Althouse: It was unusual in 2016 for Donald Trump to release a list from which he would choose Supreme Court nominees.

June 27, 2019

It was unusual in 2016 for Donald Trump to release a list from which he would choose Supreme Court nominees.

Now, there's an effort to make it seem abnormal not to release a list of potential Supreme Court nominees:

This is similar to the pressure on Trump to release his tax returns. Others have done it, so it's abnormal not to do it. What is he hiding? It's nefarious! That's how this trick works.

But will this trick work for the list of potential Supreme Court nominees — something only Trump has ever done. And I think he did it because he needed to counter speculation that he wasn't really conservative and was only pretending to be pro-life.

39 comments:

Bay Area Guy said...: ""It was unusual in 2016 for Donald Trump to release a list from which he would choose Supreme Court nominees."

Yes, and, more importantly, the list had outstanding candidates, such as Gorsuch (a Grand Slam) and Kavanaugh (a triple).

#NeverTrumpers face an existential problem with the excellent quality of Trump's judicial appointments. They tepidly respond, well, other GOP candidates would have (theoretically) made similar excellent choices.

Yeah, right; 6/27/19, 6:02 PM
Yancey Ward said...: Trump had to do it because there were reasons to suspect he might not govern as a conservative. The Democrats don't really need to produce such a list- we already know that if a Democrat wins, he/she will choose a justice to the left of Ginsberg- 100% certain.; 6/27/19, 6:02 PM
readering said...: They also understandably feared he was going to appoint a crony, like Bush tried with Miers.; 6/27/19, 6:04 PM
rcocean said...: Gorsuch is voting with the liberals in several cases. What evidence is there, that's he's a "Grand Slam"? Same with Kavanaugh. The real question isn't "Is trump a conservative" its "How conservative is the "Federalist society"?; 6/27/19, 6:07 PM
madAsHell said...: I love it when Trump owns the narrative.; 6/27/19, 6:08 PM
AlbertAnonymous said...: And we don't need another Roberts, for the love of God he seems worse than Kennedy.

Speaking of Kennedy, can anyone explain that Obergefell decision in plain English? All I can see is “Argle bargle argle bargle privacy something kinda sorta maybe could be read into the constitution somewhere”.

Truly. Another penumbra is emanating...; 6/27/19, 6:11 PM
rcocean said...: We don't need to have the D's give us their list. We ALREADY know they will nominate another Kagan-Sotomeyor-Breyer-Ginsberg - all left-wing peas in a pod.

Its ONLY The Republicans who are always being "surprised" at their SCOTUS "Mavericks"

Of course, the reason for that is the R Presidents are always lying about fighting for "Scalia like picks". Even Nixon - was playing that game. As far as I can tell, Trump has selected more upfront conservatives than anyone since Reagan. Bush II tried to give us Miers. Bush I gave us Souter. Nixon gave us Blackman. Ford didn't even pretend to be a social conservative and gave us Stevens. Which is one reason he lost in 1976. He was so dumb he never understood that, and wanted to run in 1980 as a social liberal-conservative on economics.; 6/27/19, 6:12 PM
rcocean said...: As coulter once wrote, if the D's aren't screaming that the R nominee is a fascist who will turn back the clock, you've probably nominated a squish. The more praise a R nominee gets from the D's - the worse they are.; 6/27/19, 6:14 PM
harrogate said...: As if anyone at all susceptible to this ad isn’t already seen up as a voter in 2020.

The pretense of appeal does not an appeal make.; 6/27/19, 6:16 PM
narciso said...: well they learned the lesson with bork, Thomas has been probably the best, alito pretty good Roberts has been disappointing, someone like the late lino graglia, or edith jones, probably couldn't be confirmed,; 6/27/19, 6:17 PM
rcocean said...: We got Roberts as Chief Justice because Bush didn't want to fight the D Senators for Scalia as Chief Justice.

How much you want to bet that Miers would've turned out to be another liberal?; 6/27/19, 6:17 PM
rcocean said...: Mittens probably would've nominated another Souter. He's an untrustworthy liar who's been on 3 sides of every social issue.; 6/27/19, 6:19 PM
narciso said...: she came from the texas bench, so maybe not, remember we were trying to get back the gang of 14 with mcain and graham,; 6/27/19, 6:20 PM
Yancey Ward said...: So, who will the media proclaim as the winner tonight- you know they have already written their stories, so the debate itself won't matter. I think they clearly would rather have Warren or any female candidate in preference to Biden, so the stories will be that Biden faltered tonight, which should open the door for Harris to win tonight even if she suffers a stroke and falls into a coma before the 1st question.

Also, all the stories will be that Sanders imploded, and that Buttuvwxyz performed well for a gay guy.; 6/27/19, 6:24 PM
tim maguire said...: He isn’t really conservative and I doubt he’s really pro-life. He’s something better than that. He’s a politician whose promises mean something.

Which I never would have guessed given his life before politics, but there it is.; 6/27/19, 6:44 PM
Limited blogger said...: as if the dems weren't boring enough, now they're handing out lists?; 6/27/19, 6:50 PM
Francisco D said...: And I think he did it because he needed to counter speculation that he wasn't really conservative and was only pretending to be pro-life.

Bingo!

He is actually not that conservative AND he has likely funded a few abortions in his time.

However, I will not hold that against him because I want Trump to continue to succeed as POTUS and because I hold out the possibility that his views have changed. I say that as a generally pro-choice person.

Chuckles will rant in one, two, three ...; 6/27/19, 6:53 PM
Michael K said...: As coulter once wrote, if the D's aren't screaming that the R nominee is a fascist who will turn back the clock, you've probably nominated a squish. The more praise a R nominee gets from the D's - the worse they are.

Even that isn't enough. Kavanaugh looks squishy to me.; 6/27/19, 6:55 PM
rehajm said...: Why doesn't NYT and WaPo and the rest of MSM release the hundreds of already written 1,000 page essays explaining why court packing is not only justified but a right and righteous thing to do when lefties do it.; 6/27/19, 6:59 PM
rehajm said...: Are we talking about this because they have to throw in the towel tomorrow on covering for RBG?; 6/27/19, 6:59 PM
n.n said...: Pro-life... pro-human rights... pro-science. Men and women have a conscience and capacity for personal responsibility. The very model of a civilized society.; 6/27/19, 7:02 PM
Bay Area Guy said...: Personally, I thought Travel Ban and Janus (union dues) were the two most important SCOTUS decisions this past term. Gorsuch was on the right side on both.; 6/27/19, 7:15 PM
doctrev said...: This turns into a double shot: not only will Dem nominees look like radicals, but the Diversity Sweepstakes will turn into a vast churn on behalf of the most ethnically popular judge.

If one wanted to triple shot it and had zero conscience, one could even suggest that if there are any Jews on the list, and there probably will be for a Democratic Supreme Court nomination, then the result will be furious rage from the diversity industry.

Really, there are no downsides.; 6/27/19, 7:22 PM
JackWayne said...: Roberts and Kavanaugh strike me as elites from the “centrist” side. Gorsuch is an elite from the “right” side. Trump is doing the best he can but the list he is using is from the Federalist elite who are generally “centrist”. The ruling on gerrymandering is a good one. Even Roberts cutting the baby in half on the Census is not bad because the case will come back to the Court. They will have to figure out how to allow the Bureaucracy latitude without allowing too much lawfare to hamstring the Bureaucracy. That will be tough inasmuch as Congress has clearly punted their oversight power to the Bureaucracy. Roberts is a guy who likes to consider very small issues so kicking that back to the lower court is his signature move.; 6/27/19, 7:26 PM
JackWayne said...: Further, I think the ruling on gerrymandering vitiates “one man, one vote”. I think the Court will be confronting this issue in about 7 years.; 6/27/19, 7:31 PM
readering said...: 71 argued decisions this term (i.e., not including summary reversals). Of those, 20 decisions were 5-4 or 5-3 (someone recused). Of those, 40% had a majority lineup of the 5 Republicans, 45% had a lineup of the 4 Democrats + 1 Republican, and 15% had some other lineup.; 6/27/19, 7:38 PM
rcocean said...: "Even that isn't enough. Kavanaugh looks squishy to me."

Well, Dr. K i think you're right. Kavanaugh strikes me as an oddball and i don't trust him. Any man who surrounds himself with female subordinates and clerks. And coaches girls sports teams. AND constantly talks about how he's pushing for women and helping women strikes me as...weird.

I've seen the type in the Corporate world. Managers who refuse to have male subordinates are either looking for a harem or have a screw loose. Some of them, in my experience, are egomaniacs who think every Man is a "competitor" but every woman is "safe" and is a surrogate wife/mother/daughter. The fact that he started blubbering when accused of being "anti-woman" didn't make me any more comfortable.; 6/27/19, 7:48 PM
rcocean said...: As shown by Tillerson, Preibus, Sessions, Rosenstein, Bannon, Kelly, etc. etc.
Trump is a terrible judge of character.

I think his experience in the Corporate world has led him astray. In business, you're bound by self-interest aka money. In politics, you're not. In business, it didn't matter that Cohen wasn't his friend, all that Trump cared about was whether he could "Fix" some legal problems in return for $$. But in Government a disloyal subordinate can cause you a basket full of problems.

Of course, I think he chose Kavanaugh as part of a deal with Justice Kennedy.; 6/27/19, 7:53 PM
doctrev said...: Blogger rcocean said...
"Even that isn't enough. Kavanaugh looks squishy to me."

Well, Dr. K i think you're right. Kavanaugh strikes me as an oddball and i don't trust him. Any man who surrounds himself with female subordinates and clerks. And coaches girls sports teams. AND constantly talks about how he's pushing for women and helping women strikes me as...weird.

6/27/19, 7:48 PM

Under the circumstances, you can understand his reaction, but damn! It's like he's looking to sabotage himself with an unproven allegation, or expiate some demons from really evil shit. I would not be slightly surprised.

Luckily, John Roberts makes it really easy for conservatives to hate on the courts in general.; 6/27/19, 7:54 PM
doctrev said...: Blogger rcocean said...
As shown by Tillerson, Preibus, Sessions, Rosenstein, Bannon, Kelly, etc. etc.
Trump is a terrible judge of character.

I think his experience in the Corporate world has led him astray. In business, you're bound by self-interest aka money. In politics, you're not. In business, it didn't matter that Cohen wasn't his friend, all that Trump cared about was whether he could "Fix" some legal problems in return for $$. But in Government a disloyal subordinate can cause you a basket full of problems.

Of course, I think he chose Kavanaugh as part of a deal with Justice Kennedy.

6/27/19, 7:53 PM

Most, if not all, of Donald Trump's worst personnel decisions are down to him either needing endorsements in a primary that might have gone for Ted Cruz, or designed to shore up his credibility with the military/ NeverTrumpRump senators. I don't think he regards anyone as loyal outside his own family, especially after Kelly/ Mattis backstabbed him. And I also think that the majority of soldiers will stick by him, for the most part, if he avoids listening to neocons.; 6/27/19, 7:57 PM
narciso said...: Tillerson was his bridge to the establishment, poorly considered but this is a coalition govt, Bannon was too impatient, about priorities the tariffs came in at the right time. Sessions was probably the strongest voice on immigration enforcement in the senate.; 6/27/19, 7:59 PM
Michael K said...: I think his experience in the Corporate world has led him astray. In business, you're bound by self-interest aka money. In politics, you're not. In business, it didn't matter that Cohen wasn't his friend, all that Trump cared about was whether he could "Fix" some legal problems in return for $$. But in Government a disloyal subordinate can cause you a basket full of problems.

I agree with this completely. The swamp is a nest of adders, all biting each other and trying to get the best bits for themselves.

Reagan had his California team. Trump was starting from scratch, Flynn was a good choice but was already in the crosshairs of the black hats over the Afghan thing and his support of the female FBI agent against McCabe. How was Trump to know that ? I have yet to hear what "lie" Flynn told Pence.

Tillerson seemed a good prospect but a back stabber.; 6/27/19, 8:07 PM
Michael K said...: I don't think he regards anyone as loyal outside his own family, especially after Kelly/ Mattis backstabbed him.

Also agree. The family has caused him some grief, as with Manafort, but they are loyal.; 6/27/19, 8:09 PM
narciso said...: It's not a swamp, it's a minefield ring with barbed wire. Mattis I guess was like Truman's experience with Louis Johnson after forrestak; 6/27/19, 8:15 PM
gadfly said...: So, when Donald's many tax returns are finally released, will they include Trump University and All County profits? Both endeavors, of course, are illegal activities.; 6/27/19, 8:38 PM
ga6 said...: Please burn that picture..; 6/27/19, 8:40 PM
Fen said...: So, when Donald's many tax returns are finally released, will they include Trump University and All County profits? Both endeavors, of course, are illegal activities.

Yawn.

Donald Trump has been audited by the IRS every year for the last 10 years.

If there was something there it would have leaked by now.; 6/28/19, 4:59 AM
Fen said...: Kavanaugh strikes me as an oddball and i don't trust him. Any man who surrounds himself with female subordinates and clerks. And coaches girls sports teams. AND constantly talks about how he's pushing for women and helping women strikes me as...weird.

Yup. I know it's not fair, but we you get to my age you develop a list of patterns to be wary of. Lessons learned from experiences. One of them is "That Guy" who surrounds himself with attractive female subordinates, or puts himself in a position to mentor young girls.

It's not enough to accuse him of anything "but sorry, I think our girls are going to play for a private club across town this year."

I fought hard for Kavanaugh (although I expected him to go wobbly once seated, so I'm not that disappointed) but there is something not right there.; 6/28/19, 5:06 AM
Sam's Hideout said...: The Federalist Society says they are a group of conservatives and libertarians, personally I'd judge them tilted towards the libertarians.; 6/28/19, 8:32 AM