Strategy to impeach Court Justice Kavanaugh:

[Baitball Blogger]

1) Add Security for Mark Judge.

2) With the next Dem president or control of Senate, start the FBI investigation.

3) Subpoena Mark Judge and interview all outstanding allegations against Kavanaugh.

4) If the details determine that Kavanaugh lied under oath, impeach him.

We owe this to Christine Blasey Ford.

Never forget.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

1. Good luck getting 66 senators

I'm afraid we're stuck with the Bernie or Bust SCOTUS for a generation

[Baitball Blogger]

6. Take a cue from Mitchell. Find a way to change the rules, since we are in

outright political warfare.

[berni_mccoy]

27. Impeachment conviction requires 2/3rd vote in senate. It's in the Constitution

And believe me we do not want a Constitutional convention in the current environment.

[SCantiGOP]

30. Right

And two thirds is 67. Don’t see that happening anytime soon.

[manor321]

7. Exactly

We also somehow have to win the Senate by dramatic numbers.

The time for this fight was in November 2016. The time to vote for the Democrat was then, as we told everyone.

[BigGermanGuy]

42. we've screwed our daughters

but we can save theirs.

[redstatebluegirl]

9. Yes we are.

I remember during the primary a Bernie supporter said he would not be unhappy if Trump won because it would bring on the revolution even faster. I was horrified. It sounded like and evangelical saying bring on the second coming of Christ. I kept reminding him that it was the Supreme Court he needed to worry about, the revolution wouldn't matter if they packed all the courts with crazy right wing nutcases for 40 years.

[deurbano]

32. Too many lack basic critical thinking skills! Citizens United was passed by a radical SC majority.

These "revolutionaries" complain about the money in politics (while of course demanding Democrats unilaterally refuse that money!), then declined to vote for the Democrat who could have ensured the court majority needed to dismantle Citizens United. (And of course, it's not just the Supreme Court being packed...) Not to mention, their promised revolution won't be able to reverse all the environmental damage that happens in the meantime... (ETC.!!!)

That's a perfect analogy. The so-called revolutionaries are just like the gullible, ignorant, delusional and entitled (!) radical evangelicals who insist on shoving their batshit-crazy delusions down our country's throat.

[democratic friend]

51. Yep. 9 lower court judges yesterday. 15 two weeks ago.

MUCH more concerning then the population realizes.

[avebury]

19. How about making his life

totally hell!

Put billboards up denouncing him. If George Soros would put money in the women would be able to afford to go after him in both the criminal and civil courts. Keep a steady drum beat up with ads and online media.

How about putting up images and sayings on his house. I would imagine that could be done from a public space. Roving can with a bull horn.

Our side will need to get creative.

[deminks]

2. there is also some talk of revisiting unkle Clarence, too.

[bearsfootball516]

3. It takes 67 votes to impeach a supreme court justice.

If we can't even get 1 Republican to cross the aisle on confirmation, there's no chance we're getting 15+ to impeach.

Not trying to sound pessimistic, but it's the reality of the situation.

[NewJeffCT]

8. it only needs a simple majority in the House to impeach/indict

and then 2/3 vote to convict in the Senate.

However, historically it's been almost impossible. One SCOTUS judge was impeached, but he was not convicted, and that was over 200 years ago.

[Baitball Blogger]

10. There was a time before the Me Too movement where women knew

to stay silent, because they knew that men would prevail. That is slowly changing. The next test is to see what Republicans will do once they are faced with compelling evidence. What will they do when it is obvious that Kavanaugh lied under oath, and that the system was defrauded? We won't know unless we try.

[NewJeffCT]

4. Can we go back & look into the allegations against Thomas as well?

since there were reportedly additional witnesses ready to testify against Thomas?

[Baitball Blogger]

12. Seriously, I don't see why not.

[NewJeffCT]

13. Democrats need to play more hardball

to compete with Cheating Mitch. Too often, Democrats are too nice (like, Sen Ed Markey saying that if Democrats retake the majority, he wants to bring the filibuster back... WTF Ed?)

[Baitball Blogger]

15. You're talking to the choir.

I think our new leaders are the Senators who walked out of the Judiciary committee this morning. They are most present on this issue.

[AlexSFCA]

53. omg. it's downright stupid to bring filibuster back if we win

he would be giving up power and giving up on this country and giving the power back to repusb. Insane idea to even mention.

[democratic friend]

52. Thomas has hinted he wants to retire the last few years

He’s next. We better have the senate if this happens. If impeachment hearing start he is sure to retire. He’s 70 I believe.

[leftstreet]

5. If they wouldn't impeach Bush for war crimes...

[ffr]

11. I'm behind this 100%. No higher ground positioning. Keep up the pressure until it's done.

[Baitball Blogger]

14. All we can do is continue to expose the truth. And see what will happen

once the facts are so compelling. Under the worst of circumstances, Republicans who refused to accept new facts that showed that Kavanaugh lied under oath can be challenged at the polls.

[OilemFirchen]

16. As stated above, that's never going to happen.

Better to attempt to force his recusal on all manner of cases including, for starters, those involving sexual assault and perjury.

[DetroitLegalBeagle]

28. There is no way to force a SCOTUS Justice to recuse

They are not subject to the Code of Conduct like lower judges are.

[MadDAsHell]

17. How would "details determine that he lied under oath?@

It will be as much she said/he said as yesterday was.

[Baitball Blogger]

33. We do not know what Mark Judge has to say.

He can bring in other names into the picture.

[onenote]

36. We pretty much do know what he has to say: deny deny deny

[Baitball Blogger]

38. I get the impression that those boys did this frequently, and that a can of worms

has been opened.

Avennati will have a field day building a case against all of them, if there are women who were abused decide that now is the time to step out of the shadows.

[OnDoutside]

18. There was a time when Republicans set out to control the Supreme Court with rwnjs, and on

Tuesday THEIR dream will be realised. Set a goal of winning the House and 66 Senators to impeach this lying fucker.

[MadDAsHell]

20. How would "details determine that Kavanaugh lies under oath?"

Even adding Mark Judge or any other person to the process, you still are “investigating” nothing but accusations. It would be as much she said/he said as yesterday was.

[Baitball Blogger]

21. Republicans voted yes in the judiciary committee because they felt there was no

corroborating evidence. Mark Judge is THAT corroborating evidence.

[MadDAsHell]

23. How is he corroborating evidence if he's of the accused?

That’s what’s been so confusing. Overnight we went from reading that Dr. Ford wanted Judge there as a witness to Kavanugh’s assault, to reading that Judge himself is a serial rapist that gang raped dozens of people with Kavanaugh.

[Baitball Blogger]

24. Why don't we allow the FBI decide that?

Immunity might be an option. It depends if this proceeds to personal criminal filings.

[yortsed snacilbuper]

22. "Never forget."

You got that right!

[benfranklin1776]

25. Amen we can never forget.

She exhibited tremendous courage and selfless willingness to sacrifice for the good of the country. We owe her and other victims and the principle of justice that much.

[TwistOneUp]

26. Don't forget...

Add a step called, "Obtain and read 700,000 pages of Kav's decisions that the GOP refused to turn over".

[Baitball Blogger]

34. Good point.

[Duppers]

29. Never forget.

Hell yes! Impeached will stay on the table until implemented.

[Anon-C]

31. Count me in.

[Chakaconcarne]

35. CNN is reporting they don't have the votes

Am I missing something?

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/28/politics/kavanaugh-senate-judiciary-vote/index.html

[mwooldri]

37. Wouldn't it be easier to stack the court?

Although the European Court of Justice has 28 judges (soon to be 27) hearings are held by a panel of 3, 5 or 15 judges.

I see no problem with a 15 member US Supreme Court.

[mythology]

49. And what happens the next time Republicans have the Senate and the presidency?

[ananda]

39. And vacate any cases he voted on as well!

nt

[pecosbob]

40. Add four justices to the court

it's the only remedy short of achieving a super majority in the Senate, and would require a simple majority in both chambers and the presidency...just what the GOP has currently.

[Revanchist]

43. And if/when the Republicans are back in control

They'll just add 5. The same goes for impeachment, we make a questionable move (reducing the lower court nominations to a simple majority) and they take it a step further (reducing supreme nomination to simple majority). When will we learn that changing the rules to help us today will only bite us in the ass tomorrow?

[pecosbob]

44. Do you honestly think the GOP would hesitate to do this?

Fear of GOP retaliatory escalation will cause the downfall of this nation.

[Revanchist]

45. I think it would be easier if we set the precedent

The repubs would have a field day if we try to impeach someone for actions taken before they assumed office (naturally not counting actions that that influence the outcome of the election)

[pecosbob]

47. Dems don't have the means to do this and won't unless the world's axis tilts

and Dems capture a super majority in the Senate, and we all know this won't happen. Talk of impeachment without means is pointless.

[onenote]

48. If they tried it tomorrow, how would we stop them?

Apparently the repubs have been hesitating to do this since they haven't done it, despite our having no way to stop them. Why is that? Maybe because history suggests that court packing plans are not well received by the public at large.

[Codeine]

54. Well, they clearly haven't done it up to this point,

so they recognize it’s a bad idea all around. If every change in the majority is met with another round of court packing eventually you’ve got like 60 justices and a judicial branch that is utterly subordinate to the fleeting whims of partisans.

[calimary]

41. And don't forget all those other witnesses who have offered to testify - under oath.

They should get their day, and their say. They deserve to be heard.

[MarcA]

46. Just need legislatures and executives to tell the judiciary No!

Don't complain about the Rethugs will do it too because they
already are. Don't fail to use something to do what you believe
in just because someone else might use it to do what you disagree
with.

[ck4829]

50. Kick