Poor, over-emotional Lindsey Graham couldn’t keep it together at Ketanji Brown Jackson’s hearings

Reporters present noted that during Graham’s heated exchange the spectators began to groan audibly, with one woman whispering, ‘Shut up.’

Kathleen N. Walsh
New York
Thursday 24 March 2022 14:29
Comments

It has been hard for Republican Senators to gin up really potent moral outrage against Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson during her confirmation hearings to become a justice of the Supreme Court, which Senator Lindsey Graham — who himself voted to confirm Judge Jackson for the US Court of Appeals less than a year ago — knows all too well. Perhaps that is why, on Wednesday, he outdid his own petulant performance of storming out of the room during Tuesday’s hearings. On Wednesday, Graham abandoned any pretense of respect for the nominee. Finding that he could not justify his rage with facts, he relied on volume, lies, interruptions, outbursts, accusations, and general boorishness to back up his arguments.

Graham’s list of imaginary grievances against Jackson include Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings four years ago, a George W. Bush nomination that was blocked by Democrats nearly 20 years ago, and — latching onto Senators Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley’s favorite QAnon dog-whistle and wildly baseless insinuation — that she is somehow soft on sentencing “child porn” cases.

Graham would shout an angry and oversimplified question about a complicated or irrelevant subject, interrupt with an outburst not 10 seconds later, then interrupt again to demand why the judge hadn’t answered his original question. While trying to explain for the zillionth time why sentencing guidelines for child pornography distribution are different when images are sent over the internet (where it is easy) than when they are sent via regular mail (where it is harder), Graham suddenly cut in to express shocked disbelief that she didn’t think both crimes were equally bad and that both hypothetical criminals should be sentenced to 50-year sentences. He was essentially accusing Jackson of being a pedophile apologist because she followed the law.

Occasionally the senator changed tactics, though not his tone. “Did you watch the Kavanaugh hearings?” he asked at one point. Judge Jackson replied that she had not. Undeterred, Graham barreled forward, demanding how Judge Jackson would feel if she was ambushed the way (in his description) Justice Kavanaugh was, as if she were personally responsible for those hearings. Not that he let her actually answer. When lightly chided by the Judiciary Committee Chairman Dick Durbin for his interruptions, Graham complained, rather amazingly, “She’s filibustered every question!”

Reporters present noted that during Graham’s heated exchange the spectators began to groan audibly, with one woman whispering, “Shut up.” Graham’s grandstanding faux-outrage overran his allotted time by over 10 minutes. Even if his attacks had merit (they don’t), his conduct would still have been inexcusable. For all his tirades about how the Democrats supposedly treated Kavanaugh unfairly, not one Democratic senator ever raised their voice to him as Graham did to Judge Jackson. Kavanaugh was allowed to dissolve into tears without interruption as he answered for a credible accusation of sexual assault, but Jackson can’t defend herself against a vile and thoroughly debunked insinuation without being attacked.

Everything about Graham’s performance was calculated to demean. My personal favorite moment may have been when he interjected in the middle of Jackson’s sentence to address “Mr. Chairman,” not her, with the added disrespect of referring to the judge only as “she.” I also enjoyed the verbal pat on the head implied in his, “You seem like a nice person.” The racism and the sexism that allowed Graham to steamroll his South Carolina drawl over every sentence Judge Jackson attempted to utter is undeniable. In objecting to every word out of her mouth Graham seemed also to object to Judge Jackson’s right to even be there. He presented no facts or compelling arguments and he refused to engage with literally any of her calm, rational explanations.

Calling attention to men unable to handle their emotions while women remain coolly rational feels almost too obvious. But then again, facts are simply facts.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Please enter a valid email
Please enter a valid email
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Must be at least 6 characters, include an upper and lower case character and a number
Please enter your first name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
Please enter your last name
Special characters aren’t allowed
Please enter a name between 1 and 40 characters
You must be over 18 years old to register
You must be over 18 years old to register
Opt-out-policy
You can opt-out at any time by signing in to your account to manage your preferences. Each email has a link to unsubscribe.

By clicking ‘Create my account’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Register for free to continue reading

Registration is a free and easy way to support our truly independent journalism

By registering, you will also enjoy limited access to Premium articles, exclusive newsletters, commenting, and virtual events with our leading journalists

Already have an account? sign in

By clicking ‘Register’ you confirm that your data has been entered correctly and you have read and agree to our Terms of use, Cookie policy and Privacy notice.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy policy and Terms of service apply.

Join our new commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in