We’re sure a lot of Twitchy readers suffered through the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearings along with us, what with the political grandstanding by senators with an eye on 2020, like Kamala Harris and Cory Booker.
But just because the hearings are over doesn’t mean the questioning has stopped.
— Caren Bohan (@carenbohan) September 12, 2018
Senate Judiciary Committee Chair Sen. Chuck Grassley announced Wednesday that Democrats have submitted more than 1,200 written questions for the record, and he didn’t overlook the fact that all of them have said they’re going to vote no anyway.
Senate Judiciary Cmte Chairman @ChuckGrassley says Senate Dems submitted 1,278 follow-up questions for Kavanaugh, which he says is more than every prior SCOTUS nominee combined –> pic.twitter.com/lkTGOnZ30T
— Frank Thorp V (@frankthorp) September 12, 2018
Sen. Dianne Feinstein led the charge by submitting 241 questions for the record, or QFRs. Also submitting more than a hundred questions each were Sen. Mazie Hirono (122) and Sen. Kamala Harris (113), despite the fact that both have announced they’re voting no.
In a press release Wednesday, Grassley called the overwhelming number of written questions a “meritless obstruction campaign”:
As the Senate Judiciary Committee continues its work reviewing the nomination of Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh to serve as an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, committee Democrats — all of whom are expected to vote against Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination — continue their meritless obstruction campaign by issuing an unprecedented 1,278 written questions for the record to the nominee. This is more than the combined number of written questions submitted to every prior Supreme Court nominee.
“Last week, Judge Kavanaugh sat before the Senate Judiciary Committee for well over 32 hours of statements and questions. In just the same way I handled the Gorsuch hearing, members had the opportunity to ask as many questions they wanted to ask,” Chairman Grassley said. “Submitting this many written questions appears to be just one more effort to gum up the process. It’s unnecessary and dilatory, especially when many have already decided to vote against Judge Kavanaugh. What more do they need to know to vote ‘no’?”
By comparison, 254 QFRs were submitted for Elana Kagan, and 214 were submitted for Sonia Sotomayor.
This, after he submitted more documents than any nominee in history. They look like petulant children.
— David Simmons (@ThisIsSimmons) September 12, 2018
I'm voting no but I have 1,000 questions to ask lol.
— Rod (@rodwag) September 12, 2018
Does he have to respond to them? If not, I’d like to see him blow them off. They’re just trying to stall anyway and don’t seriously care about either the questions or the answers.
— Kat (@KatGoesIndie) September 12, 2018
How do you do that without "What is your favorite color?" not being one of them? What a mockery of the system.
— Charlie Richards (@CharlieAtSalem) September 12, 2018
Nuclear option incoming. pic.twitter.com/8KppRm3LdI
— Michael Jones (@mikejoneswcnd) September 12, 2018
Thanks again, Harry Reid.
Boy, people are really, really sore that Kavanaugh is going to be confirmed no matter how much they protest.
It’s because he is the most unqualified candidate of all time.
— ResistNashVegas (@acreworks) September 12, 2018
Since Brett Kavanaugh’s got so many things in his record that the Republicans felt necessary to hide from the American people, dang right thing to do!
— Susan McAfee (@WimberleySusan) September 12, 2018
Probably shouldn’t have hidden all those records from them then
— Choz (@Chozraham) September 12, 2018
And they’re probably all very valid and should be addressed. Stop trying to rush thru the process!
— Jana Hyde (@janahyde1) September 12, 2018
What happens when you rig a hearing because the nominee is a perjuring contemptible scumbag.
— Denise (@Denisec67527755) September 12, 2018
Huh, it's almost like if they'd had access the documents they might have fewer questions?
Merrick Garland. #ObstructionOfJustice
— 4TheCommonMan (@4TheCommonMen) September 12, 2018
And your point is what @ChuckGrassley ? That they’re trying to do their actual job of oversight?? How dare they care about the shady process behind the nomination of a lifetime appointee to the SCOTUS. ?
— Betty Ann (@bettyannlv72) September 12, 2018
That's because we've never had a President under criminal investigation try to appoint a historically unpopular nominee who's engaged in partisan politics for most of his career and while failing to disclose his emails and lying repeatedly under oath. Everything is unprecedented
— Austin Swafford (@Astros290) September 12, 2018
What’s your point? Are you saying that a SCOTUS candidate shouldn’t be vetted? Sounds pretty fascist to me. But hey. The country is tired of your draconian measures. Senate is now in PLAY.
— Kirk Pitman (@TexasBred323) September 12, 2018
Yeah, Chuck Grassley’s a fascist.
Did we happen to mention that in his statement online, next to each senator who submitted questions, Grassley included a link to where each senator declared they were a no vote?
'Utter dishonesty': Hillary Clinton repeats Kamala Harris' lie that PolitiFact and the WaPost already DEBUNKED https://t.co/jvCKQYN3Hc
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) September 12, 2018