Breaking in just after noon Eastern on Tuesday for Inside Politics, panelists expressed support for liberal Senators and protesters repeatedly disrupting and trying to delay the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearing, declaring they “had no choice” and “definitely” have a point about Kavanaugh not being transparent with Americans concerning his time in the Bush White House.

When asked by host John King if “this part of the Democratic argument” was “fair” and whether they “have a point here,” Supreme Court analyst Joan Biskupic breathlessly played the role of liberal spokeswoman by immediately replying, “definitely.”

Here’s Biskupic’s spin, dismissing the hundreds of thousands of documents available and showing no difference between herself and liberals (click “expand” for more):

What Senator Grassley was doing was comparing apples to oranges when he went back to the ACLU documents of Ruth Bader Ginsburg and also the Solicitor General documents of John Roberts. It’s White House documents vs. White House documents. The White House documents of Brett Kavanaugh are being withheld and screened severely. The white house documents of John Roberts and Elena Kagan were revealed. So it’s — it really is different. The Democrats — I know this is such a polarized, partisan situation, but they do have a point. They're saying we can't really do our job without knowing at least some of that material.

Earlier, King dipped into the coverage to deem the hearing “contentious” and “remarkable process” of Democrats on the dais and in the audience disrupting what’s supposed to be a peaceful hearing. King conceded that “it’s all about politics” and further proof that “Democrats began this hearing knowing they don't have the math,” but nonetheless refused to chide them for what took place.

Senior congressional correspondent Manu Raju took a similar track, making no effort to condemn the lack of decorum. Instead, he passed it along as logical because “the strategy this morning was born out of a lot of pressure from the left” because they “were frustrated with Democrats were not taking a firm enough.”

“Democrats, in a nod to their base, really pushing hard at doing something this rather extraordinary, interrupting of a committee chairman, demanding the end of the hearing. You had protesters. This usually does not happen in the Senate hearing. So it was a pretty remarkable, aggressive move, but right now, it does not change the math,” Raju added.

Time’s Molly Ball spoke moments later and parroted Democratic arguments that this is “above a partisan battle” (click “expand” for more):

Perhaps in some cases, but you have Democrats trying to send a message that elevates this above a partisan battle. You heard in Senator Durbin's comments just now, trying to talk about the extraordinary times we're in, the level of concern among his constituents, trying to say this isn't only about issues that we disagree on, issues that the court could decide, but about the Trump presidency, about the constitutional crisis, about the special counsel. Democrats trying to focus on, you know, the process, the documents, the disclosure of the nominee's record, and the issues surrounding President Trump as a way, I think, of moving this out of the arena of just, you know, partisan issues that they disagree though, of course it is also about that.

While Biskupic first wondered “whether Democrats can keep up the momentum to try to stop, have a pause, get documents, or at least try to bring more public attention” to Kavanaugh’s supposed lack of transparency, King hyped that Democrats “felt they had no choice, that they needed to speak up at the beginning.”

Again showing support for efforts to derail Kavanaugh, King and Raju wondered if the interruptions will cause him to “slip up” (click “expand” for more):

RAJU: Yeah and he was actually ambushed. He was not anticipated this level of aggression from the Democrat. He presumed that there would we a lot of angry comments in their opening statements about process. He did not expect to get interrupted by Democrat after Democrat.....Grassley and the Republicans were caught flat-footed on that, but Grassley did not want to give an inch on this because, if he gave them an inch, they could take a mile and then where does it go from here...But this is just the start. Tomorrow is questioning. The day after is going to be incredibly contentious. The question is does Kavanaugh slip up or not. KING: Does he slip up? He gets to speak later today.

Amazingly, the panelist who criticized Tuesday’s events was Michael D. Shear of The New York Times, who acknowledged that “the Democrats are trying to elevate this and trying to play to their base” but what he didn’t grasp was “how that puts pressure on” Republicans.

“[T]he truth is regular people in those states of moderate Republicans in Maine and Alaska are not sitting around debating questions of document production...When they get to the...more substantive questions about abortion and gay rights and, you know, all of the sort of panoply of other issues, that's where at least they have a opportunity to make the case to the regular folks that you should put pressure on these senators,” Shear added.

To see the relevant transcript from CNN’s Inside Politics on August 4, click “expand.”