Supreme Revenge: Linda Greenhouse Interview

11 thoughts on “Supreme Revenge: Linda Greenhouse Interview

  • These are such superb interviews. Partisan or not, the Democrats have always played defense on nominations. And that's a good thing, such also as in gerrymandering.

    The Bork nomination is clearly one I wish had worked out better. But, only Republicans have made bad nominations (approved or not, such as Harriet Myers (?) whom W Bush nominated.)

    Democrats should focus on their own work and doing their tasks fairly, because ideas only tend irretrievably towards liberalism and not conservatism.

    Superb piece of "reporting." Thank you.

  • The problem with this doc is it plays both siderism. The Federalist Society is a small organization in each law school representing 1-3% of students. But it represents a near 100% of Republican judges. Republicans only pick from the most conservative of lawyers. On the flip side Democrats pick center right corporate lawyers. The 10% of truly liberal lawyers are not even in consideration. Where is the ACLU lawyer, or the Green Peace lawyer or The SPLC lawyer up for judgeship? Democrats did not start this fight, they fought back when it became clear that the Republicans had abandoned the idea of picking moderate judges, and would only pick from this tiny 1% of lawyers who are in the Federalist Society. The Dems pick from the other 99%. Which of these two process is radical?

    Second, this docs fails to mention that the Republicans have had a majority of Judges since Reagan. But where the bar was set for considering conservative justice kept changing. Sandra Day O'Connor was a very conservative judge by any historical standard. The fact that she became a swing vote does not change that. It just shows how right the court moved with Republicans only picking people who were in their society of radicals. After she retired, Kennedy was the swing vote. Kennedy is on the record saying he uses the Federalist Society to find his clerks. Kennedy is more conservative than O'Connor, but than is the swing vote.

    This idea that Democrats changed the game is nonsense. Democrats reacted to Republicans changing of the game in a radical way.

  • Love these in depth interviews because they show the good, bad, the ugly on all sides of the aisle. Context and depth are everything in understanding a messy process regardless of your political perspective.

  • She didn’t doubt Dr Ford? How is that possible? No date, no location, no witnesses, and a lot of inconsistencies, and omissions to her story?

    And the was surprised by Kavanaugh’s reaction?

    This lady is a Pulitzer Prize winning reporter, a journalist? She sounds so facile and blasé…

    I don’t get it…

Leave a Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *