🐱 With Little to Attack SCOTUS Nominee, Republicans Are Going Full Hypocrisy

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
CatParty



While you wouldn’t know it from the attacks Republicans are lobbing at Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson, President Joe Biden’s nominee to the Supreme Court, her confirmation is a foregone conclusion. She’s been on the Democratic Supreme Court shortlist since the Obama administration. As a former US District Court judge for eight years and a member of the US Sentencing Commission, and newly appointed to the DC Circuit Court of Appeals, Jackson has been through three separate Senate confirmation proceedings since 2010. Three Republican senators voted to confirm her to the DC Circuit in June. In short, not only is she extremely qualified for the job, but she has already been thoroughly vetted. Even Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has conceded that she has an impressive resume.

As a result, conservatives have very little fodder with which to oppose her. GOP senators have indicated they will weaponize her record as a defense lawyer when she represented alleged terrorists detained indefinitely without trial at the Guantanamo Bay naval base. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) has also made a feeble attempt to slime Jackson as soft on child porn by mischaracterizing her sentencing record as a trial court judge. GOP senators have been shamed somewhat already for their clearly racist comments and questions during Jackson’s DC Circuit nomination last summer—asking whether she’d ever participated in a riot, for instance, or if she’d ever been arrested for committing a hate crime. (Gracefully, she answered no to both.) As Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) discovered during that hearing when he asked Jackson how race would affect her work as a judge, a question never asked of a white nominee, attacking Jackson over race or suggesting that she is an “affirmative action” pick is not likely to go over well in the age of social media. That leaves Republicans and their conservative allies with, well, not much to work with.

Rather than simply celebrate the historic nomination of the nation’s first Black woman to the Supreme Court, Republicans have come up with another approach. This one is a deeply cynical and wildly hypocritical campaign to paint Jackson as a tool of “dark money” groups looking to pack the Supreme Court with radical leftists.

When it comes to Supreme Court nominations, Republicans have rarely been troubled by hypocrisy. That much was clear in 2016 when the Republican Senate refused to even hold a hearing for Merrick Garland, Obama’s nominee to replace Justice Antonin Scalia, on the grounds that his February death had occurred too close to a presidential election. That precedent was ditched four years later when they turned around and confirmed Trump nominee Amy Coney Barrett to replace the late Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg a week before the 2020 presidential election. Fast forward to 2022 and the nomination of Judge Jackson and their professed dismay over how dark money contaminates the process of judicial nominations.

When Biden announced Jackson’s nomination, McConnell did not miss a beat and issued a press release declaring she “was the favored choice of far-left dark-money groups that have spent years attacking the legitimacy and structure of the Court itself.”

The irony of this line of attack is that McConnell has been on a crusade to allow more dark money in politics for decades. His name captions the first Supreme Court case challenging the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance reform legislation, which attempted to rein in the flood of anonymous corporate donations in politics, and he openly supported the 2010 Citizens United decision that ultimately invalidated that landmark legislation. As Brian Fallon, the executive director of Demand Justice, one of the groups to which McConnell was apparently referring, told the Washington Post, the minority leader’s comments were “a tell that he has no hand to play against Judge Jackson on the merits.”

Fallon speaks from some experience. Over the past year, Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee have been laying the groundwork for a Supreme Court campaign focused on dark money by questioning all of Biden’s judicial nominees about any relationship or contact they may have had with Demand Justice. Last spring, Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) and Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) asked Jackson extensive written questions about the organization and any contacts she may have had with its leadership as part of her confirmation to the DC Circuit, including whether she knew that Demand Justice had put her on its “shortlist” of desired Supreme Court nominees.

Indeed, McConnell’s dark-money talking points are part of a larger coordinated messaging campaign against Jackson amplified by conservative media stars and organizations that, coincidentally, happen to be dark-money groups.

In January, after Breyer announced his retirement, Fox News host Laura Ingraham warned that Biden wanted to rush through a nominee to replace him because “that’s what the left’s dark money trolls want.” She claimed that whoever Biden nominated to replace Breyer would be the product of “a shady network of…dark money groups that are working to subvert—not just to change or add to our judiciary—but to change our entire system of government and frankly, our entire way of life.” The Fox News host failed to mention that she once worked for and still maintains close ties with the Independent Women’s Forum, a dark-money group in the Koch network that grew out of a committee created to defend Justice Clarence Thomas from sexual harassment accusations during his 1991 Supreme Court confirmation hearings.

The dark-money talking points for conservatives fighting Jackson’s confirmation also hail from the Judicial Crisis Network, a conservative nonprofit that does not disclose its donors. Its president, Carrie Severino, clerked for Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Founded during the second term of President George W. Bush, the group spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on ads and grassroots organizing to support the nominations of Chief Justice John Roberts and Associate Justice Samuel Alito.

By 2008, JCN was receiving money from the Koch network through the now-defunct Wellspring Committee, another dark-money organization controlled by well-connected conservative activist Ann Corkery. With a steady stream of anonymous donations, JCN has spent millions to influence state judicial and attorney general elections as well as federal judicial nominations. It has close ties to Leonard Leo, the vice president of the Federalist Society, another repository of dark money. Leo advised President Donald Trump on all of his judicial nominations and is central to an even larger web of secretive nonprofit groups involved in judicial confirmation fights.

In 2018, JCN pledged to spend at least $10 million backing the confirmation of Justice Brett Kavanaugh. In the run-up to that fight, the group received $17 million from a single, undisclosed donor. It also spent at least $10 million pushing the confirmation of Justice Barrett in 2020. None of this has stopped the group from complaining about left-wing dark money, even before Biden nominated anyone to fill the seat of retiring Justice Stephen Breyer.

JCN has never supported a Democratic judicial nominee, but the group discovered a new affinity for Breyer once he retired, seizing on him as a victim of the liberal dark-money groups they warn are backing Jackson’s confirmation. In early February, Severino wrote a National Review piececomplaining that “far-left dark money groups” had “intimidated” Breyer into retiring so that Biden could replace the moderate justice with someone younger and more radical. She lauded Breyer, who, she wrote, “prides himself on not being partisan,” noting that even McConnell had praised the justice for coming out against a proposal kicked around by Democrats to expand the size of the Supreme Court.

Severino decried liberal groups like Demand Justice that had gone so far as to drive a billboard truck around the Supreme Court urging Breyer to retire while Democrats held the Senate. (In his written questions to Jackson last year, Grassley included a photo of the truck showing the message “Breyer Retire: It’s time for a Black woman Supreme Court justice,” and asked her if she agreed with the message. She declined to comment.)

“To be clear, the Left has bullied Justice Breyer into retirement, and now it will demand a justice who rubber stamps their liberal political agenda,” she wrote. “And that is what the Democrats will provide because the time has come to pay back the dark-money supporters who helped elect them.”

Not long afterward, in early February, JCN announced that it would commit substantial sums of its own dark money to buy ads focused on the “record amount of dark money” spent from the Arabella Advisors network to elect Biden and other Senate Democrats. “Left-wing dark money groups in the Arabella Advisors network spent a jaw-dropping amount of money in 2020 to help elect Joe Biden and Senate Democrats,” Severino said in a press release announcing a $2.5 million ad buy. “These groups have done everything in their power to corrupt the judiciary and the judicial nominations process, from running smear campaigns against Justices Kavanaugh and Barrett to pushing radical court-packing reforms to even intimidating Justice Breyer into retirement. Now that they have a vacancy, they want payback for their dark money spending in the form of a Supreme Court justice who will be a rubber stamp for their unpopular and far-left political agendas.”

Despite their insistence, @ArabellaAdvisor is indeed part of the liberal dark money network driving Biden’s Supreme Court pick. pic.twitter.com/NUffprRIiO
— Americans for Public Trust (@apublictrust) March 17, 2022
Arabella Advisors is a for-profit consulting firm that helps ultra-rich people funnel large donations, often anonymously, into political nonprofits. It is indeed part of a liberal dark-money network, one an Atlantic reporter recently dubbed “the left’s equivalent of the Koch brothers,” the oil and gas magnates who have long funded right-wing political groups. In the 2020 election cycle, the network spent $1.2 billion, according to the New York Times. Among the groups linked to it are nonprofits focused on the judiciary, such as Demand Justice, which recently announced its intent to spend $1 million on ads to support Jackson’s confirmation, and which has strong ties to the Biden administration. White House press secretary Jen Psaki was a senior adviser to the group and Paige Herwig, who is senior counsel to Biden and handles judicial nominations, once served as its deputy chief counsel.

Arabella has pushed back against much of the right-wing messaging about its network and accusations of being a dark money conduit, which started about three years ago with the Capital Research Center, another nonprofit funded by anonymous donors, and the Koch and other right-wing foundations. In a statement on its website, it says, “Judicial Crisis Network (JCN) has promoted false claims about Arabella Advisors and some of our clients. These build off a series of similar false claims that Capital Research Center (CRC) has promoted for the last three years. These claims turn on a variety of factual errors and deliberate mischaracterizations—including the implication that Arabella is responsible for the work of a completely independent nonprofit organization: Demand Justice. In fact, Arabella Advisors does not work for Demand Justice in any capacity. We also aren’t anything like the caricature JCN paints of us.”

What’s more important, JCN had been part of a dark-money network for years before Arabella Advisors arrived on the scene. Demand Justice didn’t exist at all until 2018. If anything, JCN provided Democrats with the blueprint for how to use anonymous donations in judicial confirmation fights. Nonetheless, Republicans on the Judiciary Committee are likely to parrot JCN’s talking points during Jackson’s confirmation hearing, all while pretending that they are shocked—shocked!—to discover dark money in the political system.

After all, what else have they got? As Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) likes to remind reporters, Jackson has more judicial experience than four other justices currently on the court did when they were nominated. Conservative legal commentator Ed Whelan predicted as much in a tweet back in January, “Unless Biden really messes up, Senate Republicans can’t expect to defeat his Supreme Court nominee. Goal should instead be to continue to win public debate over judicial philosophy and inflict political costs.”

Unless Biden really messes up, Senate Republicans can't expect to defeat his Supreme Court nominee. Goal should instead be to continue to win public debate over judicial philosophy and inflict political costs.
— Ed Whelan (@EdWhelanEPPC) January 27, 2022
 
I would be fine if 1. The pick wasn’t from Biden and 2. Hopefully the pick doesn’t put a whole bunch of novelty shit like ghetto judges.
Aside from, you know, her history of giving pedos a slap on the wrist. Also,

RREPUBLICANS POUNCE
 
The pick in my mind just reeks of pandering. Also, the lady is indeed on record going lax on sex offenders so it does kinda play into the pedo-joe schtick.
Lest we forget the shit that was stirred over kavenaugh. it's just a partisan game each side uses the same tactics then accuses the other side of not playing fair IMO
 
The irony of this line of attack is that McConnell has been on a crusade to allow more dark money in politics for decades.
And here I thought this article would be a list of republicans who got caught diddling kids. But I guess if they wrote that article, it’d be harder to defend CP.
 
Republicans can't do anything since they're minority anyway right?
 
They're still buttblasted that Hawley committed the Crime of Noticing.
 
Hypocrisy would be simply confirming her no questions asked, the Republicans aren't being hypocritical at all by applying the same standards we expect of our Supreme Court justices ever since the Kavanaugh confirmation hearing.
 
"Just give up sweaty, your side has no say in this, so STOP NOTICING THINGS REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE".

Is it common to confirm a justice while the justice being replaced is still on the bench? They are so nakedly doing this now because it's an election year and the outlook is grim for the dem party. Even if the unquestioned fact that she is a pedophile never surfaced, her appointment will be a blemish on the court just for how nakedly political it is and the only reason she was on the list was for her gender and skin color.
 
And here I thought this article would be a list of republicans who got caught diddling kids. But I guess if they wrote that article, it’d be harder to defend CP.
Yeah, expecting any kind of anti-pedo #metoo is so :optimistic: that all the :optimistic:s involved could get converted back to enough solar power to reverse global warming, global cooling, and climate change as three separate issues.

Breitbart won't even call out a Democrat politician for literally admitting to distributing child pornography. The only people I could find admitting that the bastard distributed CP were in the comments section, but Breitbart proper still ran cover for him. A Democrat.

You'd think that if only one cause could unite the left and the right, it would be something like jobs or housing or food, things that affect everyone's day to day lives.

But no, we live in fucking clown world, and the only thing the clowns can agree on is fucking children. Both literally and figuratively.
 
The pick in my mind just reeks of pandering. Also, the lady is indeed on record going lax on sex offenders so it does kinda play into the pedo-joe schtick.
Lest we forget the shit that was stirred over kavenaugh. it's just a partisan game each side uses the same tactics then accuses the other side of not playing fair IMO
The Kavanaugh hearings were the nuclear option. Now everything is on the table.
 
"Just give up sweaty, your side has no say in this, so STOP NOTICING THINGS REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE".

Is it common to confirm a justice while the justice being replaced is still on the bench? They are so nakedly doing this now because it's an election year and the outlook is grim for the dem party. Even if the unquestioned fact that she is a pedophile never surfaced, her appointment will be a blemish on the court just for how nakedly political it is and the only reason she was on the list was for her gender and skin color.
It is more common to retire in office than to full Ginsburg. Usually they time their retirement for when “their party” can nominate the replacement. That’s what Kennedy did when Kavanaugh replaced him.
 
Rather than simply celebrate the historic nomination of the nation’s first Black woman to the Supreme Court, Republicans have come up with another approach.
Rather than simply doing what they're told, Republicans are calling out that time we threw our toys out of the crib and accused a man of being a gang-rapist with no evidence right in front of his children.
 
Brown's record shows she was clearly easy on pedos, even particularly disgusting pedos.

She's well qualified, her background is really typical for a Supreme Court justice. High profile law program, supreme court clerkship, appointments in the federal circuit, etc. She's even vaguely related to some former GOP rep whose name is escaping me (EDIT: she's related by marriage to Paul Ryan). You can expect her to be a carbon copy of Sotomayor. Very reliable liberal vote, DC swamp-approved views on everything.

Michelle Childs is the nominee they considered that would have actually been interesting, bringing a different perspective & background to the court with less swamp affiliation. Childs may have even been an occasional swing vote, and you know Dems were not having any of that. I think Leondra Kruger from the California Supreme Court was the other consideration, and she comes off as well left of the already solidly left Brown.

Expect Brown to go through no problem, DC doesn't see pedo apologism as a negative at all.
 
Last edited:
Why are people acting like she's not going to be next supreme court judge? Obama got a judge put in the supreme court back when it was 60 votes required. She's going to get 60+ confirmation votes for sure, anyone denying it is whacked. Especially cause she's a black bitch (stunning and brave)
 
....FUCK..... Motherjones Magazine. That Ultra Left Wing Ass Rag has been around for over 40+ years.
 
This is perfectly normal for when a politician is running or is nominated for any kind of position. The fact that they think it's an "attack" is very telling of their intentions with Kavanaugh and ACB. I take that they would have never bothered to do any background check had the nomination gone for a Democrat judge.

Instead, they didn't do any research, they straight up made up a rape accusation for Kavanaugh and were close to say that ACB was trafficking black children.
 
when he asked Jackson how race would affect her work as a judge, a question never asked of a white nominee, attacking Jackson over race or suggesting that she is an “affirmative action” pick is not likely to go over well in the age of social media.
Literally picked from a list of black women for the sake of appointing a black woman. How is race only applicable when Democrats want to bring it up?
 
Back
Top Bottom