats. Chuck knows that there are more women. What about BK’s debt? Does he also have ties to Russia because no one can figure out who paid off his debt.
The prosecutor Rachel Mitchell has a questionable past, it was reported that she helped Joe A cover up sex crimes.
I was cautiously hopeful when I read the woman was a *real* prosecutor and not some Washington political-corporate-lobby hack. In a purely dispassionate chess-playing way, I understand the dilemma these Republican senators have gotten themselves into – damned with women if they vote one way, damned with their base if they vote another.
I *want* to believe that they brought in this bulldog female attorney to get some answers out of Kavanaugh that they’re too chickenshit to do themselves and then they can vote NO and point to their base and mumble “conservative values and law and order and BlueLivesMatter… look over there! Is that a kneeling brown person we need to deport?” It’s their only “best” move left right now to attempt to skate down the middle and not get slaughtered in November.
But yeah, not optimistic either. Because when they showed us who they are, I believed them.
Well here’s the thing…why do they need a “real prosecutor” to do anything if she isn’t questioning the accused? This simply puts Dr. Ford on trial, which is exactly what Dr. Ford and her lawyers tried to avoid. They put her in an impossible position. Don’t fall for it.
The prosecutor works for Sheriff Joe in Arizona. You really think she’s on the side of the angels?
Effing COWARDS, DUMB-Arses, and creeps! “We are going to win”???? Not even trying to hide the fact that this is just a game and not interested in appointing someone credible!
Exactly! This is not a freakin’ game, it is the future of our country and the lives of actual real people.
They have ALL sexually assaulted women at one point or another. Otherwise, why defend such behavior? My husband has never sexually assaulted anyone nor ever attempted to, and he’s disgusted by how these men are acting.
So that’s my first thought whenever men defend other men over these accusations: they’ve done it themselves.
Get rid of all of them. VOTE.
Nailed it. I have been thinking EXACTLY the same thing. They all came off the same conveyor belt that someone mentioned above.
Michael Avenatti just released the information about his client, Accuser #3, and she is very, very real. And her affidavit is very, very disturbing.
and it also really takes a swing at that slug Mark Judge.
That same aging frat-bro was discovered hiding out at a friend’s beach house in Delaware yesterday. A reporter found his car piled up with clothing and comic books.
Disgusting. Of course he’s a neckbeard.
Isn’t she the one who went to the police?
It’s HORRIFIC. She is alleging gang-raped after getting drugged, among other horrible things. Kavanaugh is repulsive, unfit to be a SCJ, and this nomination MUST be stopped.
He’s unfit to serve in any capacity as a judge or in law enforcement, period.
Let me ask this of any legal beagles on here: can he be disbarred or have his legal degree rescinded by his law school based on enough evidence? Would that not automatically disqualify him for SCOTUS without a vote even taking place?
Not really a legal beagle, but as far as I know there are no prerequisites for being a Justice, technically one doesn’t even need to be a lawyer, let alone a judge. Almost all have been judges or esteemed attorneys, but that is tradition more than anything. I read an article a few years ago that made an argument for appointing a non-lawyer (IE a history professor or ethics expert), but realistically such a nominee would never survive the confirmation process. It’s an interesting idea though.
Justices have to follow a code of conduct and his behavior is questionable. So yes he can be impeached.
Republicans don’t care, at all, in fact there is deep hate int that party toward women.
This latest allegation, which squares with what has been said during the past few days, is horrifying. They must be investigated before there is any vote.
Will it make a difference? I really hope it does, but I have no confidence in the GOP.
They aren’t chicken, they don’t want to be confronted with the truth so they can continue to hide behind their lies, the liar in chief & manipulate their base. They are giving their base exactly what they want, Republicans behaving like their true self, which is scummy manipulative behavior. They want to maintain their narrative and know if they question her publicly it reveals their plan and their tactics. Also, add on they simply don’t care about the law or the justice system They have zero morals and don’t in the end care about this country, in fact they want to reinvent it and that first step is through the courts. They are at the end of the day, fascists try to overthrow the law as we know it, one judge at a time. .
If he gets confirmed, I’ll vomit and then rage out for a while. I just can’t. I CAN’T.
I saw a tweet from a woman that said that she felt like women are all holding all this anger and fear in their bodies and that it feels like it’ll start coming out of our mouths as BEES.
Vote, y’all. Not just this November. Vote like your lives depend on it, because it does. Or your daughter’s life does. Or her daughter.
I was really happy to see the go slow request from the Mormon women’s coalition.
I’ve read her statement and it’s absolutely horrifying. I don’t doubt her, esp given the legality of her signing it. And I’m beyond opposed to K and the whole Gross Old Perverts “party,” a question tho, she says she went to several parties where she saw guys lined up to do this — but does it seem weird she’d keep going to parties like that? Or is that just what people did then? Like there was one big party to go to, and you went to be part of the scene?
This was the 80’s and 90’s, this went on in California too. Both in high school and college.
There was. FFFFF thing here too. This shit was common.
Most of us had friends and went in groups and we had safety rules, these @ssholes would go after the outsider chicks or the ones who’s slutty friend would leave with some guy Leaving the lone girl at risk.
House parties were a huge thing, no parents, lots of drinking, and in California lots of pool parties and tons of beach parties so you’d already be partially undressed.
You went because everyone went.