Thread by @asymmetricinfo

Okay, my new column on the Kavanaugh debacle is up: washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-par…

I'm going to lay out my position first, which is that this nomination should be held for at least a time-limited FBI investigation.

And then I'm going to detail how badly Democrats handled this.

Mitchell's questioning yesterday raised a few small questions about Ford's story. But it raised immense and infuriating questions about the cynical ways Democrats managed this.

It is now simply untenable to argue that this was not a strategic leak to try to delay past midterms.

Dianne Feinstein helped Ford get a lawyer, and doesn't give her Republican counterparts a heads up that they might have a problem?

Okay, they say "She asked for confidentiality."

Fine. Democrats are the ones who breached that confidentiality.

No one else could have. No one else knew Feinstein had the letter! Also hard to see who else could have leaked Ford's name to the media, sending reporters to her house and workplace, and ultimately pushing her to come forward.

Obviously what they thought would happen is that if this leaked, Kavanaugh would just have to withdraw, giving them a chance to push the process past the midterms.

If you think #MeToo is actually important, and not simply a cynical political tool, this is not what you do.

Which has colored every single thing Democrats have said about this.

"Fine" concede people who are not trying to maintain the incredible claim that Democrats somehow aren't responsible for this. "But now we know, and we have to do something."

As it happens, I agree.

Unfortunately, Democrats continued to manage this so as to maximize political benefit rather than truth-seeking. Republicans were trying to investigate this thing off of media reports, because they had no access to either Ford or her evidence.

The timing was pushed back because Ford's team claimed she was too afraid to fly. Apparently they somehow failed to make her understand that Republicans were willing to send someone to California to interview her.

Apparently also, Ford flies a great deal, to visit family, to work, and to go on surfing holidays in Hawaii and French Polynesia.

This was a stalling tactic, and it made it look as if her lawyers were actively colluding with Democrats to maximize damage to the GOP.

Now, I reiterate that I don't think you retaliate for this by confirming a Supreme Court Justice who might have committed sexual crimes. For a number of reasons, starting with character and ending with "this will escalate the Court Wars to Defcon 1".

But if you do not understand how badly this has poisoned the well, and made it hard to talk Republicans off the ledge on this, then you should try to imagine this unfolding the same way with the partisan polarity reversed. The left would be climbing the walls.

And "But Merrick Garland" will not do as an answer. 1st, because *Merrick Garland* is not a reason to play games with something as important as a sexual assault accusation. This is a non-sequitur, and that should go without saying

And 2nd, because it's so much worse than Garland

The only way this could have ended in any halfway decent fashion would have been for Democrats to recognize that they crossed a line, pull back, and offer a compromise. Time-limited FBI investigation, and then an agreement to stand back and let another GOP nominee through.

But of course that's not going to happen. Because what really counts here is avenging Merrick Garland, not saving the institution.

To be clear, I think Garland should have been approved. More broadly, I think the court should not be central enough to arouse such partisan fury.

And I think that Republicans saying "We've taken all we can stand and now we have to fight back" are wrong on so many levels I find it hard to know where to begin.

The GOP has played its full measure of games in the Court Wars. Own it.

Also, there are things in this world more important than "drive your enemies before you and hear the lamentations of their women."

But however unfair Garland was, the shameless way this has played out was a line that should never have been crossed.

And so is "voting to confirm without investigating". Both sides need to walk back. But Democrats would have to start by offering an apology and a meaningful concession, because they began it.

I see no sign that they would even consider it. And at any rate, it looks too late.

I will continue to urge the right to rise above it anyway, and do the right thing for the country.

I don't think it will happen. But I'll continue to say it, because it's the right thing to do.

One final thought: one of the many, many reasons the way Dems handled this is such a problem is that Republicans now assume that anyone they nominate will be subject to the same pattern of "hide material concerns from Republicans on committee, then strategical 11th hour leaks!"

The message they have taken is not "Brett Kavanaugh was a bad choice" (maybe, maybe not--I'd like more information, and at any rate, they couldn't have known that, what with Dems sitting on this until September).

But "Dems will not let you confirm anyone".

And I can't exactly blame them, since it's a completely reasonable inference.

Again, I don't think that excuses rushing confirmation vote. But I don't think that prior politics excuses anything else that has been done here

You can read the column here: washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-par…