On his MSNBC show Sunday morning, after playing a clip of Tucker Carlson calling for the release of the LSAT (Law School Admission Test) score of Ketanji Brown Jackson, Biden's Supreme Court justice nominee, Jonathan Capehart said to his liberal Democrat guest:
"Senator Hirono, I'm not going to curse because it's Sunday and I'd get fired. Can you talk about why what Tucker Carlson just said is so repugnant?"
Hirono failed to answer Capehart's question. She didn't/couldn't venture anything as to why it was "repugnant" to ask for Brown Jackson's LSAT score. The most she could muster was to suggest that there's little Carlson says "that enlightens anybody."
Given Hirono's failure, you might have thought that Capehart would have taken a moment himself to explain what was so repellent about Carlson's request. But like Hirono, Capehart was unwilling, or unable, to do so.
So . . . just exactly what is wrong with asking for her LSAT score? If we were choosing among doctors, would it be "repugnant" to ask for their MCAT scores? Capehart must see this as a suggestion that Jackson is black, therefore she's unqualified. Before Jackson was named, Capehart suggested because she was black, she'd be more qualified and brilliant than anyone who came before her.
Hirono suggested that instead of learning Brown Jackson's LSAT score, we should look at her "experience."
Brown Jackson's LSAT score [like Obama's college transcripts] will probably never be publicly disclosed. It's not usually done in Supreme Court confirmations. But let's ask: Would the MSNBC suits really have fired Capehart if he had cursed Carlson? It seems more likely that, to the contrary, his viewers and bosses would have applauded him. Take the precedent of Joy Reid: her various verbal outrages, far from leading to her firing, were rewarded with a promotion to a prime-time show gig.
Hirono did supply some unintentional humor. She claimed that, in contrast with Trump's SCOTUS appointees, Brown Jackson would be "very even-handed."
Really? Brown Jackson was considered the most liberal of all of Biden's potential nominees. Indeed, a coalition of a dozen liberal groups wrote to Biden before his selection letting it be known that Brown Jackson was their preferred pick. Is there any serious doubt as to how Brown Jackson would vote on hot-button issues such as abortion, guns, affirmative action, etc? Biden himself had made clear that he would appoint someone taking a liberal line on the issues. He went so far as to confirm that he'd apply a "litmus test" on abortion!
Note: Capehart actually mentioned two factors preventing him from cursing Carlson. In addition to the fear of being fired, Capehart noted that it was Sunday. Capehart has often alluded, as here, to the fact that he's a church-going guy.
On his MSNBC Sunday show, Jonathan Capehart saying he'd like to "curse" Tucker Carlson for the "repugnant" suggestion the Biden SCOTUS nominee Ketanji Brown Jackson's LSAT score should be released, was sponsored by Progressive, AT&T, Walgreens, Chase, and Hyundai.
Here's the transcript.
The Sunday Show
11:19 am ET
JONATHAN CAPEHART: Senator Hirono, speaking of they're really reaching now, what I'm about to play for you, this is not a member of congress. This is not a member of the senate. But it is somebody who has way more power over your Republican colleagues than anybody really should. It's Tucker Carlson. I'm going to play something he said about Judge Jackson, and then we'll talk about it on the other side.
TUCKER CARLSON: So, it might be time for Joe Biden to let us know what Ketanji Brown Jackson's LSAT score was. How did she do on the LSAT? Why wouldn't he tell us that? That would settle the question conclusively as to whether she's a once-in-a-generation legal talent, the next Learned Hand.
It would seem like Americans in a democracy have a right to know that and much before giving her a lifetime appointment, but we didn't hear that.
CAPEHART: Senator Hirono, I'm not going to curse because it's Sunday, and I'd get fired. But can you talk about why what Tucker Carlson just said is so repugnant?
MAZIE HIRONO: Frankly, there's very little that Tucker Carlson says that enlightens anybody. So what we should be focused on is Judge Jackson's experience, the fact she has broad support from police organizations, from judges nominated by Republican presidents. She has broad support. Why? Because she's very even-handed, something that I can't say about the Trump nominees, by the way. They were not being nominated because they were even-handed. They were being nominated because they basically have an ideological agenda, much of that from the Federalist Society. So they really have -- Republicans have a hard time dealing with someone who is actually fair in her approach to deciding cases.