"...perhaps the Democrats will rise above the fray instead of taking the bait."

Well except for the Bernie or Burn It! people. But they're assholes anyway.

JULIAN ASSANGE NAILS IT
JULIAN ASSANGE: Well, I mean, that’s interesting. We have seen that with a lot of other publications. I guess there’s a question: What does that mean for the U.S. Democratic Party? It is important for there to be examples of accountability. The resignation was an example of that. Now, of course, Hillary Clinton has tried to immediately produce a counter-example by putting out a statement, within hours, saying that Debbie Wasserman Schultz is a great friend, and she’s incorporating her into her campaign, she’s going to be pushing for her re-election to the Congress.

So that’s a very interesting signaling by Hillary Clinton that if you act in a corrupt way that benefits Hillary Clinton, you will be taken care of. Why does she need to put that out? Certainly, it’s not a signal that helps with the public at all. It’s not a signal that helps with unity at the DNC, at the convention. It’s a signal to Hillary Clinton partisans to keep on going on, you’ll be taken care of. But it’s a very destructive signal for a future presidency, because it’s—effectively, it’s expanding the Overton window of corruption. It doesn’t really matter what you do, how you behave; as long as that is going to benefit Hillary Clinton, you’ll be protected.

Oh good, now the select special elite Bernout core corps are going full retard with the conspiracy theories.

I suppose these particular yahoos were well down that sewage-hole to begin with, but it still stinks when they try to fling their sacred offal up at the rest of us.

"After last night, perhaps the Democrats will rise above the fray instead of taking the bait."

@1 and 2, you do realize the irony that in your knee jerk reactions, you are going low and taking the bait yourselves... don't you?

Oops, meant 1 and 3. @2 is taking the bait, but it's not ironic.

I do think that Mrs. Clinton's appointments will be far better than Trump's.

It's a pity she won't get a single one through Congress.

GhostDog dear, the important ones - the Supreme Court Justices - will make it through the nomination process if the Democrats take back the Senate. And Hillary Clinton is badass enough to harangue the Congress in a way that President Obama is not able to.

Dear RS: somehow you will have to learn to live with the rest of us dirty, stinking, stupid fellow americans. Just like we have learned how to live with you with our holy, morally superior, elite, educated master race. See you on the other side.

@7

That's a big if, Mrs Vel-DuRay. Especially since we need a 2/3 majority. Not saying it won't happen. Just saying it's a big if.

And I would never argue Mrs. Clinton's badass-ness. However, I am concerned that her badass-ness will be countered by the almost Ahab-esque hatred Republicans have for her.

Full disclosure, Republican hatred of the Clintons is the one constant of politics that has been around ever since I became politically aware in around 1992. It is, for me, the north star of suck. Every other aspect of politics has changed since then except that one thing.

It wouldn't surprise me if Republican hatred of the Clintons ends up causing global thermonuclear heck.

The sad Bernie fans remind me of the Sad Brazilians meme from the World Cup: http://sadbrazilians.tumblr.com/ (still good for a smile after all this time)

so much naivete in the Sandernistas. I hadn't expected that this late in the game.

@ 6/10, the American public won't stand for them to block the SCOTUS nominations forever (and I do expect the GOP to attempt to do just that in the event of a Clinton victory, despite they're strained justification for not voting now). It's a government shutdown scenario.

If the Dems regain the Senate they can get rid of the filibuster for Supreme Court appointments, just as they already did for all lower level judges. The so called nuclear option. My expectation is that would in fact happen, and rather quickly, if the Republicans continue on with their refusal to fill the Scalia seat. Assuming, of course that sanity prevails and Trump is defeated.

@13

Well, that depends. I agree that the Democrats and some of the moderates will be mad as hell about it.

However, the anarcho-capitalists of convenience*, *AHEM*, I mean the ultra conservative wing of the Republican party will cheer them on and a lot of the media moderates(David Brooks, Andrew Sullivan, et al) will tut tut and say how both sides are just as bad because Clinton didn't appoint exactly who the conservatives want.

Yes, I am deeply cynical about all of this.

*They hate government and love the free market. Except when it comes to stopping abortions and the government benefits that they are personally getting.

GhostDog, the 2/3 majority is a Senate rule. If it is a new, Democratically controlled Senate, they could go for broke and return to a simple majority.

As for Republicans, they are at heart bullies. Bullies back down if you confront them. I think she'd be good at confronting them.

GhostDog I'll match your cynicism a raise you TPP passing and Garland being appointed during the 'lame duck' session.

"taint the memories of his revolution."

pure drivel. Are you trying to get a job at the Seattle Times? I hope you succeed.

@2 - Or DWS is a long-time friend and she's helping a friend. That's a stupid reason, of course, but it just may be that simple (in Clinton's mind.) Or, Debbie knows where the bodies are buried so Clinton had to do something.

As for when Clinton is elected, yes, the right in Congress will do everything they can try to sabotage her. I lived thru the years with her husband and you would have thought they were Satan and Lady Satan. I could never understand the venom the right had for them.

But Clinton is one tough person and I think she learned a lot from those years and from the years in the Obama administration.

@17:

I'm still betting that President Obama will withdraw Garland's nomination as soon as Clinton has clinched the election. The Senate, which I believe will be in recess at that point, wouldn't have near enough time to schedule hearings, Garland can't be approved without them, and they'll be stuck with their promise/tantrum to not consider a nomination from the current administration.

@19
"Or, Debbie knows where the bodies are buried so Clinton had to do something."
Are you suggesting that the Clintons may have engaged in untoward behavior of some sort at some time???