General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsSo Murkowski was a "yes" before the ABA called for an FBI investigation
That was what jumped out at me from the Wall Street Journal "no plan B" article. The White House felt it was all set before the ABA wrote their letter (bravo for them).
If so, it all comes down to whether conservative Christopher Wray's FBI finds corroboration in a week's investigation. Wray clerked for Mike Luttig- a very conservative (former) appellate judge. Which probably means that Wray cares a lot about the Supreme Court being conservative.
I guess "hope for the best and expect the worst" applies to this situation, but it's better than what we faced last night.
Kaleva
(36,298 posts)"Ms. Murkowski said Friday morning before the Senate committee vote that she remained undecided on the nomination. "
https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/kavanaugh/card/1538166098
She was undecided before the letter from the ABA and she still was undecided the following morning.
Alhena
(3,030 posts)Callado119
(171 posts)I wouldnt take anything they think seriously.
Kaleva
(36,298 posts)The ABA letter certainly kept her in the undecided camp.
mythology
(9,527 posts)You assume the Trump administration knows anything. They are the Keystone Kops.
hlthe2b
(102,236 posts)I can't read the behind paywall WSJ article, but EVERYTHING I have seen and read and heard makes it clear that Murkowski (far more than Collins) is a high probability no vote--but officially remains undecided. I think the statement that she was going to vote "yes" is incredibly unfounded.
BlueSpot
(855 posts)I'll take the scrap of hope. We're better off today then we thought we were yesterday. Let's don't forget that.