|
Question... how many job interviews have you been on where you've been asked if you ever raped anyone and if YOU can prove that you haven't, even though the person accusing you of rape has no recollection of key details such as when and where it happened and no one else is corroborating her accusations. He's facing serious criminal allegations during said "job interview" and is being treated like he's a defendant on trial even though he's not.
|
I've never had a job interview for a lifetime appointment that has no way of firing me should they hire me incorrectly. If this guy was in his 70's I'd be willing to give him a pass - because a mistake will last less time.
As it is - a SC nom is forever - as in until they decide they are tired of the job - there is no way currently to remove a seated judge - this kind of thing requires a bit more scrutiny perhaps. That all said - I've never seen a SC judge (in my lifetime) get through the process this fast - usually it takes like a year so all the background stuff can be done *prior* to the hearing. The rush to get this done so fast is why everything is ramped up to 11. Don't blame the dems for that - it's been an open secret that Mitch McConnell had planned to slam the SC nomination through before the elections - widely reported through the first half of this year. All of the current problems with the SC nomination process can be laid at his feet. And yeah - dems screwed the pooch over federal judges - but good lord that's a different ball game than SC noms.
Lastly - the temperament when being questioned does matter - Clarence Thomas has a similar grilling - he got confirmed. He didn't look like a petulant man-baby when being questioned. If you can't handle the nomination process - you are free to turn down the nomination.
