Bill Clinton Did Not Win an Election By Getting a Blowjob: The Danger of Lindsey Graham’s Willful Ignorance about Russian Interference

In his statement in Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing yesterday, Lindsey Graham embodied the problem with Republicans’ deliberate ignorance about Russian interference in the 2016 election.

As part of his statement, he raised the time Joe Biden pointed out what a hypocrite Brett Kavanaugh was for believing presidents should not be investigated during their term but nevertheless thought it necessary to ask Bill Clinton the following questions:

If Monica Lewinsky says that you inserted a cigar into her vagina while you were in the Oval Office area, would she be lying?

[snip]

If Monica Lewinsky says that she gave you oral sex in the Oval Office area, would she be lying?

If Monica Lewinsky says that you ejaculated in her mouth on two occasions in the Oval Office, would she be lying?

Lindsey did so to suggest Biden’s comments about the Clinton investigation refute the claim that Trump picked Kavanaugh to protect himself from investigation, as if the investigation of Clinton for a blowjob was as legitimate as Mueller’s investigation into whether Trump cheated to win the election.

To justify such an absurd claim, Lindsey suggests that the Mueller investigation is only about whether Trump acted improperly when he fired Comey.

When it comes to the pillar of political virtue, Comey. Harry Reid: “That he’s been a supporter of Comey, and led the fight to get him confirmed, as he believed Comey was a principled public servant. With the deepest regret, I now see that I was wrong.” Mr. Nadler, from NY. “The President can fire him for cause and ought to. He violated the guidelines and put his thumb on the scale of an election.” Mr. Cohen, from Tennessee, a Democrat. “Call on Comey to resign his position, effective immediately, I’m sureupon reflection of this action he will submit his letter of resignation for the nation’s good.” To my Democratic friends,  you were all for getting rid of this guy. Now all of a sudden the country is turning upside down cause Trump did it.

The same guy who recently endorsed the idea of Trump firing Jeff Sessions once Kavanaugh gets confirmed then claimed he would do everything to protect the Mueller investigation. He says that even while suggesting he agrees with Kavanaugh that the president shouldn’t be investigated.

There’s a process to find out what happened in the 2016 election. It’s called Mr. Mueller. And I will do everything I can to make sure he finishes his job without political interference. And I’m here to tell anybody in the country that listens, that this is so hypocritical of my friends on the other side. When it was their President, Kavanaugh was right. When you’re talking about Roe v. Wade, it’s okay to promise the nation it will never be overturned. It’s okay to pick a Democratic staff member of this committee, but it’s not okay to pick somebody who’s been a lifelong Republican.

Which brings us to the stunning bit. Having just misrepresented the scope of the Mueller investigation — completely ignoring that the primary investigation is about whether Trump conspired with a hostile foreign power to win the election — Lindsey then suggests that Democrats should have no influence over judges because they lost the election the legitimacy of which Mueller continues to investigate (and about which Mueller has already provided evidence that the scope of Russia’s help for Trump went further than initially known).

People see through this. You had a chance, and you lost. If you want to pick judges from your way of thinking, then you better win an election.

After discussing his support for Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, Lindsey then suggests that stripping the last limits on presidential power is just a game (even while admitting he likes Trump best of all for getting two SCOTUS picks).

I hope people in the country understand this game. It’s a game that I’m sad to be part of. It’s gotten really bad. The antidote to our problems in this country when it comes to judges and politics is not to deny you a place on the Supreme Court. This is exactly where you need to be, this is exactly the time you need to be there, and I’m telling President Trump, “You do some things that drive me crazy, you do some great things. You have never done anything better, in my view, than to pick Gorsuch and Kavanaugh.  Cause you had an opportunity to put well-qualified conservatives on the court — men steeped in the rule of law — who will apply analysis not politics to their decision-making, and you knocked it out of the park, and I say to my friends on the other side: you can’t lose the election and pick judges.

Lindsey ends, again, by taunting Democrats that they can’t have any input on Supreme Court justices if they lose an election.

An election the investigation of which Lindsey claims to, but is not, protecting. An election the investigation of which may be stymied by the confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh.

Of course, this is only possible because of the way four different efforts in Congress — including Lindsey’s own — have served to obscure the matters under investigation. You’ve got Lindsey’s investigation and Bob Goodlatte’s — both more worried about a single FISA order that even a conservative Republican has told me was based on overwhelming evidence — than whether the guy making lifetime appointments cheated to get that authority. You’ve got Devin Nunes’ investigation, better described as an information gathering effort to help Trump get away with any cheating he engaged in than an investigation of whether he did cheat. Finally, there is Richard Burr’s investigation which, while on its face is more credible, nevertheless is not pursuing leads that support a case that Trump conspired with Russia to win the election.

Lindsey Graham is concerned about lies Christopher Steele may have told under oath in the UK, but not lies Don Jr clearly told his own committee. His big rush to stack SCOTUS suggests the reason for that has everything to do with a need to sustain a fiction that those SCOTUS choices are the result of a legitimate election win rather than willfully conspiring with a foreign adversary to get those choices.

image_print
26 replies
  1. Desider says:

    Except Democrats won an election and the GOP stole a Supreme Court pick from them, making up a new rule as they went along. Fuck all this logic – these assholes make Alice in Wonderland comments and we’re supposed to come along answer if they were sane adult commentary.

    • orionATL says:

      right on the money –

      fact-free, beyond-bullshit republican arguments are supposed to be treated as sensible commentary.

    • jayedcoins says:

      This is why I have such a hard time finding the balance that I agree with between the “burn it down” and “rule of law” crowds. I don’t agree with red rose troll Twitter, but I also don’t think Ben Wittes and his begging to return to the status quo is particularly helpful.

      Conservatives have happily played dirty on these things my entire life — certainly, my entire voting adult life (and probably before). Polling on policy topics shows that even when conservatives control the majority of seats in both chambers, they aren’t actually aligned with what the majority wants, while leftward causes are. They don’t even pretend anymore to try and involve the opinions and needs of the “minority,” even though we are the fucking majority.

      I know this is a huge uphill climb, but I actually think that the top two strategic goals on any functional left-of-center party’s agenda should be really simple. Grant statehood to PR and DC, and increase the number of justices and pack the court with progressive minds.

      • orionATL says:

        you’ve got to start at the real world, realtime wellspring of political and economic (pathological income disparity) dysfunction in this country which is the excessive power seized by corporations since 1980 and the bribery of congress members they then institutionized thru lobbying firms. you do this by legally mandating that all corporations have as their premier obligation acting for the welfare of society. so acting includes among other matters paying their taxes, the equilibration of the m take-home pay and benefits of their workers, officers, and directors, the acknowledgement that no corporation is entitled to constitutional benefits and protections(as opposed to individuals within it), the full disclosure of all lobbying and other political payments, and the disentangling of “wall street” pressure from corporate decisions.

  2. earlofhuntingdon says:

    Even former JAG lawyer Sen. Graham knows that one candidate winning the presidency is irrelevant to the Senate’s job of giving that president advice and consent.  Regardless of the Senate body’s make-up of Republicans and Democrats, its institutional job is to render that advice and and to give or withhold its consent, based on as full a record as it can practicably obtain.

    Sen. Graham, OTOH, is cynically gutting the Senate’s institutional responsibilities in order to obtain partisan advantage.  The advantage he wants is not short-term, between now and the end of 2020.  In Kavanaugh, he is fighting for an arch-conservative, neoliberal advantage he hopes will extend for decades.

    Toward that end, Trump and investigations about his legitimacy – his malevolent incompetence needs no further investigation – are irrelevant, too, except to the extent they interfere with the longer-term goals.

    Graham is not playing nice, he’s not even playing hardball.  He is engaged in a supremely cynical exercise.  The rest of America be damned. 

    The Dems can demonstrate they know the game being played and are prepared to play it, or sit back while the rest of America is made to suffer for it.

    • orionATL says:

      senator lindsey graham is a two-faced, forked-tongued, greaser of a politician too slippery to stand on principle for even a moment. senator graham would sell his grandmother into slavery.*

      if i had to guess, i’d say senator graham’s sudden about-face on protecting the mueller investigation has to do with mark sanford’s defeat at the tiny hands of president trump and his too-stupid-to-breathe fanatics in south carolina. 2020 is not far away (though plenty of time left for graham to do another about-face if trump falls from grace).

      “… Even as McCain battled brain cancer, Trump continued to harshly criticize him for a vote against Republican health-care legislation. Trump also recently declined to mention McCain’s name at a signing ceremony for a defense bill named after him.

      During the CBS interview, Graham said he plans to continue to work with Trump where he can.

      “I am not going to give up on the idea of working with this president,” Graham said. “The best way I can honor John McCain is help my country… ”

      https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/lindsey-graham-says-the-way-trump-handled-mccains-death-was-disturbing/2018/08/30/3a28f04a-ac49-11e8-8a0c-70b618c98d3c_story.html

      *as i suspect would graham’s senatorial twin, charles schumer.

    • Doctor My Eyes says:

      Hear! Hear!  The Republican tell is that they start with the assumption that they have to cheat, and they cheat on everything.  They gerrymander in order to create legislatures that do not represent what the people want. They suppress voting and steal votes outright in order to steal elections. They seek the assistance of foreign powers and ruthless criminals in order to help them subvert the will of the people. They lie about what they will do because they know the people do not want them to do these things. They hate science, which by its nature undermines lying. They attempt to control the media because they know honest reporting will hurt them.  They lie because they do not respect the rule of law.

      They can’t find a legitimate candidate for the SC to represent their so-called conservative interests, one whose record would withstand scrutiny, so they create a farce of a procedure to make things look legitimate.  They assume that legitimate means will not serve them well.  In fact, likely the number one priority for any SC candidate would be that he is corrupt. The second attribute would be basing his opinions on being reactionary.  Sticking it to liberals seems to be the basis of most of the GOP’s ideas.

      We’ve grown so accustomed to it, but it is stunning the extent to which the GOP operates from the basic assumption that they have to cheat and lie, even about what they stand for. Of course, this is the case because of the increasing maldistribution of wealth.  When you represent the .1% in a democracy, you have to cheat.

    • earlofhuntingdon says:

      Brett will get a pass on anything disclosed to the committee during the course of his hearings, whether or not disclosed to the full Senate or the public.

      • AndTheSlithyToves says:

        I’m with Willis on this… I think we’re reaching peak corruption this year.  https://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/14/abe-fortas-resigns-from-supreme-court-may-15-1969-238228

    • emptywheel says:

      Oh, he’s been following my work closely for some time, and chasing the Stone PAC stuff aggressively himself.

    • orionATL says:

      i’ve found prokop interesting and informative, my highest praise.

      vox itself is a ray of light in a dim world.

  3. Allison Holland says:

    gramn changed after that first golf game.  was he bought ?   was he blackmailed ?   he is acting crazed. even cornered.  certainly corrupted.  when democrats take over they will just have to add more justices. how else can we fix it. and it will need to be fixed. i am not a royalist or an orthodox catholic from the 15th century so i am a little concerned.

  4. Mulder says:

    I watched Active Measures over the weekend. I’m recommending it to all my friends and relatives who roll their eyes at me when I utter the words conspiracy to defraud the United States, Russian hacking etc. It is a compelling view, hits the right notes especially for those who really haven’t paid all that much attention or tried to avoid the topic. I yelled at the screen multiple times as the story unfolded, “Marcy wrote about that! Marcy wrote about that!”.

    A highlight was the interview segments interspersed throughout with (among others) John McCain. Filmed before his health issues, he was as you would expect. Clear eyed, resolute about Russia and Putin’s dangers to the US. Each time he appeared I swear I thought of his buddy Lindsey Graham and his evolving chicken shit stances on the election fraud, Trump, and this current Kavanaugh crapola etc. Hard to understand. Kompromat, anyone?

  5. darms says:

    Why are the R’s even bothering holding hearings on Kavanaugh? It’s kabuki theater and fools no one, just approve him 50+1 to 50 & get it over with. Actually there are a number of things the R’s could be doing these days but supposedly aren’t – yet. What is the point of holding back? Some arcane nonsense about rule of law vs. rule of men? Sorry, that train left w/Bush v. Gore in 2000…

    • Pat Smith says:

      The way this theater is playing out may backfire for Republicans. Susan Collins faces fierce objections from her constituents. https://theintercept.com/2018/09/05/susan-collins-activists-raise-270000-in-pledges-for-susan-collinss-democratic-opponent-if-she-votes-for-kavanaugh/ I think the public really does not like this guy and many women are woke.

  6. Zardoz says:

    Allison Holland says:
    September 5, 2018 at 1:16 pm
    “i am not a royalist or an orthodox catholic from the 15th century so i am a little concerned.”

    Now you’ve really got my interest. I find it rather ironic, in this once paranoidly Protestant country that the followers of the Faux Orange Liddle Bavarian are so concerned with immigration when during the 1850’s the issue was the massive immigration of Catholic Irish and Italians. Now Kavanaugh makes much of his Jesuit upbringing (and he was two years ahead of Gorsuch, a nominal Episcopalian, in Georgetown Prep BTW) during his opening statement. Now, unless one counts an Episcopalian as a real Protestant, there are none on the Supremes, last time I looked. Talk about packing the court.

    Same for the House leadership, and then the White House staff. The issues revolving around the swamp there obscures the disproportionate number of Georgetown and Fordham alumni, including the fake Presbyterian, Trump. What then to make of Georgetown John Kelly telling Omarosa that the WH staff works for him, and not for the Liddle Bavarian?

    While the vast majority of ‘liberal’ American Catholics are as loyal Americans as anybody else, if one spends any time talking to hardcore Traditionalist Catholics one can clearly detect their longings for the old monarchical order. The feudalism that the Roman Church instituted in Europe was modeled under the system described in Genesis 47, after Joseph ‘colluded’ with Pharaoh to manipulate the markets and enserf all formerly free Egyptians. The Egyptians sold themselves into bondage. Déjà vu?

    Make America What Again?

    In any case, the only thing that otherwise differentiates Kavanaugh from any other conservative judge is his prior position that Presidents should not be subjected to criminal investigation. Cui bono?

    • Doctor My Eyes says:

      Fascinating comment.  Thanks. When it comes to controlling the government, is it Yale vs. Georgetown?

      There are other things to differentiate Kavanaugh.  His possible exposure for being a war criminal in relation to creating legal justifications for torture being the one that stands out in my mind. (I haven’t read EW’s recent post, which seems to address this issue.) It took 3 years for his appointment to the court of appeals to be approved because he was seen as too political by the Dems.  Naturally, in time, the Dems made a deal to let him on (way to look forward and be reasonable, Dems!), he got out of committee on a party line 10 – 8 vote. He is worse than many–one reason he was chosen.

  7. SC says:

    Graham won in 2014 55% to 38% (over okay Dem Brad Hutto). Since 2002, when he replaced Strom Thurmond in the Senate, he’s been elected by similar margins. His popularity in South Carolina goes up and down a bit (the largest drops tend to be when he’s perceived as doing something liberalish) but assuming things stay as they are, he’s going to be reelected in 2020. In South Carolina, Trump clobbered Clinton in 2016 by nearly 15 points so I’d guess that Graham is counting on being rewarded at the ballot box for his support of Trump. Perhaps the only major event that might hurt Graham politically enough that he’ll lose his seat is if Trump doesn’t run (for whatever reasons) in 2020.  Much of Graham’s support of Trump is simply, if Trump goes down, Graham’s seat is less secure.

    Sadly, Graham is being logical from his point of view. He’s smart enough to know that Trump’s very likely to be guilty of a range of pretty awful crimes and so if he can protect Trump, in the Senate and courts, he will be rewarded at the ballot box for his efforts. I realize it’s kind late to say this and that it’s completely obvious but . . . to avoid disasters like Trump, we need to not elect awful Senators like Graham. We need more Dems (I’m being optimist with “more” here, after a quick bit of googling I don’t see “any”)  who make exactly the arguments made in this post about Graham–that he’s dishonest, inconsistent, and not in any way acting in favor of public good by supporting Trump–and at least try to make him pay a political price at home for his misdeeds. IMO, even if they don’t have the largest megaphones, Dems should at least bother to make the case that Graham is not governing in the public interest.

Comments are closed.