Confirmation Battles

David and Sarah talk coronavirus confusion, and Justice Clarence Thomas and confirmation battles with Carrie ...

By

David and Sarah talk coronavirus confusion, and Justice Clarence Thomas and confirmation battles with Carrie Severino of the Judicial Crisis Network.

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Keep reading with a free account
Create a free Dispatch account to keep reading Get Started ALREADY HAVE AN ACCOUNT? SIGN IN
By
Comments (7)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Avatar photo
    LLM4OSU

    I love David and Sarah ... and I am a moderate Conservative by nature, not a Democrat (not a Republican these days) ... but I have to say I feel this is the most partisan podcast I’ve heard from this team. It seemed that all blame was being put on Democrats for their partisan tactics in confirmation hearings. There was no mention of how offensive it was that Senator McConnell did not even allow a rightful confirmation hearing for an Obama appointment. And while saying Senators shouldn’t vote against a nominee who is otherwise qualified based purely on the nominee’s approach to jurisprudence, it was stated it’s OK to vote against a nominee who is not a Constitutional originalist. 🤷‍♀️ That argument makes no sense to me. And while Justice Thomas may be a very good juror, there was a bit of an “admiration society” discussion of him that did not even acknowledge the credible accusations of sexual harassment against him during his confirmation hearing and how that is a factor in his subsequent life on the court, for good or for ill. I guess there were a lot of things in this discussion which triggered my “Partisan Spidey Senses” more than usual in listening to any Dispatch podcasts. Just a danger of being a true Centrist, I guess. 😬. C’est la vie

    Collapse
  2. David Piegaro

    Is the documentary not released yet for streaming?

    Collapse
  3. Avatar photo
    Kevin Johnson

    Great, great pod! Respectfully, it seems odd that David either doesn’t know or doesn’t mention that the data-and-model-driven idea of possibly opening selectively in weeks after a period of isolation, increased testing, and tracking has been pointed out by doctors Birx and Fauci for a week now at daily briefings. David welcomes this possibility from the UK expert, but ignores that Trump and the team have pointed to this possibility for some time. Focusing on other things Trump said (awful joke about Romney, factual errors, etc.) David missed or ignored that, on the idea of opening,,and on using malaria drugs, Trump was mirroring what doctors and other smart people were saying. Whether Trump is wrong or right to push for an aspirational date such as Easter, he was not being anti-science, or outrageous, or pushing sacrificing the old for GDP in pushing these two themes. He does enough outrageous things without The Dispatch joining the Twitter swamp in reflexively rejecting everything Trump agrees with. A wit once said that everything Lillian Hellman wrote was a lie, including “and” and “the.” Don’t fall into this trap when Trump spins and bungles concepts Fauci and Birx generally support, stripping away the frumpiness...please.

    Collapse
    1. Avatar photocircle-angle-nib
      David French vertical-nib Author

      Thanks so much for the comment Kevin, and I'm glad you enjoyed the podcast. One thing about Trump's Easter proclamation. I'm going to stand by my assessment that a president shouldn't give a target date without providing substantiation for that date. It seems like the least we can ask. I appreciate the fact that Trump has some capable advisers who backfill for him, but he's still POTUS. Also, I would like a greater appreciation in providing dates like this of the wild variation between and among states. Easter could be a key date in Kentucky but not in New Jersey, for example. Anyway, I don't measure Trump against himself (in some ways he's been better than his normal self during the most recent phase of this crisis) but rather against a basic standard of competence and truthfulness. Again, I'm glad you enjoyed the pod!

      Collapse
      1. Avatar photo
        Kevin Johnson

        Fair enough, and thanks. God speed.

        Collapse
  4. John H

    Excellent, excellent episode.

    I learned about Carrie Severino from her book, Justice on Trial (which she coauthored with the excellent Molly Hemingway.) In JoT I discerned Carrie's hand in the way the book described the background details in the judicial confirmation battles.

    I am a huge Justice Thomas fan (I am one step away from hanging his picture on my wall) AND I am a huge fan of this podcast. I thank you David and Sarah for making this podcast so interesting.

    It is almost as if this episode combined all of my favorite flavors to the point of overload.

    Collapse
  5. Simon Michau

    Interestingly, the as of yet unpublished Oxford study is literally titled "Fundamental principles of epidemic spread highlight the immediate need for large-scale serological surveys to assess the stage of the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic (https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.03.24.20042291v1.full.pdf).
    It also admits that it rests on key assumptions regarding infection rates made without any real data (as noted in scientific criticism of the study: https://www.sciencemediacentre.org/expert-reaction-to-unpublished-paper-modelling-what-percentage-of-the-uk-population-may-have-been-exposed-to-covid-19/).

    Collapse