| | | | What Kavanaugh's confirmation would mean | | Thursday was a very good day for Brett Kavanaugh -- maybe his best day since being chosen as Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee back in July.
Yes, North Dakota Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D) announced she would vote against his nomination. But two of the three swing Republican senators -- Maine's Susan Collins and Arizona's Jeff Flake -- praised the thoroughness of the recently concluded FBI investigation into allegations of sexual assault against Kavanaugh. (More on what all the swing senators said on Thursday below.)
Tea leaf readers saw the broadly supportive comments from that duo as a sign that the FBI's supplemental check on Kavanaugh had a) turned up no corroboration of claims made by Christine Blasey Ford and Deborah Ramirez and b) provided Kavanaugh with something very close to the 50 senators' votes he needs to make it to the court.
To be clear: This is a very fluid situation. The first big vote -- to end debate on the nomination -- comes Friday. If that succeeds, a final vote on confirmation will be Saturday. Until that first vote is in the books, it's a dangerous proposition to draw too many conclusions about What It All Means.
Still! Kavanaugh appears on the precipice of the court. He's closer tonight than he's been, politically speaking, in weeks.
So what would it mean if Kavanaugh got the 50 votes he needed tomorrow and then again Saturday? Two main things.
1. Kavanaugh on the Court would fundamentally reshape it in a more conservative direction for potentially decades to come. Lost amid the massive political fight occasioned by the allegations by Ford and Ramirez is the fact that Kavanaugh is without question more conservative than the man he is replacing -- Anthony Kennedy. Whereas Kennedy was regarded as the swing vote on the court for many years, Kavanaugh's ascension would change all that. There would likely be a relatively reliable 5-4 conservative majority on the court.
2. Trump would be a big winner. Circumstances have conspired to hand Trump a major opportunity: To put two justices on the Supreme Court within his first two years in office. The bet that just something like this would happen is why so many conservatives held their noses and voted for Trump. And while he has been deeply unpredictable on all sorts of things, he has been remarkably steady on court picks -- nominating people, in Kavanaugh and Neil Gorsuch, who are regarded by conservatives as the right choices. Putting Kavanaugh (and Gorsuch) on the bench would buy Trump a whole lot of goodwill among conservatives as he heads into his 2020 re-election bid.
The Point: There are no asterisks next to the names of the members of the Supreme Court. Whether you got there on a unanimous Senate vote or barely survived, your vote still counts the same. And when that vote is one of only nine on the most important court in the country, with no term limits, it counts a whole hell of a lot.
-- Chris | | "Why don't we dunk him in water and see if he floats?"
-- Sen. Lindsey Graham, speaking about Brett Kavanaugh to a protester who was opposed to Kavanaugh's nomination. Lucky for us, the exchange was caught on camera. | | | There are only five senators who really, really matter when it comes to the FBI's findings on Brett Kavanaugh (more from Chris on that here).
Kavanaugh needs a simple majority of 51 votes to be confirmed (which is the exact number of Republicans in the body) but only 48 of those Republicans are committed to supporting Trump's nominee.
Out of the five swing-voting senators, the GOP just needs three more yes votes to confirm Kavanaugh. Very quickly, here's where things stand among those key five:
VOTING NO: - North Dakota Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D): Heitkamp said she plans to vote against Kavanaugh's confirmation. "In addition to the questions about his past conduct, last Thursday's hearing called into question Judge Kavanaugh's current temperament, honesty and impartiality," she tweeted.
APPEAR TO BE HEADING TO YES: - Maine Sen. Susan Collins (R): It "appears to be a very thorough investigation," the Maine Republican said earlier today of the FBI's additional vetting of Kavanaugh.
- Arizona Sen. Jeff Flake (R): Flake agreed with Collins' classification of the investigation as "very thorough." Having parsed the FBI report, he said, "we've seen no additional corroborating information" to the claims made against Kavanaugh.
UNKNOWN: - West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin (D) is still reviewing the investigation's findings.
- Alaska Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R), told reporters just after 6 p.m.: "I'm not going to comment. I have finished reviewing and reading all of the interviews, but I'm not going to comment."
| | | In honor of National Taco Day (have you celebrated yet?), give your ears a helping of the all-instrumental and surprisingly delightful song "Mr. Taco" by Ben Millburn. | | WHAT COMES NEXT: KAVANAUGH EDITION | | Brett Kavanaugh's Supreme Court nomination has dominated today's news cycle and (appropriately) today's newsletter. Now that the FBI report is out, what exactly happens next?
Right now, senators are reviewing the report (there's only one copy of it and for senators' eyes only).
Next, they'll take a procedural vote on Kavanaugh's nomination Friday, opening the door to a final vote possibly happening also Friday.
The Supreme Court begins its new term on Tuesday -- and if he's confirmed, there's a chance Kavanaugh could be sworn in that same day, CNN's Ariane De Vogue reports. | | New York Attorney General Barbara D. Underwood has made another filing in a lawsuit alleging the Trump Foundation violated state and federal laws, specifically "engaging in prohibited political activity in connection with the 2016 presidential campaign."
The filing states that "Our investigation makes clear that, for more than a decade, the Foundation operated in persistent violation of state and federal law governing charities," according to the AG's office.
This summer, Underwood announced a lawsuit against the Trump Foundation and its directors -- including Trump's children Ivanka Trump, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. The filing sought $2.8 million in restitution (plus penalties) and to ultimately dissolve the foundation. | | President Donald Trump is in Minnesota tonight for a fundraiser and a rally in the land of 10,000 lakes.
He's headed to Rochester, home to the Mayo Clinic and MN-01, one of the key toss-up districts that is a linchpin for the eventual winner of the House's majority.
The race, listed as one of CNN's key races (naturally), pits Republican Jim Hagedorn against Democrat Dan Feehan. While the seat has been held by a Democrat since 2006 (and the incumbent decided not to seek re-election this year), President Donald Trump carried the district in 2016. | | ALSO HAPPENING IN MINNESOTA | | Rep. Keith Ellison, facing abuse allegations from a former girlfriend and currently locked in a campaign to become Minnesota's next attorney general, says he's considering stepping down from his position at the DNC.
Ellison has said he wants to focus on winning the AG race -- and did not say whether his departure would be affected by the abuse allegations (that he denies), according to CNN's Colin McCullough.
Ellison was named deputy director of the DNC in 2017 after a contentious leadership battle that placed current Chairman Tom Perez into the party's top spot. | | | From Brenna: "I believe that 'Campaigning in Texas in a Suit' only missed the cut for one of Dante's circles of hell because the New World had yet to be discovered. I feel so much for Sen. Ted Cruz. You know what's hotter than Texas and also hell? This newsletter! 😅Share it with your friends." | | | | | | |
Post a Comment