they are going to find a way to make "cause" expansive, and applicable to activities not related to on job performance. Also, likely to look at it as confirmation hearing fraud, not being truthful upfront, etc. So many ways for this to go off the rails. And Cobb seems open to all of them.

If "they" are going to do that then this hearing doesn't matter much anyway Cobb's questions are probing the issues, that's just being a good judge. Probing on the issues that would need to be addressed to rule in Cook's favor is good, actually

otoh, a judge who doesn't really show this sort of concern for the contours of your argument can be a sign you've already lost - no need to examine the details because they just aren't relevant

I guess we will see. I got a very bad feeling from the start here, and am really hoping it's just breakfast.

I also take it as a good sign that Lowell's answers don't seem uncomfortable - I noted at one point that it read as if he was having some fun with it

I'm so depressed with our Judiciary I can think they know how to go through the motions to avoid the criticism. I'm listening to you. I'm also fighting inclination to be suspicious after egregious affront of scotus rulings for Trump and their rulings by shadow docket. SCOTUS gave us Trump.

The appellate level is its own thing. At the trial level there are some basic rules of thumb that can help gauge how things are going (e.g. - a judge who begins by complimenting you is about to screw you)