• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

A Senator Walker would be an insult to the state and the nation.

I’ve spoken to my cat about this, but it doesn’t seem to do any good.

Insiders who complain to politico: please report to the white house office of shut the fuck up.

Republicans are the party of chaos and catastrophe.

Our job is not to persuade republicans but to defeat them.

“Squeaker” McCarthy

Let there be snark.

Everybody saw this coming.

They traffic in fear. it is their only currency. if we are fearful, they are winning.

You don’t get to peddle hatred on saturday and offer condolences on sunday.

Some judge needs to shut this circus down soon.

Putting aside our relentless self-interest because the moral imperative is crystal clear.

Accountability, motherfuckers.

I did not have telepathic declassification on my 2022 bingo card.

Incompetence, fear, or corruption? why not all three?

Sitting here in limbo waiting for the dice to roll

We’ve had enough carrots to last a lifetime. break out the sticks.

John Fetterman: Too Manly for Pennsylvania.  Paid for by the Oz for Senator campaign.

Their freedom requires your slavery.

Being the leader of the world means to be the leader of peace.

if you can’t see it, then you are useless in the fight to stop it.

We cannot abandon the truth and remain a free nation.

We are aware of all internet traditions.

Nancy smash is sick of your bullshit.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Open Threads / Highlight Trump’s malfeasance at Barrett confirmation hearings?

Highlight Trump’s malfeasance at Barrett confirmation hearings?

by Betty Cracker|  September 29, 202012:49 pm| 268 Comments

This post is in: Open Threads, Politics

FacebookTweetEmail

Tom Sullivan at Digby’s blog posted an interesting idea on how the Senate Dems might handle the upcoming Barrett hearings, given that they are numerically powerless to stop Republicans from confirming the judge. Sullivan says the concept originated on history prof Bill Svelmoe’s FB page, and the gist is to turn the hearings into The Trump Show, with Democrats using examples of Trump admin malfeasance to elicit responses on legal questions. An excerpt:

Judge Barrett, would you please explain the emoluments clause in the Constitution. [She does.] Judge Barrett, if a president were to refuse to divest himself of his properties and, in fact, continue to steer millions of dollars of tax payer money to his properties, would this violate the emoluments clause?

Then simply go down the list of specific cases in which Trump and his family of grifters have used the presidency to enrich themselves. Ask her repeatedly if this violates the emoluments clause. Include of course using the American ambassador to Britain to try to get the British Open golf tournament at a Trump property. Judge Barrett, does this violate the emoluments clause?

It’s not a bad idea. The Trump admin is one long carnival of criminality, so the Dems wouldn’t run out of source material: Hatch Act violations, refusal to comply with congressional oversight, the Ukraine shake-down, family separations at the border, etc.

As Svelmoe put it, flipping the script this way would weaponize Barrett’s “supposed good character and keen legal mind against the administration that has nominated her. Let her either convict Trump or embarrass herself by trying to weasel out of convicting Trump. Either way, it’ll be great television …”

Sounds like a solid idea. What say you? Open thread.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « I’m not the cat I used to be, I’ve got a kid
Next Post: I’m Only Watching the Debate Because the Potential Exists for Trump to Stroke Out and Drop Dead »

Reader Interactions

268Comments

  1. 1.

    geg6

    September 29, 2020 at 12:54 pm

    I LIKE IT!!!!!!!!!!

    Make her humiliate herself or show herself for the upstanding, intelligent, honorable handmaiden she claims to be.

  2. 2.

    westcoastranger

    September 29, 2020 at 12:54 pm

    That’s just good business. What an amazing idea.

  3. 3.

    randy khan

    September 29, 2020 at 12:55 pm

    Interesting idea.  In practice, she’d repeatedly say that she can’t comment on cases that might come before the court or on hypotheticals.  (Sometimes it even would be true.)  But the spectacle of her not responding to the questions could be helpful.

  4. 4.

    MisterForkbeard

    September 29, 2020 at 12:56 pm

    Eh. I think she’d just say “I can’t comment on potential cases, and it’s a complicated subject. I will not compromise myself or my judicial ethics by weighing in on a hypothetical.” Rinse, repeat.

  5. 5.

    different-church-lady

    September 29, 2020 at 12:56 pm

    It’s a fascinating idea: use the hearings as negative ads. If effective, the cost of this SCOTUS seat is the presidency. The only stategic response for the GOP would be to postpone confirmation hearings to after the election, at which isn’t soon enough for Barrett to be voting in any immediate ratfucking.

  6. 6.

    Another Scott

    September 29, 2020 at 12:57 pm

    Sounds good to me, but it might be getting into the weeds too much for good sound bites on TV (which, like it or not, sway public opinion).

    Schumer has been beating on health care. That probably needs to be part of any questioning of her, since we know that she’s being rammed through to have her on the bench when the ACA case is taken up in November.

    Dems are fighting for the new House COVID-relief bill.

    The Senate GOP has slammed on the brakes as Americans died of COVID—but they’re slamming their feet on the gas to ram through a justice to rip away Americans’ health care in this pandemic.

    Dems are fighting for health care.

    — Chuck Schumer (@SenSchumer) September 29, 2020

    True, short, to the point, and something that the vast majority of Americans care about.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  7. 7.

    trollhattan

    September 29, 2020 at 1:00 pm

    “Something, something, stare decisis. I do not deal in hypotheticals.”

    She’s not falling for it, not even a little. The last few nominees have all learned to sidestep the “woman’s right to choose” queries and will not even weigh in on whether Brown vs. Board of Education was properly decided. [Spoiler: judicial overreach!]

    I expect three days of “I may or may not like beer.”

  8. 8.

    Kay

    September 29, 2020 at 1:00 pm

    I love the incredible arrogance that says everyone in the country has to hold their breath and hope one or another far Right judge doesn’t snatch away their healthcare coverage.

    I mean, Jesus. The nerve of these people. Ten years they’ve been threatening us.

    This person, chosen by Donald Trump and rubberstamped by a far Right Congress, could take her seat on that court immediately after the public rejects Donald Trump and the far Right Congress and none of them care a whit. Not only are they not worried about it, they are petulantly demanding we all embrace it. It’s just too much. They make too many threats and too many demands.

  9. 9.

    Felanius Kootea

    September 29, 2020 at 1:01 pm

    I think this is an excellent idea!  Watch her squirm.

     

    Someone on the thread below mentioned the Lincoln Project ad featuring Captain Sullenberger.  It is a thing of beauty.

  10. 10.

    different-church-lady

    September 29, 2020 at 1:01 pm

    @MisterForkbeard: It’s not about her answers: it’s about the questions.

  11. 11.

    patrick II

    September 29, 2020 at 1:02 pm

    It is a great idea. I would like to hear which Heritage legal position supports that kidnapping and caging of children if the president says it’s O.K.

    Does that legal principle support the cost of the (known) six children who lost their lives?

  12. 12.

    Baud

    September 29, 2020 at 1:03 pm

    Pounding a shoe on the table worked for Khrushchev.  Might be worth a shot.

  13. 13.

    Kay

    September 29, 2020 at 1:05 pm

    She’s not going to answer any of the questions she’s asked.

    She doesn’t have to. They’ve already announced they’re all voting for her. She has a really thin record so they have no earthly idea what she’ll do once she’s on, but this is no more a “hearing” than I’m a kangeroo.

    But since pulling this off was a wholly political power play, I have no objection to Democrats using the “hearing” that is not a hearing as a platform for politics. That only seems fair. Half the country should be heard.

  14. 14.

    Yutsano

    September 29, 2020 at 1:06 pm

    @Baud: I…don’t think that would be a good look for Amy Coney Barrett…

  15. 15.

    Kent

    September 29, 2020 at 1:06 pm

    I’m no great expert on these things.  But it seems to me that Trump’s malfeasances are completely baked into the political environment these days.  Everyone in the US pretty much already has a solidified opinion about Trump himself.

    What I think is much less known (because of the media malpractice) is the extent to which the GOP at the state and federal level is STILL actively trying to destroy the ACA and strip medical care from tens of millions of Americans.  This is FAR FAR more consequential to most Americans than emoluments.

    I would spend every damn moment of the hearings probing the ACA which Barrett has a history of writings about.  Paint her as a far right radical who wants to strip ordinary Americans of their health insurance in the middle of the pandemic and just fucking let them die.  And by extension, tie that onto Trump.

    If she doesn’t outright promise to uphold the ACA then rip her to fucking shreds in hearings and in ads, and tie the whole thing to Trump.

    We won 2018 on health insurance.  That’s how we win 2020 as well.  Because only the most truly vile dead enders actually want to strip health insurance from their fellow Americans.

  16. 16.

    MattF

    September 29, 2020 at 1:08 pm

    Everyone agrees that Barrett is brilliant, so no doubt she’d find a way around those lines of questions. Trying to outsmart her or embarrass her will be futile and it’s a bad look. I think Ds should keep banging away at healthcare and, yes, reproductive rights. It’s not just abortion— there’s there’s a long list of connected issues there, including insurance for contraception, childcare, and women’s health.

  17. 17.

    Soprano2

    September 29, 2020 at 1:10 pm

    @Kay:  I love the incredible arrogance that says everyone in the country has to hold their breath and hope one or another far Right judge doesn’t snatch away their healthcare coverage.

    I mean, Jesus. The nerve of these people. Ten years they’ve been threatening us.

    This person, chosen by Donald Trump and rubberstamped by a far Right Congress, could take her seat on that court immediately after the public rejects Donald Trump and the far Right Congress and none of them care a whit. Not only are they not worried about it, they are petulantly demanding we all embrace it. It’s just too much. They make too many threats and too many demands.

    It’s how they’re trying to cement what they believe is their God-given right to rule over all of us regardless of what the majority of us want. I think they truly believe this is for the best for everyone, and that the majority is too stupid to know what’s best for it. It’s the worst kind of autocratic overreach, but unfortunately it’s probably going to affect us for at least the next 10 years. I think this hyperbole about having a conservative majority “for a generation” is over-the-top. Who knows what will happen to people, after all Scalia just dropped dead way ahead of when people probably thought he would die. They all talk as if Clarence Thomas and Alito are going to live 30 more years.

  18. 18.

    mrmoshpotato

    September 29, 2020 at 1:11 pm

    @MisterForkbeard: Or, to put it another way – Out-Alberto Gonzalez Alberto Gonzalez.

  19. 19.

    Sab

    September 29, 2020 at 1:11 pm

    @Another Scott: GOP is already working on tjat. Reuters has an article up right now about how ACA might not actually be all that much at risk.. Every legal expert the article quotes has been involved in anti-ACA litigation. Really balanced there. Author’s name is Lawrence Hurley.

  20. 20.

    Shalimar

    September 29, 2020 at 1:12 pm

    The hypotheticals dodge in particular drives me nuts.  You’re a judge.  If you had pulled that “won’t answer hypotheticals” bullshit on the Bar Exam, you wouldn’t even be a lawyer.

  21. 21.

    Kent

    September 29, 2020 at 1:12 pm

    @randy khan:Interesting idea.  In practice, she’d repeatedly say that she can’t comment on cases that might come before the court or on hypotheticals.  (Sometimes it even would be true.)  But the spectacle of her not responding to the questions could be helpful.

    She’s already on the record opposing the ACA and calling for it’s repeal.  Dems should just take her at her actual fucking word that she wants to strip heath care from tens of millions of Americans and just dare her to contract them

    Don’t try to get an actual answer out of her.  Just say.  We already KNOW your position because you told us.  Don’t you have any shame about wanting to strip health care away from millions?

  22. 22.

    Kay

    September 29, 2020 at 1:13 pm

    I predict this fake hearing will be 50% Republicans speechifying on her brilliance and promoting the far Right agenda, so, absolutely, Democrats should counter.

    That’s what it’s about and that’s ALL it’s about.

  23. 23.

    bystander

    September 29, 2020 at 1:14 pm

    I don’t get Dem Senators saying they won’t talk to her.  Why pass up the chance to ask her if she realizes how out of touch with Americans she is?  How fringe her legal gyrations and double talk are?  Over and over again.

  24. 24.

    James E Powell

    September 29, 2020 at 1:14 pm

    Democrats need to use the next week or so to inform the nation that Barrett is a right-wing radical who uses her fringe Catholic ideas to shield her from criticism. She is on record on a number of issues. She is eager to impose her extreme right-wing religious views on the whole nation. And the Republicans are trying to jam her onto the court because they know the majority of the country do not agree with her extreme right-wing views and would prefer a justice who is more like the majority of Americans.

    It’s not going to stop the Republicans, but it could make give what they are doing more impact in the election. Repeat it over and over: Banning abortion is not just her opinion, it is the central goal of her entire legal philosophy. Republicans want her to vote to get rid of ACA because they know they will never have the votes to do it in the congress.

  25. 25.

    Ruckus

    September 29, 2020 at 1:14 pm

    I like it.

    Either she answers in ways that screw her or her benefactor, in ways make her look ineffective, or refuses to answer at all, which makes her look petty. Now republicans will think that makes her look smart because she’s owning the dems.

    And given the situation, that may be as good as it gets because nothing is going to stop mitch from ramming this through. Except republican defectors. And I’ll be very surprised if that happens.

  26. 26.

    trollhattan

    September 29, 2020 at 1:18 pm

    @Kay:

    Remembering Lindsay Graham practically bursting into tears apologizing to Li’l Brett for what big meanies those Democrat Party people were to him, I can only imagine the shitfest they have in store for us this time. “You’re being mean, to a girl!“

  27. 27.

    Kent

    September 29, 2020 at 1:19 pm

    @Shalimar:The hypotheticals dodge in particular drives me nuts.  You’re a judge.  If you had pulled that “won’t answer hypotheticals” bullshit on the Bar Exam, you wouldn’t even be a lawyer.

    Asking hypotheticals in this sort of hearing is the wrong way go about it.  You lay out their actual positions and make them deny them.  And when they don’t you pounce.

    “Yes or No.  Are you willing to tell the American people that you won’t vote to strip health care from tens of millions of their fellow citizens?

    That’s how you ask those sorts of questions.

  28. 28.

    geg6

    September 29, 2020 at 1:20 pm

    @bystander:

    The meetings aren’t public, so why bother with the bullshit she’ll be flinging in private?  I wouldn’t meet with her because she’s an illegitimate nominee whose views are a given.  Fuck that nonsense.

  29. 29.

    Ruckus

    September 29, 2020 at 1:20 pm

    @Kent:

    I like it.

    She is, as a number have stated, for ending the ACA. Make her own that. Officially. Openly.

  30. 30.

    Sab

    September 29, 2020 at 1:20 pm

    @trollhattan: At least she won’t be able to bring her spouse in to be tearful, like Alito did, or are GOP men now allowed to cry in public?

  31. 31.

    Sebastian

    September 29, 2020 at 1:22 pm

    This is so good I would pay to watch it.

  32. 32.

    geg6

    September 29, 2020 at 1:22 pm

    @Sab:

    Kavanaugh did, so it must be okay.

  33. 33.

    Lavocat

    September 29, 2020 at 1:22 pm

    It sure as fuck is better than not showing up at all (Josh Marshall’s advice, over at Talking Points memo), which is akin to having a temper tantrum and screaming “NOT FAIR!”. You know what’s better than not showing up to do your fucking job? ANYTHING!

  34. 34.

    Betty Cracker

    September 29, 2020 at 1:24 pm

    @Felanius Kootea: That’s a really good ad.

  35. 35.

    J.

    September 29, 2020 at 1:24 pm

    I LOVE this, but I fear, as many of the previous commenters noted, that she will avoid answering these questions. But it would make for good TV!

  36. 36.

    jonas

    September 29, 2020 at 1:25 pm

    As Svelmoe put it, flipping the script this way would weaponize Barrett’s “supposed good character and keen legal mind against the administration that has nominated her

    That she even accepted her nomination under the present circumstances belies the notion that she had any character to begin with…

  37. 37.

    Immanentize

    September 29, 2020 at 1:25 pm

    It would be a good strategy — but the emoluments clause is the weakest sauce ever.  Go to easy things like the recently decided (by SCOTUS) tax return cases.  Or to the standard used to find the Commerce Department violated set administrative procedures regarding the census.  Or the administrative vacancies Act.  Cases already decided, but which Trump keeps violating.

    Also, I want her explanation why she publicly argued that Garland should not be considered but she should?

  38. 38.

    Sloane Ranger

    September 29, 2020 at 1:27 pm

    @randy khan: This!

  39. 39.

    Kent

    September 29, 2020 at 1:27 pm

    @Ruckus: I like it.

    She is, as a number have stated, for ending the ACA. Make her own that. Officially. Openly.

    Exactly.  Don’t fuck around with hypotheticals.  You just wrap her position and that of her party around her neck and make it public.  Let her deny it if she wants.  And if she tries to wiggle out of it you pounce.

    Apply the same thing to all of the GOP senators in the hearing. Let them fucking try to defend stripping health care from millions.

  40. 40.

    Immanentize

    September 29, 2020 at 1:27 pm

    @Lavocat: agree.  I want Josh M to point to any group that won a political argument by deciding to boycott an election.  That move has loser stink all over it.

  41. 41.

    Jeffro

    September 29, 2020 at 1:27 pm

    @trollhattan: She strikes me as more of a wine person  ;)

  42. 42.

    zhena gogolia

    September 29, 2020 at 1:27 pm

    @Felanius Kootea:

    I think it’s VoteVets and not Lincoln Project.

  43. 43.

    Sab

    September 29, 2020 at 1:29 pm

    @geg6: I thought he just yelled and frothed at the mouth.

  44. 44.

    snoey

    September 29, 2020 at 1:30 pm

    How about:

    “It’s not about you or the answers you give, your another Federalist Society hack Trump judge so we know those already. My colleagues across the aisle know this or they wouldn’t have announced their support before knowing which FSHTJ the nominee was going to be.

    I’m going to use my time talking about the stakes.”

    Welcome to legal realism, no more games its raw power time.

  45. 45.

    Betty Cracker

    September 29, 2020 at 1:30 pm

    @Lavocat: I think turning the hearings into an anti-Republican ad is a better strategy, but I get why Marshall (and others) say maybe the Dems shouldn’t participate at all. It’s an illegitimate process by the Republicans’ own rules, and depriving them of the bipartisan dog and pony show underscores what a partisan screw-job it is. I have no idea if that message would resonate more than the “temper tantrum” scenario you cite, but it doesn’t seem as obviously dumb to me as it does to you.

    Regardless, it’s not going to happen. They are participating. I just hope everyone is focused on what the job is.

  46. 46.

    Ridnik Chrome

    September 29, 2020 at 1:30 pm

    Sounds like a solid idea. What say you?

    It gets my vote.

  47. 47.

    What Have The Romans Ever Done for Us?

    September 29, 2020 at 1:30 pm

    @Soprano2: I don’t believe for a second most of them think what they’re doing is for the best for everyone. They’re a wholly owned subsidiary of Moneybags Inc. and they just do not care about everyone, they only care about the rich. The pro life movement is just a way for them to keep stringing along a non-trivial number of non rich voters.

    I think some questions on Trump’s unconstitutional behavior are a good idea but spending the entire hearing on it might be too inside-basebally.

    I do think they should ask point blank about Trump saying he needs her on the court to help him steal the election and whether accepting a nomination under those circumstances is ethical. They should also push her to commit to recusal if an election suit comes to the Court.

  48. 48.

    Immanentize

    September 29, 2020 at 1:31 pm

    @Ruckus: I think Kamala Harris has indicated that is her whole focus for the confirmation hearings.  Good.  That shows the campaign is focussed.

  49. 49.

    Hoodie

    September 29, 2020 at 1:31 pm

    @Kent: Agree.  I think you start with the recognition that she will be confirmed and the point is more to establish and further a narrative for court reform than to somehow miraculously block the nomination.  Making Trump the focus is a distraction for short term effect and will be less useful in reforming the Court after Barrett is inevitably confirmed.   You want to make sure she is put into a position where she will be confirmed to be a partisan hack and/or a loon.  Ask her about her connections to the Federalist Society.  Question about her judicial philosophy, how she views the role of the Court vs. the Congress and President, etc.  Question her on her published writings on issues such as the ACA and Roe. She’ll probably dodge, but the idea is to create a record for the argument to expand the Court in the next year.   The narrative to further is that the GOP has perverted the Court by grooming ideologues and nakedly partisan operatives who will camp out on the Court and block every democratic attempt to govern for the next 40 years.  You want to get her to at least tacitly confirm that she thinks that’s a good role for the Court. The ACA is a good focal point for that.

  50. 50.

    Sab

    September 29, 2020 at 1:31 pm

    @J.: They can read her published writings to her and ask her to comment on her own published comments.

  51. 51.

    piratedan

    September 29, 2020 at 1:32 pm

    I understand the walking away from the process folks, I get what they are saying.  For me, it seems like Dems getting any time in front of America is such a rare thing these days that I think they should seize the opportunity to do so and make sure that they read her statements and positions on such legalities into the record.

    After all, there’s not even a guarantee that we’ll see any of this on TV and if so, what will be cherrypicked for dissemination.  Can’t hurt to get her to confirm what her own purported positions are, unedited and in public for people to see.

    THIS is the result of what they elected.

  52. 52.

    Immanentize

    September 29, 2020 at 1:32 pm

    @Betty Cracker: Schumer said he is not meeting with her because it is a bogus process.  That is probably enough to make that point.

  53. 53.

    Immanentize

    September 29, 2020 at 1:33 pm

    @zhena gogolia: It is pitched as a combined effort of both groups.

  54. 54.

    LevelB

    September 29, 2020 at 1:33 pm

    That is the best idea I have heard in a long time.  Get it all on the record – and let the republicans defend the crimes.

  55. 55.

    trollhattan

    September 29, 2020 at 1:33 pm

    @Jeffro:

    “I went to communion three times today and I’m baked!”

  56. 56.

    Kent

    September 29, 2020 at 1:33 pm

    @Lavocat:It sure as fuck is better than not showing up at all (Josh Marshall’s advice, over at Talking Points memo), which is akin to having a temper tantrum and screaming “NOT FAIR!”. You know what’s better than not showing up to do your fucking job? ANYTHING!

    Yeah, that was sheer dumbfuckery.

    The Democrats are being given free TV coverage and the eyes of the nation during this confirmation fight.  Take it and use it to some larger strategic end if you know the votes are against you.  Pick their 3 or 4 weakest GOP positions and spend the whole hearing hammering them.  Whatever polls the worst for the GOP.  Health care?  Voting rights?  Environmental protection?

    The Dems would be committing political malpractice of the highest order if they don’t use the ENTIRE confirmation process as a free anti-GOP infomercial against Trump and every single GOP elected official.

    Principled stands get you nowhere.  That was Kerry’s approach to the swift boating.  He wasn’t going to “dignify it” with a response.  He kept his “dignity” and Bush won re-election.

  57. 57.

    randy khan

    September 29, 2020 at 1:33 pm

    @Kay:

    She has a really thin record so they have no earthly idea what she’ll do once she’s on . . .

    Oh, they know.

  58. 58.

    topclimber

    September 29, 2020 at 1:34 pm

    @Kay: My understanding is that the ACA case hinges on the abolition (or perhaps just zeroing out) of the mandate penalty. No penalty equals no tax. No tax means the Roberts justification for the mandate is moot. Add in the overreach of a wingnut trial judge that no mandate means the whole law is thrown out.

    The court will hear the case after the election, but will surely not issue a ruling for several months. During that time a new Biden administration and hopefully a Senate that goes along with the House can reinstate or refund the penalty at $1 a year.

    IANAL (you are) but wouldn’t that make the GOP case moot?

  59. 59.

    Jeffro

    September 29, 2020 at 1:35 pm

    Re: using the hearings to ask her questions about emoluments, the ACA, etc: sure, go for it.  We might as well get a few shots in before she’s seated.

    Dems need to keep reminding Americans how far out of the mainstream Sister Barrett and the GOP are – no time like the present, leading right up to the election.

  60. 60.

    jonas

    September 29, 2020 at 1:35 pm

    Given that she’s already stated her flat-out opposition to the ACA, I wonder if Roberts would make her  recuse herself when they hear the case.

  61. 61.

    randy khan

    September 29, 2020 at 1:35 pm

    @Kent:

    Don’t try to get an actual answer out of her.  Just say.  We already KNOW your position because you told us.  Don’t you have any shame about wanting to strip health care away from millions?

    I agree.  There should be a lot of this.  And the occasional question about her law review article arguing that Social Security is unconstitutional.

  62. 62.

    catclub

    September 29, 2020 at 1:37 pm

    @Another Scott: That probably needs to be part of any questioning of her, since we know that she’s being rammed through to have her on the bench when the ACA case is taken up in November.

     

    I am not sure about that. I think the GOP does not really want to win that ACA destruction case.  They need to rush her in for an extra vote on vote and voter suppression in the upcoming election.

  63. 63.

    Immanentize

    September 29, 2020 at 1:38 pm

    Also, make Amy say nice but substantive things about RBG.  OR NOT?  I noticed when she spoke at her coming out party she listed a number of people who were inspired by Ruth.  She did not include herself.  Odd, I thought.

  64. 64.

    ?BillinGlendaleCA

    September 29, 2020 at 1:38 pm

    @Another Scott: “Fighting for Health Care” worked in 2018, it’s a good message.

  65. 65.

    Mag

    September 29, 2020 at 1:39 pm

    Regarding Lincoln Project and Barrett, I think Angry Black Lady is spot on:

    Project Lincoln has been awfully quiet about Amy Coney Barrett.
    The reason? They’re not your friends. They’re fine with her and everything she stands for. They just don’t like trump.

    — Imani Gandy ☄️?? (@AngryBlackLady) September 28, 2020

    The more legitimacy Democrats give Project Lincoln the more legitimacy they will have if Biden wins. That’s my concern. All of this enemy of my enemy is my friend shit is going to bite Democrats right in the ass. They’re not your friends at all.
    But whatever.

    — Imani Gandy ☄️?? (@AngryBlackLady) September 28, 2020

    Lincoln Project are still Republicans to their core. They like the product, just not the orange packaging.

  66. 66.

    Immanentize

    September 29, 2020 at 1:40 pm

    @Mag: George Conway said as much a couple of days ago.

  67. 67.

    Shalimar

    September 29, 2020 at 1:40 pm

    @Kent: What you’re asking is a hypothetical, unless you point out it’s a specific case they vote on in 7 weeks, in which case she won’t comment on cases currently before the Court.

  68. 68.

    Jeffro

    September 29, 2020 at 1:41 pm

    @trollhattan: LOL

    Somehow, unlike Mr. I Like Beer, I have a feeling she will keep her cool.  Prove me wrong, though, Dems ;)

  69. 69.

    Sure Lurkalot

    September 29, 2020 at 1:43 pm

    It’s not just taking health insurance away from those who get coverage via the ACA but the many other protections the act expanded to employer based insurance. Emphasize how everyone will likely lose coverage like preexisting condition, free wellness visits, etc.

  70. 70.

    Comrade Scrutinizer

    September 29, 2020 at 1:44 pm

    @Kay: I think all these “this is what she should be asked” comments are nonsense; just a pipe dream.  As you say, she won’t answer anything of substance, she’s not going to be pinned down on any position.  Why should she?  The fix is in.

    What I do wonder is whether the GOP decides to cut Trump loose.  It’s kinda late for the GOP to moderate their positions, but on the other hand they’ve successfully weaponized the judiciary, they’ve rolled back a lot of regulations, and they’ve given their donors mega tax breaks.  What else can Trump do for them?  I doubt that (most of) the GOP wants to burn everything down.  That really doesn’t benefit them.  They have to be concerned about their Senate majority, so even a small pull away from Trump could preserve some seats.  If Trump goes full totalitarian that doesn’t benefit them either; he’s too unstable. I wouldn’t be surprised to see some pullback from Trump in the next couple of weeks.

  71. 71.

    BlueGuitarist

    September 29, 2020 at 1:45 pm

    @MattF:

    Has Barrett been clear about Griswold v Connecticut and whether states can ban access to contraception?

  72. 72.

    trollhattan

    September 29, 2020 at 1:47 pm

    @Jeffro:

    It will be necessary for the women to bring the knives to these hearings. Senator Harris, for a handy example.

  73. 73.

    Johnnybuck

    September 29, 2020 at 1:47 pm

    Well I’m sure it will make everybody feel better but it won’t change a thing. The public already is opposed to this confirmation.

  74. 74.

    What Have The Romans Ever Done for Us?

    September 29, 2020 at 1:48 pm

    @Mag: I just saw a Lindsey Must Go add on MSNBC from The Lincoln Project using his footage where he says “use my words against me”. It’s an attack add on Lindsey Graham who is in charge of this whole process. Maybe they’re not our friends but they don’t appear to be down with the rush to confirm.

  75. 75.

    Jeffro

    September 29, 2020 at 1:50 pm

    @Mag: LP has also been going after pro-trumpov Senators, and I’m pretty sure they came out saying the double standards (on who does/does not get a hearing and a vote) have to stop.  Not the same thing as flat-out publicly opposing the ACB nomination, but still.

    (But I may have them confused with Stand Up Republic’s recent statements like that.  So many anti-trumpov Republican groups to keep track of these days!  =)

    I can’t see LP turning on Dems until the GOP has pretty much rid itself of trumpov and Trumpism, which is to say, likely never.  Turn on the Dems at any point before that time, and they’d be assisting the trumpistas.  They seem more likely to stay on the fringe of our big tent for quite some time.

  76. 76.

    What Have The Romans Ever Done for Us?

    September 29, 2020 at 1:52 pm

    @randy khan: If she is on record as arguing that Social Security is unconstitutional the Dems should definitely expose that multiple times. It’s a huge wedge issue within the Republican coalition.

  77. 77.

    Johnnybuck

    September 29, 2020 at 1:52 pm

    @What Have The Romans Ever Done for Us?: They know she’s going to be confirmed, they just want to kick Lindsey and send a message that they’re the ones calling the tune in the post-Trump era.

    And they get a Judge out of it in the process.

    It’s a win-win

  78. 78.

    Betty Cracker

    September 29, 2020 at 1:53 pm

    @Hoodie: Good points, and it’s high time the Federalist Society got more scrutiny. WE know what it is, but my guess is if you polled Americans, 90% wouldn’t have the foggiest notion. They’ll pretty much run our fucking lives soon, so it would be nice if everyone knew what the FS brand meant.

  79. 79.

    Jeffro

    September 29, 2020 at 1:54 pm

    @Johnnybuck: I’m sure it will make everybody feel better but it won’t change a thing. The public already is opposed to this confirmation.

    It doesn’t really have to change a thing…but it could, at the margins.  You’re right that the public is against any nomination going forward at this time, and is opposed to the things Barrett stands for as well.  So why not highlight that repeatedly in hearings and really fire up our base?  Why not tie her nuttiness firmly around the GOP’s throat heading into the election?

    If nothing else, it helps ‘prep the battlefield’ a bit for when we add four justices to SCOTUS next year.  “Hey, if they’re going to put people this far out of the mainstream onto the Court just because they can…we have to restore the balance here…”

    ETA or geez what Hoodie already said 30 comments ago…I need to slow down when I scan these threads  =)

  80. 80.

    orsonk

    September 29, 2020 at 1:55 pm

    Sounds like a great idea!

  81. 81.

    Ocotillo

    September 29, 2020 at 1:56 pm

    It might not be a bad idea to ask her about Leonard Leo and the Federalist Society.  What I am saying is give America a primer on who they are, etc…  Also, get into discussing why the Koch’s Americans for Prosperity is spending millions to support her.

    You don’t really ask a question as such (she’s not talking) just frame a question with a Maddow like explanation of the dark money and behind the scenes power brokers that are putting her in this seat.

  82. 82.

    Kent

    September 29, 2020 at 1:58 pm

    @Mag: Exactly.   We allied with Stalin to beat the Nazis.  And it was the right thing to do.  You take your allies when you can find them.  But you don’t get naive about it.

  83. 83.

    Steeplejack

    September 29, 2020 at 1:58 pm

    @Soprano2:

    They all talk as if Clarence Thomas and Alito are going to live 30 more years.

    Thomas is a cardiac event waiting to happen.

  84. 84.

    miroker

    September 29, 2020 at 2:00 pm

    I am all for them doing that, but after watching their performance in the past few years, I have no hope that they have either the spine or the desire to stand up for what is right. They feed at the same trough as the republican’ts as far as campaign bribes (oops, donations) go, so they are too scared to rock the boat.

  85. 85.

    catclub

    September 29, 2020 at 2:01 pm

    @Kent:

    Because only the most truly vile dead enders actually want to strip health insurance from their fellow Americans.

     AKA: 40% of he electorate.

  86. 86.

    Kent

    September 29, 2020 at 2:02 pm

    @Johnnybuck:Well I’m sure it will make everybody feel better but it won’t change a thing. The public already is opposed to this confirmation.

    You never know how these things will shake out and what the downstream consequences are.  For example the GOP did endless fucking Benghazi hearings in 2014.    Did they change anything?  Not for the Obama Administration.  But they arguably gave us President Trump because it was the Benghazi hearing fishing expeditions that ultimately uncovered the Clinton emails thing.

    The GOP knows better than to ever walk away from a free microphone.

  87. 87.

    Sloane Ranger

    September 29, 2020 at 2:02 pm

    @trollhattan:

     

    I can only imagine the shitfest they have in store for us this time. “You’re being mean, to a girl!“

    The way to avoid this is for all the men to give their time over to Harris and Klobashar

    Also Barrett can’t have a meltdown like Kavanaugh. It will make her seem weak and emotional. Like a girl In RWNJ world, girls are only allowed to play if they act like one of the boys.

  88. 88.

    Kent

    September 29, 2020 at 2:03 pm

    @catclub: We can do a lot if we have the other 60%

  89. 89.

    zzyzx

    September 29, 2020 at 2:04 pm

    I’d ask her, “You referred to the 14th amendment as ‘possibly illegitimate.’ Do you think that the 14th Amendment is actually part of the US Constitution?”

    If she answers yes, then ask her to explain what she meant, if no, then hammer on that.

  90. 90.

    A Good Woman

    September 29, 2020 at 2:04 pm

    @Immanentize: Also, I want her explanation why she publicly argued that Garland should not be considered but she should?

     

    That right there is where it should start with the Democrats questions.

  91. 91.

    catclub

    September 29, 2020 at 2:05 pm

    @Comrade Scrutinizer: It’s kinda late for the GOP to moderate their positions, but on the other hand they’ve successfully weaponized the judiciary, they’ve rolled back a lot of regulations, and they’ve given their donors mega tax breaks. What else can Trump do for them? 

     

    Trump talks ALL the time about his second term agenda, doesn’t he?

  92. 92.

    Falling Diphthong

    September 29, 2020 at 2:06 pm

    I like it! Make it clear just how far from the Constitution we have progressed as frogs in boiling water these last four years.

  93. 93.

    Falling Diphthong

    September 29, 2020 at 2:09 pm

    @Immanentize:

    I want her explanation why she publicly argued that Garland should not be considered but she should?

    Ask for the specific section of the Constitution that says that when different parties hold the Senate and presidency, it’s okay for the Senate to take a crap on the Constitution and not do their job IF the Senate is run by Republicans. Seriously, I want someone to try and put this in traditional judicial conservative respecting the intent of the founding fathers terms.

  94. 94.

    Skepticat

    September 29, 2020 at 2:09 pm

    @different-church-lady: It’s not about her answers: it’s about the questions.

    Spot on. I think it’s an excellent idea.

  95. 95.

    LongHairedWeirdo

    September 29, 2020 at 2:14 pm

    If they did that, I’d all-but demand that they also ask about their opinion regarding the President’s duty to see that the law is faithfully executed – requesting actions known to violate the law, offering pardons, etc..

    I am probably going in the wrong direction with that suggestion – it might make lousy TV, and the point here is to interest viewers, to make some go “hey, that’s a good point” and, of course, to paint the Republicans as completely amoral about these appointments, and about Trump.

    (Kavanaugh should have been enough to show Republican amorality about SCOTUS appointments- someone who screams about having to face a clearly relevant question of fact, and suggests that having to answer questions means he’s the subject of vicious attacks, would be courting contempt charges as a *witness* – the idea of leaving him as a judge, much less promoting him, should sicken people. Except, of course, people like him, and Trump, who think rules are made to affect others.)

  96. 96.

    Falling Diphthong

    September 29, 2020 at 2:14 pm

    @Comrade Scrutinizer:

    I think all these “this is what she should be asked” comments are nonsense; just a pipe dream.

    I think that’s the point of this strategy. Don’t try to think of an incredible zinger that will derail her confirmation or bind her rulings afterward–that isn’t happening. Use the hearings to motivate D voters and depress R voters.

    I’ve long said that Democrats only get het up about judicial nominations when there’s a Supreme Court vacancy, which is not a useful time to get het up. This is not a powerful argument for Trump–if he were smart and thought the race was close, he’d be saying that Rs only got that extra justice if they turned out to re-elect Trump first. McConnell seems to have convinced him the Supreme Court can declare him king–this is about McConnell’s legacy, not Trump’s.

  97. 97.

    Barbara

    September 29, 2020 at 2:15 pm

    @Mag: Right.  Trump is too crude for them and can’t dissemble enough to keep the unfairness unsaid.  What they can never admit is that putting someone like Trump up for election is the only way they can possibly bring enough rubes along to get 270 electoral votes.  John McCain and the Northern Lights couldn’t do it, and someone like Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan definitely can’t.  No, their continued power depends on insanity of one kind or another.

    And really, Democrats take them more seriously than Trump supporters do.  Seriously, unmasked, the white working class that they leverage to gain electoral power does not really like the hard right agenda supported by the Lincloln Project anymore than I do.  I don’t bother looking at their ads anymore.  Their power rests on the idea that Democrats will act on the implied threat that there is more of where Trump came from.  They are totally a Washington power broker phenomenon.

  98. 98.

    topclimber

    September 29, 2020 at 2:16 pm

    @Mag:  Two points:

    1. Maybe LP doesn’t waste its money on losing causes. They can’t stop Barrett’s confirmation and any damage they do to her reputation will not affect her tenure on the court.
    2. Many of us are not looking for GOP friends. We want people we can make rational deals with, and who will honor their agreements. Then we call them out on any and all bull—t.
  99. 99.

    Johnnybuck

    September 29, 2020 at 2:16 pm

    @Kent: Maybe I’m wrong, but if your position is that this is an illegitimate process to begin with and you are refusing to meet with the nominee because of that, yet you want the opportunity question her at the same time (in a hearing where she won’t directly comment on any of your inquires) seems like something Republican members on the committee  will have a field day with.

    They’ll call it hypocrisy, discourteous and political grandstanding and likely fire up their own base.

  100. 100.

    The Other Bob

    September 29, 2020 at 2:17 pm

    The best thing they can do is get her to lie under oath.  Then later remove her from the bench for perjury.

  101. 101.

    Kay

    September 29, 2020 at 2:18 pm

    CookPoliticalReport
    @CookPolitical
    ·4h
    New Electoral College rating changes:
    Iowa – Lean R to Toss Up
    Ohio – Lean R to Toss Up

    Ha. This is going to be fun!

  102. 102.

    Martin

    September 29, 2020 at 2:19 pm

    @Kent: We won 2018 on health insurance.  That’s how we win 2020 as well.  Because only the most truly vile dead enders actually want to strip health insurance from their fellow Americans.

    Consider that conservatives are a lot like the folks that believe the planet is overpopulated. In their mind, if we raise the standard of living of all Americans, the country would collapse. It would be unaffordable, our cultural institutions would fail (taco truck on every corner), and crime would run out of control because black people would be subject to the same polite policing that upscale white people are, and they believe that some large portion of the country are inherent criminals.

    This is the core concept of conservatism. Everything else is in service to this idea. If you give everyone health insurance, then nobody will have health insurance because the people you add will bankrupt the people that have it. That’s their calculus. It’s obviously bullshit, but it’s what conservatism is.

  103. 103.

    Kattails

    September 29, 2020 at 2:21 pm

    @Kent: Better. Just lay it right out in her own words.

    Also, do you truly believe your tenure would not be tainted by being appointed by a possible felon? By someone with (read off list) all these currently pending charges against him? What makes it legitimate for someone like this to have the power to nominate anyone, at this point in time for freaking dogcatcher?

  104. 104.

    Omnes Omnibus

    September 29, 2020 at 2:22 pm

    @Immanentize: Painting her her as a hypocrite is good.

  105. 105.

    zhena gogolia

    September 29, 2020 at 2:23 pm

    @Immanentize:

    Oh, thanks, I misread.

  106. 106.

    Baud

    September 29, 2020 at 2:24 pm

    @Johnnybuck: There’s nothing Dems can do that the right won’t have a field day with.

  107. 107.

    Chief Oshkosh

    September 29, 2020 at 2:24 pm

    Two BIG thumbs up on the tactic of making Barret walk through the Donny Parade of Crimes.

  108. 108.

    Betty Cracker

    September 29, 2020 at 2:24 pm

    @Kay: Encouraging! IIRC, you’ve said that if Ohio is close, PA and MI are probably out of reach. Good!

  109. 109.

    Baud

    September 29, 2020 at 2:24 pm

    @Kay:

    There’s still good in Ohio. I can feel it.

  110. 110.

    zhena gogolia

    September 29, 2020 at 2:25 pm

    @Jeffro:

    I’ve seen LP people harshly criticizing the rush to confirm a justice.

  111. 111.

    James E Powell

    September 29, 2020 at 2:25 pm

    @Johnnybuck:

    Well I’m sure it will make everybody feel better but it won’t change a thing. The public already is opposed to this confirmation.

    I’d like to see some polling that reveals what percentage of Americans know it is happening, know how the process works, remember the Republicans refusal to consider Garland, understand how the supreme court affects anything other than abortion, care at all about the whole thing.

    Anyone whose vote can be affected by the supreme court is already locked in on their candidate. The point of the hearings is to brand her as a radical right winger in general and an enemy of ACA specifically. The only possible positive outcome would be that voters turn on a few vulnerable Republican senators and they lose.

  112. 112.

    David ? ☘The Establishment☘? Koch

    September 29, 2020 at 2:25 pm

    @Kay:

     

    SOURCES: The Biden campaign is expected to move forward with huge TV ad outlay in OHIO
    Current start date for statewide TV ad spending in OH is 10/6; could start sooner

    — Medium Buying (@MediumBuying) September 28, 2020

    Meanwhile

    The Trump campaign is also again canceling TV ad schedules that had been booked in Ohio for 9/29-10/5

    — Medium Buying (@MediumBuying) September 28, 2020

  113. 113.

    Kay

    September 29, 2020 at 2:27 pm

    Shekinah Hollingsworth sat crying in her Ford Fiesta outside Cedar Rapids’ Coe College last October.
    The Iowa Trump Victory field organizer had just left the school, where she was meeting with a student on behalf of President Trump’s reelection campaign in the state before it was interrupted by a scathing phone call from State Director Carly Miller and Deputy State Director Kerrick Kuder.
    Miller and Kuder were upset with Hollingsworth because the Maryland native hadn’t shared with them the fact that she worked a second, early morning job in order to afford being an organizer in the state—as a full-time Trump field organizer, she was earning around $2,100 a month with a stipend of $300 for campaign expenses.

    In news that should surprise no one, the Trump Campaign bosses are horrible.

  114. 114.

    Omnes Omnibus

    September 29, 2020 at 2:28 pm

    @jonas: Roberts has no ability to make anyone recuse themselves.

  115. 115.

    James E Powell

    September 29, 2020 at 2:28 pm

    @Kent:

    The GOP knows better than to ever walk away from a free microphone.

    Not saying you are wrong, but the reason that the Benghazi hearings worked was because the press/media hate Hillary Clinton and it gave them something to use against her. If the Benghazi hearings had been directed against Obama, they’d have gone nowhere fast.

  116. 116.

    Jeffro

    September 29, 2020 at 2:28 pm

    @Kay: As of this moment, OH looks like a good D pickup possibility, maybe even better than GA or TX.

    And trumpov keeps holding out hope that he’s going to “flip” MN – good luck with that, orange man.

    So very weird, this election, these polls.

    I have Biden/Harris at around 350 EVs and that’s without GA, TX, or IA.

  117. 117.

    MisterForkbeard

    September 29, 2020 at 2:29 pm

    @A Good Woman: I’ve had some conservative friendly friends tell me that all THEY see is that she said “The Senate can do what it wants, so it’s totally okay to not vote on Garland” and now is saying “The senate can do what it wants, so it’s okay to vote on me”.

    Basically, she refused to have an opinion and in so doing just so happens to have landed on the exact Republican position every time.

  118. 118.

    WaterGirl

    September 29, 2020 at 2:29 pm

    Could not possibly love this idea more!

  119. 119.

    zzyzx

    September 29, 2020 at 2:29 pm

    I saw a Trump ad on MNF last night and I was surprised at how boring it was. There was a generic “Biden will raise my taxes!” appeal and then a lot of “Trump just gets it.”

    I don’t see how that moves anyone.

  120. 120.

    hueyplong

    September 29, 2020 at 2:30 pm

    @zzyzx: Yes, it’s difficult for her to characterize as a “hypothetical” a question about the meaning of her own statement.

  121. 121.

    Barbara

    September 29, 2020 at 2:30 pm

    @Omnes Omnibus: He doesn’t, but having worked for the chief judge in a circuit, there are ways of gaining compliance.  Starting with not permitting junior justices to write any opinions on their pet subjects. You can really bottle someone up as the chief if you want to.

  122. 122.

    David ? ☘The Establishment☘? Koch

    September 29, 2020 at 2:30 pm

    @Baud: Thanks for the reminder.  I need to set my YoutubeTV to record tonight’s Cleveland-Yankee game. ⚾

  123. 123.

    Mousebumples

    September 29, 2020 at 2:31 pm

    LeanTossup (@LeanTossup) tweeted at 1:06 PM on Tue, Sep 29, 2020:

    Quinnipiac Georgia:

    Pres: Biden +3 (LeanTossup: Biden +2.5)

    Senate: Ossoff +1 (LeanTossup: Ossoff +0.8)

    (https://twitter.com/LeanTossup/status/1311004341185249287?s=03)

    Warnock leads the field at 33% in the open Senate seat.

  124. 124.

    Johnnybuck

    September 29, 2020 at 2:32 pm

    @Baud: I’m well aware of that, and i stated I could be wrong, I hope I am.

  125. 125.

    Chief Oshkosh

    September 29, 2020 at 2:33 pm

    @trollhattan: So have all Democratic Senators yield their time to a female Senator. One Kamala Harris comes to mind. Hell, if you want good TV, have Sen. Harris ask four rounds of questions to one round from Senator Warren. That’s about the right ratio.

    It’ll be great TV, so Donny will be compelled to watch. Hilarity will ensue.

  126. 126.

    MattF

    September 29, 2020 at 2:34 pm

    Pinned tweet on the @stronglang timeline.

  127. 127.

    WaterGirl

    September 29, 2020 at 2:37 pm

    @Felanius Kootea: @zhena gogolia:  You are both right.  It’s the Lincoln Project in partnership with Vote Vets.

    11 years ago, Sully was called for his moment. Now, we are all called to this moment.

    Join Sully in regaining control of this nation's destiny by voting Donald Trump out.

    In partnership with @votevets. pic.twitter.com/r9wQiAdjRO

    — The Lincoln Project (@ProjectLincoln) September 29, 2020

  128. 128.

    Kelly

    September 29, 2020 at 2:37 pm

    If we get the trifecta along with structural changes to the judiciary, DC and Puerto Rico statehood I want an immediate do over on the 2020 census. Seems straightforward and easy to justify.

  129. 129.

    Kay

    September 29, 2020 at 2:37 pm

    Ellie Rushing
    @EllieRushing
    ·1h
    A woman who told me she was hired and paid by the Trump campaign to monitor polling places just arrived. She wouldn’t speak to me on the record. She said she’s been hired to “oversee the integrity of the election” and was angry they wouldn’t let her inside.

    It’s really odd to have to pay election observers. I wonder if they shipped her in from somewhere else. You have to be an Ohio “elector” (voter) in Ohio.

  130. 130.

    Immanentize

    September 29, 2020 at 2:38 pm

    @Steeplejack: So is Alito. And of the two, he is the rage-aholic who needs daily feeds of rage-ahol.  He will pop.

    ETA and Roberts has a seizure disorder that has (literally) floored him a few times that I know about.  And compared to those at the Court, I don’t know shit.

  131. 131.

    Citizen Alan

    September 29, 2020 at 2:39 pm

    @Omnes Omnibus: Yeah, that ship sailed with Bush v. Gore, in which two members of the majority voted despite having family members working on the Bush transition team.

  132. 132.

    James E Powell

    September 29, 2020 at 2:43 pm

    @Kay:

    I’m wondering if they cancelled the TV ads so they could pay their election watchers.

  133. 133.

    Omnes Omnibus

    September 29, 2020 at 2:43 pm

    @Barbara: This is true, but I don’t want people thinking that the Chief Justice has powers the does not have.  I also try to push back whenever I see people arguing that the ABA should disbar people or not permit a lawyer to do certain things.  You and I know that isn’t within the power of the ABA, but many commenters don’t know the arcane workings of the legal profession.

  134. 134.

    Betty

    September 29, 2020 at 2:44 pm

    @zhena gogolia: It’s both.

  135. 135.

    Omnes Omnibus

    September 29, 2020 at 2:48 pm

    @Citizen Alan: So you think there is no value in making her own it?

  136. 136.

    LuciaMia

    September 29, 2020 at 2:50 pm

    @David ? ☘The Establishment☘? Koch: So wheres their ad money going?

  137. 137.

    Immanentize

    September 29, 2020 at 2:53 pm

    @Mousebumples: Fuck Lieberman

  138. 138.

    lowtechcyclist

    September 29, 2020 at 2:55 pm

    @trollhattan:

    Remembering Lindsay Graham practically bursting into tears apologizing to Li’l Brett for what big meanies those Democrat Party people were to him, I can only imagine the shitfest they have in store for us this time. “You’re being mean, to a girl!“

    @Sloane Ranger:

    The way to avoid this is for all the men to give their time over to Harris and Klobashar

    Seconded. Besides pre-empting that whinefest, Harris and Klobuchar are smarter than most of the men to begin with.  Give ’em the ball and let ’em run with it.

  139. 139.

    Mousebumples

    September 29, 2020 at 2:57 pm

    @Immanentize: yup. He’s at 7%,if i remember right. (Loeffler and Collins are mid 20s)

  140. 140.

    catclub

    September 29, 2020 at 2:58 pm

    @Kelly: here is the only clause in the Consty:

    The actual Enumeration shall be made within three Years after the first Meeting of the Congress of the United States, and within every subsequent Term of ten Years, in such Manner as they shall by Law direct.

     

    No bar to extra enumerations.

  141. 141.

    JPL

    September 29, 2020 at 2:59 pm

    @Mousebumples: Earlier I saw a Loeffler ad attacking Warnock, which I found odd.    Previously she was going after Collins, and now I know why.

  142. 142.

    catclub

    September 29, 2020 at 3:00 pm

    @James E Powell:

    I’m wondering if they cancelled the TV ads so they could pay their election watchers.

    No, why pay them AT ALL, the day after the election. Trumps M.O.

  143. 143.

    Llelldorin

    September 29, 2020 at 3:00 pm

    I’m a bit optimistic that The Lincoln Project might be succumbing to the reverse of a syndrome I remember from newly-minted Republicans in the ’80s, that I think I’ve seen described around here as “I’ve always been a Democrat, but now that I’m a Republican I’m deeply concerned about Chappaquiddick.”

    Once you’re on the outside of the Republican Party looking in, a lot of things that we’ve been complaining about for years are suddenly really obvious. (See, for example, Max Boot suddenly noticing the racism deeply embedded in the Republican Party these days.)

  144. 144.

    Llelldorin

    September 29, 2020 at 3:02 pm

    @lowtechcyclist:

    Thirded. Harris also has experience as an advocate, which Barrett, for all her undoubted brilliance, conspicuously lacks.

  145. 145.

    Kay

    September 29, 2020 at 3:03 pm

    @James E Powell:

    It’s weird! Why do they have to pay people? In 2012 Obama had a lead lawyer who did the organizing and I assume (hope) she was paid but the observers are usually a volunteer job. She wasn’t AT the polling place. She was directing the whole state.

    I listened in on the Biden Ohio election observers call last night and I know they’re all volunteers.

  146. 146.

    Nora Lenderbee

    September 29, 2020 at 3:06 pm

    @Immanentize: Also, I want her explanation why she publicly argued that Garland should not be considered but she should?

    This!

  147. 147.

    tam1MI

    September 29, 2020 at 3:07 pm

    @David ? ☘The Establishment☘? Koch: The cancellations of advice buys looks an awful lot like a campaign that has run out of money…

  148. 148.

    SiubhanDuinne

    September 29, 2020 at 3:09 pm

    @zhena gogolia:

    I think it’s VoteVets and not Lincoln Project.

    It’s los dos, according to the end credits.

  149. 149.

    MisterForkbeard

    September 29, 2020 at 3:10 pm

    @Kelly:

    I want an immediate do over on the 2020 census. Seems straightforward and easy to justify.

    I mean, even IF you ignore all the fuckery going on this time, cutting the problem in half, disobeying orders to keep the Census going, etc… we did it in the middle of a pandemic where meeting in person was heavily skewed.

    All political/fuckery considerations aside, it’s pretty easy to make the case that the census just isn’t going to be accurate. Census officials have actually said so.

  150. 150.

    Immanentize

    September 29, 2020 at 3:12 pm

    @Kay: But personally, as we have discussed, I think the Dems should pay all their campaign workers.  15 or fight!

  151. 151.

    Immanentize

    September 29, 2020 at 3:13 pm

    @MisterForkbeard: I saw an analysis in the NYTimes that the fuckery is going to hurt red states much more than blue, with NM being the only blue in the top 10 that will be undercounted.

  152. 152.

    A Good Woman

    September 29, 2020 at 3:13 pm

    RVAT ad to air tonight in OH

  153. 153.

    Immanentize

    September 29, 2020 at 3:16 pm

    @A Good Woman:

    “Country over party” is a good ending line.

  154. 154.

    patroclus

    September 29, 2020 at 3:22 pm

    Well, initially, I was optimistic that we could convince at least a few Republican Senators that a USSC nomination was utterly ridiculous in the middle of an election but that appears to have failed, so I agree now that the best tactic is to make the whole thing as political as possible and ask about health insurance, the Post office, the Census, the grifting, the tax returns, the Ukraine scandal, LGBT rights, women’s liberty and anything else that is currently a political issue and make the Republicans and Barrett own all of it.  Sure, she won’t respond substantively but everyone knows that.  Paint her as what she obviously is and make it clear that this rush to fill Ginsburg’s seat is entirely political.

  155. 155.

    Shalimar

    September 29, 2020 at 3:22 pm

    @Mousebumples: I’m not sure what Lieberman is still doing in this race.  He has no chance whatsoever of finishing ahead of Loeffler and Collins, and his career in politics is over if he keeps Warnock out of the top 2.

  156. 156.

    Another Scott

    September 29, 2020 at 3:23 pm

    @Felanius Kootea: That’s a great ad.

    Thanks.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  157. 157.

    SiubhanDuinne

    September 29, 2020 at 3:23 pm

    @Steeplejack:

    Thomas is a cardiac event waiting to happen.

    Not until January 20, 2021, please.

  158. 158.

    Mousebumples

    September 29, 2020 at 3:25 pm

    @Shalimar: his career in politics is over if he keeps Warnock out of the top 2.

    Does he even currently have a career in politics? Or is he just here for the chaos/lulz?

  159. 159.

    WaterGirl

    September 29, 2020 at 3:25 pm

    @A Good Woman:

    ATTENTION OHIO: LOOK OUT FOR OUR NEW AD!

    Sarah is a lifelong conservative, veteran, and farmer from OH. This fall, she’s putting country over party and voting for Joe.

    Airing on TV in Cleveland during tonight’s debate and digitally statewide.#OperationGrant @ProjectLincoln pic.twitter.com/tp1aFgMxtf

    — Republican Voters Against Trump (@RVAT2020) September 29, 2020

  160. 160.

    patroclus

    September 29, 2020 at 3:26 pm

    @SiubhanDuinne: Well, we’ve got a little leeway.  The new Senate will be in place by January 6.

  161. 161.

    zhena gogolia

    September 29, 2020 at 3:26 pm

    @patroclus:

    Yeah.

  162. 162.

    Anya

    September 29, 2020 at 3:28 pm

    Trump is gonna go full Q-anon. He’ll start with claiming Soros planted a chip inside Biden’s ear that gives him answers then he’ll progress to 2020 pizzagate. Pundits will claim “Biden shows anger. That played into Trump’s hands.”

  163. 163.

    patrick Il

    September 29, 2020 at 3:29 pm

    @Shalimar:

    Combine that with”I won’t discuss cases that might come before the Supreme court” and you are left with name rank and serial number.

  164. 164.

    Shalimar

    September 29, 2020 at 3:32 pm

    @Mousebumples: Someone who knows him better will have to answer.  He obviously has the arrogance to be a politician, running for senator as his first job instead of finding a House seat.  I’m guessing he thinks he has a future and will try again.  Whether anyone else should care is an open question.

  165. 165.

    ?BillinGlendaleCA

    September 29, 2020 at 3:34 pm

    @Martin: Conservatives believe EVERYTHING is zero sum and Trump embodies this philosophy.  If you gain something, I must be losing something, even if I can’t pin point what it is.

  166. 166.

    Barbara

    September 29, 2020 at 3:34 pm

    @Omnes Omnibus: I was just making the point that the CJ has soft power, like assigning the authorship of opinions.

  167. 167.

    James E Powell

    September 29, 2020 at 3:37 pm

    @Kay:

    I worked as a poll watcher nearly every election back in Ohio and I never got paid. A few times they gave us donuts.

  168. 168.

    Litlebritdifrnt

    September 29, 2020 at 3:38 pm

    @LuciaMia:  According to the Daily Mail Brad Parscale’s bank account.

  169. 169.

    Cheryl Rofer

    September 29, 2020 at 3:43 pm

    The White House has formally submitted Judge Amy Coney Barrett's SCOTUS nomination to the Senate pic.twitter.com/eFbT6OjR8M

    — Zoe Tillman (@ZoeTillman) September 29, 2020

  170. 170.

    misterpuff

    September 29, 2020 at 3:44 pm

    @David ? ☘The Establishment☘? Koch: Drumpf Campaign Strategy: Why spend the money on ads? We spend the money on fixers (Congress, SC and lawyers)…and I (Drumpf) keep the rest.

  171. 171.

    Another Scott

    September 29, 2020 at 3:46 pm

    @Mag: Rick Wilson of the Lincoln Project as asked about her on C-Span yesterday.

    https://www.c-span.org/video/?476256-4/washington-journal-rick-wilson-discusses-campaign-2020-future-gop

    (Sorry about the CAPS)

    Rick Wilson

    I THINK IT WILL AFFECT THE ELECTION IN A BIG WAY AND I THINK IT WILL BE BAD FOR CORY GARDNER, SUSAN COLLINS, AND PROBABLY DAN SULLIVAN AND ALASKA, ALL MORE OR LESS PRO-CHOICE STATES, EXCEPT FOR SOUTH CAROLINA, A DIFFERENT CHEMISTRY THERE, BUT ARIZONA, COLORADO AND, MAINE, IT HAS TURNED THE ELECTION IN THOSE STATES TO A SINGLE OR ISSUE. IT SPEAKS TO THE CARE OF THESE REPUBLICANS, WHO SAY THEY ARE INDEPENDENTS, BUT ARE NOT. I THINK THAT THE NOMINATION WILL LEAD TO A SCRAMBLE IN THE SENATE. I THINK IT BLEW UP ONE OF THE PLANS THEY HAD TO TURN THE FALL INTO THEIR — WHERE [“Russia” is what I heard on the radio] RON JOHNSON WAS GOING TO HAVE A UKRAINE PALOUSE A TO ATTACK JOHN BYRON — PALOOZA TO ATTACK JOE BIDEN. I THINK MITCH MCCONNELL WILL PAY A PRICE FOR THIS. HE MAY LOSE HIS MAJORITY BECAUSE OF THIS. AT THE LINCOLN PROJECT, THE GARWIN [sic] RULE, ESTABLISHED BY THE REPUBLICANS, SHOULD HAVE BEEN APPLIED HERE, AND THE NOMINATION SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE PERSON WHO WINS THE ELECTION. AT THAT POINT, WE WOULD’VE HAD A DIFFERENT CHEMISTRY IN THE COUNTRY, ONE WAY OR ANOTHER. THIS RACE WILL FUNDAMENTALLY BE A REFERENDUM ON DONALD TRUMP, NOT ON HIS NOMINEE.

    So, yeah, under different circumstances he might like her. But it’s clear his main goal is burning Trump and Trumpism to the ground. And he’s alsohaving some glee that it’s going to put the hurt on a lot of GOP Senators who refused to honor their oath to protect the Constitution.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  172. 172.

    piratedan

    September 29, 2020 at 3:46 pm

    @Cheryl Rofer: so… hours after RBG is interred?  If only they were as adept to responding to a national pandemic.

  173. 173.

    Gin & Tonic

    September 29, 2020 at 3:47 pm

    @Immanentize: No, thanks.

  174. 174.

    SiubhanDuinne

    September 29, 2020 at 3:48 pm

    @patroclus:

    Then January 6th it is!

  175. 175.

    Ruckus

    September 29, 2020 at 3:50 pm

    @Immanentize:

    The symbolism of Chuck not meeting with her does make the point and officially.

  176. 176.

    cain

    September 29, 2020 at 3:51 pm

    @Johnnybuck: They’ll call it hypocrisy, discourteous and political grandstanding and likely fire up their own base.

    Gosh, that sounds like typical republican projection. I mean hypocrisy is putting a SCOTUS nominee to vote in the first place.

    Nobody is dumb enough to think that what’s happening isnt’ a Republican power play.

  177. 177.

    patroclus

    September 29, 2020 at 3:52 pm

    @Another Scott: Wow, Rick needs to calm down and stop shouting.  I think he’s going to have a heart attack or something.

    Seriously, the leadership of the Lincoln Project are former Republicans – much of the staff are Dems.  The leadership will go their separate ways after the election – the core ratf*ckers will remain ours.  I’m not worried.

  178. 178.

    Johnnybuck

    September 29, 2020 at 3:58 pm

    @cain: Hey, I said I could be wrong, but I don’t understand how this helps wavering democratic voters, and not have the same effect for Republican leaners.

  179. 179.

    Mary G

    September 29, 2020 at 3:59 pm

    That Sully ad is killer.

  180. 180.

    piratedan

    September 29, 2020 at 4:00 pm

    @Johnnybuck: I take the POV that it’s better to be seen fighting for the people, showing how this is supposed to work and acknowledge how the GOP has led us to this travesty of process and candidate.

  181. 181.

    Ruckus

    September 29, 2020 at 4:00 pm

    @Betty Cracker:

    I directly know people that if asked would have no idea what the FS is, what it stands for, who it wants to screw over, or why. They just do not follow this political stuff. Or even pay a lot of attention to the news.

  182. 182.

    moops

    September 29, 2020 at 4:03 pm

    Since these are not really hearings as anyone would understand the term, the Dems can just declare they are there to chat with a new USSC judge that the GOP have already decided to accept.  Let’s just talk shall we?

     

    You can also make it about Bill Barr, and Mitch McConnell. Since she will refuse to answer questions about pending legal points you can make her answer questions about past misdeeds of appointed and elected Republicans. If Mitch McConnell has been taking funds from Russia for his campaigns, should he also be impeached? If Bill Barr lied to Congress about the Mueller Report, should he be impeached?

    Those are constitutional questions but not something that comes before the court.

  183. 183.

    germy

    September 29, 2020 at 4:04 pm

    The American people deserve transparency from their leaders, it's why as of today, I've released 22 years of my tax returns. https://t.co/6fwL20fWeI

    — Joe Biden (@JoeBiden) September 29, 2020

  184. 184.

    MomSense

    September 29, 2020 at 4:05 pm

    Millions of people cannot pay their rent and millions of children are going hungry – and these Republican shitweasels cannot be bothered to help them.  But a fucking SCOTUS justice who wants to strip healthcare from millions of Americans, thinks she can determine who is worthwhile enough to vote, and is apparently cool with making women’s bodies the property if the state.
    I’m so fucking done with Republicans.

  185. 185.

    James E Powell

    September 29, 2020 at 4:05 pm

    @Betty Cracker:

    In truth that number would be higher than 90%, but the name “Federalist Society” sounds like something that everyone should know about so in a poll, people will say they’ve heard of it even though they have no idea what it is.

  186. 186.

    Another Scott

    September 29, 2020 at 4:12 pm

    @James E Powell: … and nobody knows who funds and important part of them, either.

    https://www.whitehouse.senate.gov/news/speeches/the-third-federalist-society

    (The “?” are apparently non-standard characters from MS Word or something.)

    Bad enough that judicial selection has been outsourced?—?or in-sourced?—?to a partisan entity. Worse is how non-transparent this all is. It’s hard to find out who’s behind it. It’s a very non-transparent problem, but here is what we’ve been able to piece together. The evidence is that the Federalist Society is funded by massive, secret contributions from corporate right-wing groups that have big agendas before the courts.

    In 2017, the Federalist Society took $5.5 million via an entity called DonorsTrust. DonorsTrust’s has its sole purpose to launder the identities of donors to other groups, so that Americans don’t know the real backers of the groups. It is an identity removal machine for big donors. Through the hard work of investigators, journalists, and researchers, we have learned that the Koch brothers are among the largest, if not the largest, contributors to DonorsTrust. The Federalist Society’s total annual budget is about $20 million, so this $5.5 million in funding laundered through DonorsTrust provides more than a quarter of its entire budget.

    Other shadowy corporate and right-wing organizations also donate millions to the Federalist Society. In one year, the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, a right-wing trust, gave over $3 million to the Federalist Society.

    Koch Industries, several other Koch-network foundations and trusts, and nearly a dozen wholly anonymous donors have given over $100,000 each to the Federalist Society. Tax documents from 2014, uncovered by the New York Times, show a donation of more than $2 million from the Mercer family?—?the secretive donors who helped start Breibart News and bankrolled the Trump campaign.

    How do we know that these groups have a big agenda before the courts? We know that because they also fund a fleet of front groups that file so-called amicus briefs before courts signaling what results the big donors want. The Kochs, the Bradleys, the Mercers and their ilk spend millions to pursue an anti-regulation, anti-union, and anti-environment agenda. And they use the Federalist Society to stock the judiciary with judges who will rule their way.

    Lots and lots of sunlight needs to shine down on these various “non-profits”…

    Grr…

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  187. 187.

    Cameron

    September 29, 2020 at 4:15 pm

    I’m not a Nathan Robinson fan, but this piece has some very disturbing ( to me, anyway) descriptions of some of our future Justice’s  past decisions.

    https://www.currentaffairs.org/2020/09/why-amy-coney-barrett-should-not-be-on-the-supreme-court/

  188. 188.

    Ruckus

    September 29, 2020 at 4:15 pm

    @Martin:

    BINGO!

    Many wonder how republican politicians can continue to screw their own voters and get applauded for it. It is the sparrow/curtain rod story. As long as their “enemies” are getting treated worse, they are fine with whatever.

  189. 189.

    craigie

    September 29, 2020 at 4:19 pm

    @Kent:

    The way to do this is to start with “You’re on record as opposing the ACA. Can you describe the legal reasoning that supports your position?”

    Nowhere to hide on that one.

  190. 190.

    Chris Johnson

    September 29, 2020 at 4:20 pm

    @Martin: The youtuber Innuendo Studios has covered this very well in the video, ‘Always A Bigger Fish’. The thing is if you understand that’s the motivation of conservatives it gives you better weapons for arguing with them.

    Essentially you say ‘the hierarchy you support is not honest. It is giving people on the top an easy ride, a cheat. You need to not be cheating hardworking people on behalf of some oligarchs and cheaters who have not earned their success’.

    Since it is an article of faith to them that those on the top earned it, if you can prove that some on the top did not, then you can get the conservatives evening the score for you. IF you can prove that some on the top cheated.

    Conveniently, they all do. There’s always a crime.

  191. 191.

    Another Scott

    September 29, 2020 at 4:28 pm

    Entertaining goings-on in court today, apparently…

    Sullivan: "Have you been in communication with President Trump?"

    Powell: "That's protected by executive privilege"

    S: "You are not a government employee"

    P: "The..the one for lawyers then. Attorney's client privilege."

    S: "You are not his attorney."

    P: "…….Prima Nocta?"

    — slakmehl (@daniel2e) September 29, 2020

    (via Popehat)

    Kay – “We need better elites!!”

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  192. 192.

    Kay

    September 29, 2020 at 4:34 pm

    @Another Scott:

    Tipping the scales in favor of the rich doesn’t just create inequality, it produces an inept upper class shielded from the consequences of its errors.

    Income inequality makes lower quality elites. They don’t have to compete with scrappy peons! :)

    Conservatives should embrace my theory. It’s very market-based.

  193. 193.

    WaterGirl

    September 29, 2020 at 4:41 pm

    @Another Scott: Who are sullivan and powell?

  194. 194.

    James E Powell

    September 29, 2020 at 4:44 pm

    @WaterGirl:

    Sullivan is the judge on Flynn’s case. Powell – no relation – is Flynn’s attorney.

  195. 195.

    WaterGirl

    September 29, 2020 at 4:48 pm

    @James E Powell: Thank you!  I know that Judge Sullivan is the judge on Flynn’s case, but without knowing the attorney’s name or the context, I was totally lost.

  196. 196.

    Le Comte de Monte Cristo, fka Edmund Dantes

    September 29, 2020 at 4:49 pm

    OUTFUCKINGRAGEOUS!

    Louisville now has a “Green Zone” of heavy equipment and traffic blocks cordoning off Injustice Square and the courthouse complex. There is no vehicular traffic for about a 12 block area, with further barricades out about another 4 blocks to deny people most access to downtown.

    This is strangling such restaurants as are still open and is in place even after the cessation of a 9 pm to 6:30 am citywide curfew.

    At various times of the day, pedestrians – including lawyers – are harassed for ID and to state their business going into the cordoned area. It is my intention to cross that line without providing ID or stating my business (which is to file a confidential pleading in a child dependency case) that I cannot file online. I intend to be the biggest asshole on the planet, so that after I’m released, the city writes me a sizable check.

  197. 197.

    Bill Arnold

    September 29, 2020 at 4:52 pm

    Can a lawyer here have a look at this to see what ACB is saying about the Fourteenth Amendment?
    https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1619&context=jcl
    The argument is a little complex; not sure I’m following it as she … intended.

  198. 198.

    germy

    September 29, 2020 at 4:53 pm

    everyone looks so happy

    pic.twitter.com/LQqohJvfKv

    — alex (@alex_abads) September 29, 2020

  199. 199.

    cckids

    September 29, 2020 at 4:55 pm

    @What Have The Romans Ever Done for Us?:I do think they should ask point blank about Trump saying he needs her on the court to help him steal the election and whether accepting a nomination under those circumstances is ethical. They should also push her to commit to recusal if an election suit comes to the Court.

    This. To me, this is the main point.

    Also, they need to refrain from going after her weird, dangerous religious beliefs. That gives both the R’s and (more importantly) the media a convenient handle to grab and to ignore everything else that is said.

  200. 200.

    catclub

    September 29, 2020 at 4:56 pm

    @SiubhanDuinne: Did you see the WAPO editorial on “Thomas needs to recuse himself from anything related to Joe Biden”  and then they quote from his (Thomas’s) book on how Biden mistreated him?

  201. 201.

    SiubhanDuinne

    September 29, 2020 at 4:58 pm

    @germy:

    I approve the timing of the trolling!

  202. 202.

    catclub

    September 29, 2020 at 4:58 pm

    @Le Comte de Monte Cristo, fka Edmund Dantes: without providing ID or stating my business (which is to file a confidential pleading in a child dependency case) that I cannot file online. I intend to be the biggest asshole on the planet, so that after I’m released, the city writes me a sizable check.

     

    Good luck with that!

  203. 203.

    Immanentize

    September 29, 2020 at 4:59 pm

    No matter what you may think of the Lincoln Project, I give them props for their “Whispers” ad which certainly hastened the downfall of Brad Parscale.

  204. 204.

    Baud

    September 29, 2020 at 4:59 pm

    @Le Comte de Monte Cristo, fka Edmund Dantes:

    the city writes me a sizable check

    Or to your widow.

  205. 205.

    Fonzie84

    September 29, 2020 at 5:03 pm

    The idea is moronic.  It will be child’s play for someone as brilliant a jurist as she is and an experienced professor as well to turn these simple questions around to something positive for herself and for Trump.  These senators are no intellectual match for Barrett.  They should simply hide under their desks until it is all over rather than undermine the Democrats’ chances in November.

  206. 206.

    Immanentize

    September 29, 2020 at 5:04 pm

    @Bill Arnold: it is part of a Scalia musing that the 14th A. Applies only to African Americans who are descendants of slaves.  No I am not kidding.

    For fuckwits like her, I like to ask:

    Is funding the airforce, space force and marines unconstitutional?  Do we have an unconstitutional “standing army?”

  207. 207.

    jonas

    September 29, 2020 at 5:05 pm

    @Kay: 

    That story in that link was nuts. All these volunteers/workers for Trump are stunned to find out that the campaign is filled with all these managerial assholes who don’t give a damn about the people below them. FFS. Have you ever seen the president you’re campaigning for? What the hell did you expect?

    Oh, that’s right. You didn’t expect the leopards to eat *your* face.

  208. 208.

    catclub

    September 29, 2020 at 5:08 pm

    @Another Scott: you have to be impressed by how cheap it is for billlionaires to fund these groups.   The Koch are worth something like $40B and here they might have given $5M. Call it $4M for simplicity and it

    is 1/100th of 1% of $40B.  So if I had only $400,000 it would be like $40 – one restaurant meal.

  209. 209.

    Immanentize

    September 29, 2020 at 5:08 pm

    @Another Scott: I followed the whole hearing today via Emptywheel.  Holy crazy nutjobs, Batman!  Record and fact free arguments.  It is possible Sidney Powell altered a document submitted to the Court.  Shit gonna get real.

  210. 210.

    catclub

    September 29, 2020 at 5:09 pm

    @Baud: I was thinking the same thing. Outcomes Might be melanin dependent.

  211. 211.

    tybee

    September 29, 2020 at 5:09 pm

    @Baud:

    Or to your widow.

    as long as someone gets paid, it’s all good

    @Baud:

  212. 212.

    debbie

    September 29, 2020 at 5:12 pm

    I’ve decided to watch reruns of Criminal Minds tonight. Seeing competent psychopaths will be a refreshing change.

  213. 213.

    catclub

    September 29, 2020 at 5:13 pm

     

    PoliticsTrump Tax Returns Show President’s Exposure to Foreign Influence 4 hours ago

    Biden Adds Pressure to Trump Pre-Debate by Releasing Tax Returns

    Biden should state that his returns also show he does not owe money to unknown foreign entities.

  214. 214.

    Benw

    September 29, 2020 at 5:14 pm

    Confirmation of Trump’s malfeasance would be a highlight of Barrett‘s hearings!

  215. 215.

    Mike S (Now with a Democratic Congressperson!)

    September 29, 2020 at 5:15 pm

    @Jeffro: I’d be interested in hearing her thoughts on who might have standing to sue for the enforcement of the Emoluments clause. Is it enforceable at all? Or is a law needed to enact penalties?

  216. 216.

    catclub

    September 29, 2020 at 5:15 pm

    @debbie: Seeing competent psychopaths will be a refreshing change.

     

    except they always catch em, right?  The real competent ones never get caught.  BTK went 25 or so years before being caught.

     

    Or do you mean the detectives are competent psychopaths? I could go with that.

  217. 217.

    WaterGirl

    September 29, 2020 at 5:15 pm

    @Immanentize:

    I followed the whole hearing today via Emptywheel.  Holy crazy nutjobs, Batman!  Record and fact free arguments.  It is possible Sidney Powell altered a document submitted to the Court.  Shit gonna get real.

    My ears perked up!  Can you tell us more?

  218. 218.

    catclub

    September 29, 2020 at 5:15 pm

    @WaterGirl: there was a live blog at TPM

  219. 219.

    SiubhanDuinne

    September 29, 2020 at 5:16 pm

    @catclub:

    No, I missed that! Thanks, I’ll go find it as soon as I catch up with this thread.

  220. 220.

    WaterGirl

    September 29, 2020 at 5:16 pm

    @catclub:

    except they always catch em, right?  The real competent ones never get caught.

    Sometimes takes a whole season, and even more than one season, to catch the really bad ones.

  221. 221.

    Another Scott

    September 29, 2020 at 5:17 pm

    @Cameron: Thanks for the pointer.

    It’s a long piece for the web, but worth the time.

    Unless we are open about the fact that political values matter, it is indeed hard to find reasons to oppose “qualified” conservative justices. But that is absurd: it matters a hell of a lot whether a person is likely to take your most fundamental rights away. In fact, I would go so far as to say that I would prefer as a justice a person with no legal credentials whatsoever, who barely even understands what a law is but is committed to doing right by others. Yes, better the virtuous doofus than someone who has published a large number of law review articles and clerked for Scalia but accepts horrible injustices as fine, and declines to use their power to rectify those injustices because they voluntarily subscribe to a particular theory of textual interpretation.

    Co-sign.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  222. 222.

    Martin

    September 29, 2020 at 5:18 pm

    @Chris Johnson: The challenge though is that who is in the over/underclass is incredibly flexible. In the span of a single conversation the rich can move from over- to under-, etc.

  223. 223.

    zhena gogolia

    September 29, 2020 at 5:19 pm

    Donald Trump's finances are strong. Sorry Failing New York Times. Trump is only launching an Only Fans, Go Fund Me & Patreon to get closer to PATRIOTIC SUPPORTERS! pic.twitter.com/kHvhiFaWIh— J-L Cauvin (@JLCauvin) September 29, 2020

  224. 224.

    Morzer

    September 29, 2020 at 5:19 pm

    I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: make Coney Barrett go through every sordid, corrupt moment of Trump’s presidency and answer for it on the record. Make Goody Two Shoes squirm.

  225. 225.

    debbie

    September 29, 2020 at 5:19 pm

    @catclub:

    No, they do get caught in the end, but they’re much harder to figure out than the Orange Clown.

    It’s a very fine line, but I’ll do anything to avoid watching the debate.

  226. 226.

    catclub

    September 29, 2020 at 5:23 pm

    on the TPM live blog juicy tidbit:

    After suggesting that the DOJ attorneys were arguing like “bad defense lawyers,” Gleeson says he wants to focus “on the rules they have articulated for” Flynn that won’t be applied for any other case.

    He notes that the DOJ, in its arguments, did not respond to his challenge that the Department drop any case where an agent had some sort of bias. He also raised the unlikelihood that in any other false statements case, the DOJ would turn over to the defendant any evidence suggesting an agent doubted at one point the defendant’s guilt.

  227. 227.

    Le Comte de Monte Cristo, fka Edmund Dantes

    September 29, 2020 at 5:24 pm

    @Baud:

    Her fondest dream…..

  228. 228.

    Sebastian

    September 29, 2020 at 5:24 pm

    @piratedan:

    Well isn’t that the core of the problem in this country? Republicans and their oligarch puppet masters have been flooding the airwaves for decades year round and the only time we get to show the population we are not baby eating commie monsters is during a presidential election because then we finally get our message out.

    The rightwing noise machine needs to be destroyed or anything we do will roll back downhill like Sisyphus’ rock.

  229. 229.

    David ? ☘The Establishment☘? Koch

    September 29, 2020 at 5:26 pm

    @catclub:

    the DOJ would turn over to the defendant any evidence suggesting an agent doubted at one point the defendant’s guilt.

     

    This is some shit. Flynn lied directly to the face of the FBI (they have audio of the calls) and some agents still wanted to “doubt” his guilt.

  230. 230.

    jeffreyw

    September 29, 2020 at 5:28 pm

    @Ruckus:

    Hearing FS, first thing folks around here think is Farm Service.  Sells seed, fertilizer, fuel and LP gas.

  231. 231.

    catclub

    September 29, 2020 at 5:31 pm

    I liked this one:

     

    I think at tomorrow night’s debate, #JoeBiden should start every response by looking at the moderator & saying, “Well, that’s the 750 dollar question, isn’t it?”

  232. 232.

    catclub

    September 29, 2020 at 5:32 pm

    @David ? ☘The Establishment☘? Koch: OR, the DOJ is claiming that some agent had some doubt, but not actually bringing that person to testify to such facts.

  233. 233.

    brantl

    September 29, 2020 at 5:33 pm

    @Felanius Kootea: Sully’s commercial is spectacular! And what Amy Barrett needs to be asked is the definition of each crime that Dumbold Jerk Stump has committed, then go briefly through the facts, and ask how that doesn’t fit the definition of the crime? Do this with every instance. Rinse, repeat. They can beat him to DEATH with this.

  234. 234.

    Redshift

    September 29, 2020 at 5:33 pm

    @craigie:

    The way to do this is to start with “You’re on record as opposing the ACA. Can you describe the legal reasoning that supports your position?”
     

    The answer I want to hear is “you’re on record as opposing the ACA, but have also insisted that the courts should not ‘make policy’.” How do you reconcile those positions?

  235. 235.

    Kenneth Fair

    September 29, 2020 at 5:34 pm

    @randy khan: I think that’s exactly what she would do. Maybe the way to fix that is to frame the questions as hypotheticals, but where the hypothetical is obviously and directly based on what Trump has done.

  236. 236.

    Another Scott

    September 29, 2020 at 5:34 pm

    @Immanentize:

    Executive Privilege? The President talking to his convicted former National Security Counsel's Lawyer about the status of his criminal case is somehow tied to Executive Office functioning?

    That's pretty shocking if someone actually thought that was privileged https://t.co/eyzKunD9L2

    — Senator Scott Surovell (@ssurovell) September 29, 2020

    (Surovell is my state senator and a very sharp cookie!)

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  237. 237.

    Kay

    September 29, 2020 at 5:34 pm

    Brad Parscale is under investigation for ‘stealing’ between $25-$40 million from Trump’s 2020 presidential campaign, well-placed sources told DailyMail.com
    The 44-year-old is also being investigated for ‘pocketing’ another $10 million from the Republican National Committee, the insiders added

    Told ya.

    Biden could take care of the whole criminal gang just by investigating that campaign’s finances.
    There is no way in hell the sleazy Trump Family and the low quality hires collected all that money without stealing some of it.

  238. 238.

    Omnes Omnibus

    September 29, 2020 at 5:35 pm

    @Fonzie84: I call shenanigans.

  239. 239.

    Redshift

    September 29, 2020 at 5:35 pm

    @James E Powell:

    If the Benghazi hearings had been directed against Obama, they’d have gone nowhere fast. 

    Exactly. There was barely a peep in the news media about Ron Johnson’s Hunterghazi hearings.

  240. 240.

    Kay

    September 29, 2020 at 5:37 pm

    Their spending spree represents a remarkable turnaround for the college basketball standout who lost his family’s company to bankruptcy in the mid-2000s but rebuilt his finances after working for Trump in various digital guises since 2011.

    Because of course he did. That should be a given at this point.

  241. 241.

    Redshift

    September 29, 2020 at 5:37 pm

    @Kay: Bet he’s only being investigated because he didn’t clear his stealing with the boss, and he’s not a family member.

  242. 242.

    James E Powell

    September 29, 2020 at 5:39 pm

    @Bill Arnold:

    I gave it the quick overview and if I was paid to do so I would provide a well-researched response, but the short as is right here.

    More generally, the idea known variously as originalism, original intent, and, I guess now, original public meaning – is a bullshit intellectual guise by which the right-wing seeks to repeal the 20th century. Apart from their habit of only applying it to get right-wing results and ignoring it when it doesn’t, the claim that it should be an objective constitutional first principle fails because there is nothing to show that the framers intended to embody the theory in the constitution.

  243. 243.

    Another Scott

    September 29, 2020 at 5:39 pm

    I don't think the conservative take on @realDonaldTrump paying no taxes should be: BECAUSE HE'S SMART!

    I've paid nearly 50% of my income in taxes, year after year, and any system that allows billionaires to pay ZERO is unspeakable corrupt.

    How about changing it, Democrats?

    — Ann Coulter (@AnnCoulter) September 29, 2020

    Yeah!

    Is that…? Yes, yes it is. Hmm… Rooting for injuries, I am.

    (via ssurovell)

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  244. 244.

    catclub

    September 29, 2020 at 5:40 pm

    @Redshift: beat me to it.

  245. 245.

    Miss Bianca

    September 29, 2020 at 5:41 pm

    @Le Comte de Monte Cristo, fka Edmund Dantes: 

    God speed you, dude. WTF, Louisville??!

  246. 246.

    brantl

    September 29, 2020 at 5:44 pm

    @trollhattan: And the Dems should say, “you can prove that’s a girl, and I’ll think about apologizing, okay?”.

  247. 247.

    Jim, Foolish Literalist

    September 29, 2020 at 5:45 pm

    @Another Scott:

    Coulter: I’ve paid nearly 50% of my income in taxes, year after year,

    I’m no accountant, but Ima go ahead and call bullshit on that

  248. 248.

    Another Scott

    September 29, 2020 at 5:47 pm

    #RBG was our hero. She lifted up women and men to a more fair, equal, and just America. With her legacy and our future on the line, please join us to help share her words on billboards. Donate here https://t.co/l8RXiIE8Bp if you can; otherwise please share a #WinItForRBG tweet. pic.twitter.com/wYnXCvn6qT

    — Christine Pelosi (@sfpelosi) September 29, 2020

    (via NotLarrySabato)

    https://www.gofundme.com/f/winitforrbg is the clean link.

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  249. 249.

    The Thin Black Duke

    September 29, 2020 at 5:52 pm

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    I’m no accountant, but Ima go ahead and call bullshit on that

    Especially when Coulter is implying that the Democrats are to blame for such a corrupt system.

  250. 250.

    J R in WV

    September 29, 2020 at 5:54 pm

    @Felanius Kootea:

    Someone on the thread below mentioned the Lincoln Project ad featuring Captain Sullenberger.  It is a thing of beauty.

    Wife and I just watched that ad — Captain Sullenberger is well spoken and obviously skilled at his craft of flying. The ad is superb, as is Sully. His flying that airliner successfully into the Hudson river, saving every passenger, the whole crew, was heroic in the best sense of the word.

    Vote….Him…. Out!!!! What a great person. Proud he is standing up for America and the Democratic Party!

  251. 251.

    Bunter

    September 29, 2020 at 5:54 pm

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: I’ve had this argument with many people. Doesn’t matter that there’s no 50% bracket. Or that even in NYC, I, who have nothing other than the standard deductions, don’t pay anywhere near that even with adding up Fed, state and local. People believe it and cannot be disabused of the belief. I finally told the last three people they needed better accountants if true. Oh, to make it worse, this is in the financial sector.

  252. 252.

    David ? ☘The Establishment☘? Koch

    September 29, 2020 at 5:56 pm

    @Kay: That just adds to the long, long list (link).   I’m not sure if I should add Bolton to the list as well (he’s facing a grand jury).

  253. 253.

    James E Powell

    September 29, 2020 at 5:57 pm

    @Immanentize:

    I saw a quote on TPM that in her conversation(s) with Trump, Flynn’s attorney said she recommended that he not pardon Flynn. Is that because guilt is implicit in a pardon? He already pleaded guilty. Why wouldn’t his attorney just take the pardon & go?

  254. 254.

    MomSense

    September 29, 2020 at 6:03 pm

    @Immanentize:

    I skimmed one exchange that started with executive privilege (unceremoniously denied) and then went to attorney client privilege which also was denied.  It was like D’oh moment after D’oh moment.  Where did Flynn find his counsel??

  255. 255.

    topclimber

    September 29, 2020 at 6:06 pm

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist: You are no doubt right about federal income tax. But add in state tax, sales tax,  property tax, excise taxes on more than you want to know and she might be in the mid 30% area.

    Or she can be doing the usual BS of treating marginal tax rate (that on your highest bracket) with total tax.

    Being it is Coulter, I go with the usual BS.

  256. 256.

    Ruckus

    September 29, 2020 at 6:21 pm

    @jeffreyw:

    I’m sure that’s around where you live, not around this blog…

    Some in the navy would have thought that meant fucking skanks, so add in a third possibility.

    And of course here it means Federalist Society.

  257. 257.

    StevetheWeave

    September 29, 2020 at 6:34 pm

    [I posted this on DailyKos two days ago.  You get her to agree, agree, agree, and then play switcheroo.]

    The Dems have to give up this 5-minutes-each BS in favor of a professional prosecutor, someone like Daniel Goldman who worked on impeachment to Pamela Karlan from Stanford who testified at the impeachment.

    The Rethugs brought in that “Expert on Rapes” during the Kavanaugh hearing from somewhere in flyover country.  We can bring our expert.

    This is outright war and Barrett is a right-wing ideologue.  There is video of her saying, effectively, that settled law is settled.  Major BS.  Do you really think that if an Abolish Roe case came up, she would recuse (no way!)?  Or she would not agree to abolish?

    In the hearing, she’s going to say that her previous opinions are valid.  And when the time comes, she will deliberately reverse herself.  She is deep down – in her soul – (of which will get uglier as she ages and gains more power )– fundie’s dream.

    Quite sure that she looks in the mirror every morning these days and says, “Perhaps we would like to the first woman Chief Justice”

    So here’s what she should be asked (Q/A).

    Is she religious?  Yes.

    Believes in Bible? Yes

    Will you confirm that Bible has broad appeal to many people?  Yes.

    And among many folks, there is some disagreement about how it is read and interpreted? Yes.

    Some people believe that what happened in the Bible literally happened, but for others the drama of the Bible supports many beliefs and stories with the weight of moral authority.  Is that correct? Yes.

    So whether it really happened or not, the beauty of the Bible are its stories, real or hypothetical, that inspire us.  Correct?  Yes.

    But generally the Bible certainly says that “the most of us and the least of us” are human beings who should be treated with dignity and respect? Yes.

    One of the 10 commandments which Christians, Jews, and other religions agree is “Thou shall not commit adultery” or “Thou shall not covet thy neighbor’s wife.”  Correct?  Yes.

    In as few words as possible, please define adultery for us.  Blah. Blah. Blah,

    (Now, get ready)

    It has been reported and verified many times that Donald Trump dated and may have had sexual relations with other women while still  married to his 2nd wife.

    Would that act be defined as adultery?

    Blah, Blah, Blah.  (starts to twirl in her seat; some pompous Rethug Senator gets all huffy).

    Another of the 10 commandments is “Thou shall not steal.”  Correct?  Yes.

    In as few words as possible, please define stealing for us.  Blah. Blah. Blah,

    (Now, get ready)

    It has been reported and verified many times that Donald Trump did not fully pay men and women who did contract work for him.  (If you have a better incident to use, use it)

    Would that act be defined as stealing?

    Blah, Blah, Blah.  (starts to twirl & burn in her seat; some pompous Rethug Senator screams for someone else to get the fire extinguisher, and then gets all huffy).

    REPEAT AS MANY TIMES AS NECESSARY TO WATCH HER SQUIRM (AND TRUMP WILL GO NUTS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

    Look, the Rethugs will call the Dems religious bigots for questioning her faith.  Here, we use her faith against her.

    She has also ruled on tax matters.  We should try to find a way to have her cite her religion against stealing, and use that as a way to shame Trump on his non-payment of taxes.

    (This is why we need a full-time Questioner on behalf of Senators.  Dems senator press release:  we are 100% united and we are fighting for the people! Other suggestions welcome)

    Feel free to add.

    But …

    We need a full-time Questioner on behalf of Senators.

  258. 258.

    Miss Bianca

    September 29, 2020 at 6:35 pm

    @Omnes Omnibus: I was going to call “malarkey”. Or something more pungent.

  259. 259.

    craigie

    September 29, 2020 at 6:36 pm

    @Redshift:

    Also excellent.

  260. 260.

    Bill Arnold

    September 29, 2020 at 6:37 pm

    @Immanentize:

    Is funding the air force, space force and marines unconstitutional?

    The Air Force is mentioned. The part I was looking at was this (and the surrounding argument(s)):

    But Congress and the President have also created super precedents, including the constitutionality of the Louisiana Purchase, the admission of the state of West Virginia, the seating of territorial delegates in the House, the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, the creation of the Smithsonian Institution, and the establishment of the United States Air Force.

    and the footnote for the Fourteenth Amendment mention is:

    See CONG. GLOBE , 40th Cong., 2d Sess. 4295–96 (1868) (concurrent resolution delaring that the Fourteenth Amendment “is hereby determined to be part of the Constitution of the United States” approved by the House by a vote of 127-33, with fifty-five members not voting); see also S. RES. 198, 114TH CONG ., 1 ST SESS. (2015) (commemorating the 150th anniversary of the ratification of the Thirteenth, Fourteenth, and Fifteenth Amendments in an unanimous resolution and stating that “the people of the United States . . . ratified the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States on July 9, 1868”).

  261. 261.

    Another Scott

    September 29, 2020 at 6:40 pm

    @Bunter: I’m sure she’s taking her gross pay as the denominator, the net pay as the numerator, and saying it’s less than 0.50 and therefore she’s losing “half her income in taxes”.  Note she didn’t say “income taxes”.

    Lots and lots of people are in that boat.  And it’s not particularly unfair for most of them above the median income.

    But “billionaires” paying $750, yeah, that’s unfair.  If she wants Democrats to fix the tax code, that’s fine with me!!

    Cheers,
    Scott.

  262. 262.

    debbie

    September 29, 2020 at 6:43 pm

    @Jim, Foolish Literalist:

    Even if she’s living in New York (the city and state taxes are both high), she’s lying. Because of course.

  263. 263.

    Geminid

    September 29, 2020 at 6:44 pm

    @James E Powell: Before “Originalism” there was “Strict Constructionism.” But that got so identified with racism it had to be rebranded as “Originalism.”

  264. 264.

    SiubhanDuinne

    September 29, 2020 at 7:53 pm

    @Miss Bianca:

    “Fucking bullshit” was what first popped to mind. Is this a new troll or someone with a history here?

  265. 265.

    Miss Bianca

    September 29, 2020 at 7:59 pm

    @SiubhanDuinne: I just automatically suspect “new troll”, myself, but who knows.

  266. 266.

    brantl

    September 29, 2020 at 8:20 pm

    @Bill Arnold: It’s pretty obvious even in a  cursory read, that she’s got a stick shoved up her ass, just as far as the one that was up  Scalia’s.

  267. 267.

    Wyatt Salamanca

    September 29, 2020 at 8:37 pm

    @trollhattan:

    Remembering Lindsay Graham practically bursting into tears apologizing to Li’l Brett for what big meanies those Democrat Party people were to him

    I look forward to Lindsay bursting into tears on Election Day when he has to give his concession speech.  He needs to be swept into the trash receptacle of history along with Trump.

  268. 268.

    Wyatt Salamanca

    September 29, 2020 at 8:46 pm

    @SiubhanDuinne:

    Is this a new troll or someone with a history here?

    Meet the new troll, same as the old troll.

    (With apologies to Pete Townshend)

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

2023 Pet Calendars

Pet Calendar Preview: A
Pet Calendar Preview: B

*Calendars can not be ordered until Cafe Press gets their calendar paper in.

Recent Comments

  • Geminid on Monday Morning Open Thread: Go, Team Biden! (Feb 6, 2023 @ 2:22pm)
  • Scout211 on Roast Chicken Chronicles…entry [n]…. (Feb 6, 2023 @ 2:20pm)
  • Ruckus on Monday Morning Open Thread: Go, Team Biden! (Feb 6, 2023 @ 2:20pm)
  • Kent on Roast Chicken Chronicles…entry [n]…. (Feb 6, 2023 @ 2:20pm)
  • Suzanne on Roast Chicken Chronicles…entry [n]…. (Feb 6, 2023 @ 2:19pm)

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
Favorite Dogs & Cats
Classified Documents: A Primer

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Front-pager Twitter

John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
ActualCitizensUnited

Shop Amazon via this link to support Balloon Juice   

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice Events

5/14  The Apocalypse
5/20  Home Away from Home
5/29  We’re Back, Baby
7/21  Merging!

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!