Brett Kavanaugh Confirmation Thread

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

Her request for an FBI investigation is reasonable and pretty much the opposite of someone trying to seek attention.   This is more of a background check issue than anything else.   And the Anita Hill FBI investigation only took three days, so this isn't about delay.  If they had acted when Feinstein referred it to them, it would likely already be completed. 

Kavanaugh has to testify before the Senate because he is the Supreme Court nominee, not to mention a prominent public official who has done this before.  Nothing obligates this poor woman to go before a firing squad of partisan Senators to be questioned by them about her sexual assault.   She didn't leak this story publicly and didn't want to come forward. 

[retread 2,951]

Would like to see her go on 60 minutes with accompanying interviews from the therapist, fellow classmates, husband, etc.

[Telegraph_it 3,350]

Is there an echo in here?

[David Dennison 18,487]

3 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Her request for an FBI investigation is reasonable and pretty much the opposite of someone trying to seek attention.   This is more of a background check issue than anything else.   And the Anita Hill FBI investigation only took three days, so this isn't about delay.  If they had acted when Feinstein referred it to them, it would likely already be completed. 

Kavanaugh has to testify before the Senate because he is the Supreme Court nominee, not to mention a prominent public official who has done this before.  Nothing obligates this poor woman to go before a firing squad of partisan Senators to be questioned by them about her sexual assault.   She didn't leak this story publicly and didn't want to come forward. 

With every request, she makes the Republicans look more and more unreasonable, especially in light of the Anita Hill testimony. She'll get all of her asks in, they'll refuse, and then she'll show up and make them look like they are attacking a credible victim of sexual assault.

The optics couldn't be worse for the Republicans.

[Incredulity 11,444]

7 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

The fact that Grassley won't issue a subpoena tells you all you need to know about the GOP level of interest in hearing from Dr. Ford.

How do you think the left would portray Grassley issuing a supoena?  Good God.

[David Dennison 18,487]

Just now, Incredulity said:

How do you think the left would portray Grassley issuing a supoena?  Good God.

Not any worse than they are portraying him now. The Republicans look awful.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

Just now, David Dennison said:

With every request, she makes the Republicans look more and more unreasonable, especially in light of the Anita Hill testimony. She'll get all of her asks in, they'll refuse, and then she'll show up and make them look like they are attacking a credible victim of sexual assault.

The optics couldn't be worse for the Republicans.

She may not show, though, and I wouldn't blame her.   And if she doesn't, I don't think it will hurt Republicans, who will just say they gave her a chance.   Voters don't care about process issues like her requests for an FBI investigation or not to sit at a table with Kavanaugh.  That's just reality. 

[David Dennison 18,487]

3 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

She may not show, though, and I wouldn't blame her.   And if she doesn't, I don't think it will hurt Republicans, who will just say they gave her a chance.   Voters don't care about process issues like her requests for an FBI investigation or not to sit at a table with Kavanaugh.  That's just reality. 

I think it will hurt them tremendously. It already has. 

Women care a lot and women are going to drive the election.

[Incredulity 11,444]

11 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Not any worse than they are portraying him now. The Republicans look awful.

This might be the dumbest comment in this thread.

Subpoena her, LOL...... WTF.

[GHOSTUSER 361]

15 hours ago, burntorangebongos said:

h https://twitter.com/eugenegu/status/1042119602329726976 ttps://twitter.com/eugenegu/status/1042119602329726976 https://twitter.com/eugenegu/status/1042119602329726976

 

This is the most relevant issue concerning his nomination in my book. How did he afford all of that on his salary. He gave an answer with respect to getting paid back for the baseball tickets he put on his card from his friends but I didn’t see an answer as to how he could afford those other items. Other than the embarrassing puff piece on the accuser, the WSJ has been killing it when it comes to coverage of this mess. 

I have no problem with the Dems playing hardball and pulling a Garland if they could. Smearing a man’s reputation on an uncorroborated flimsy accusation is channeling their inner Ted Kennedy. I just hate the posturing that anyone really actually gives a shit that this event actually happened or not. Dems are trying to stall until midterms and the Rep. are trying to ram this through. No one’s hand is clean. Packing the courts to match the objectives of the party in power is being done in Hungary and Poland. No surprise it’s happening here.

What Democrats Have Become

Brett Kavanaugh is a casualty of an anything-goes political resistance.

Daniel HenningerSept. 19, 2018 6:59 p.m. ET

As of the most recent available moment in this episode, Ms. Ford’s lawyer said her client would not appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee until there is a “full investigation by law-enforcement officials.” Like the Mueller excavations, that could run to the horizon, unable to find anything but unwilling to stop until it finds something. 

Let us posit that the one thing not at issue here is the truth. As a matter of law and fact, Ms. Ford’s accusation can be neither proved nor disproved. This is as obvious now as it must have been when Dianne Feinstein and the other Democrats came into possession of this incident. 

Surely someone pointed out that based on what was disclosed, this accusation could not be substantiated. To which the Democrats responded: So what? Its political value is that it cannot be disproved. They saw that six weeks before a crucial midterm election, the unresolvable case of Christine Blasey Ford would sit like a stalled hurricane over the entire Republican Party, drowning its candidates in a force they could not stop. 

In #MeToo, which began in the predations of Harvey Weinstein, Democrats and progressives finally have found a weapon against which there seems to be no defense. It can be used to exterminate political enemies. If one unprovable accusation doesn’t suffice, why not produce a second, or third? It’s a limitless standard.

The Democrats’ broader strategy is: Delay the vote past the election; win the Senate by convincing suburban women that Republicans are implacably hostile to them; seize power; and—the point of it all—take down the Trump government. 

This is the “resistance.” This is what Democrats have become. Resistance is a word and strategy normally found in a revolutionary context, which is precisely the argument made by the left to justify its actions against this presidency since the evening of Nov. 8, 2016. Anything goes. Whatever it takes. Brett Kavanaugh is not much more than a casualty of war. 

Rather than try to argue or win public issues on substance, the Democrats have become a party that seems to think it can win with muscle alone. Environmentalism emerged in the 1970s as a worthwhile idea that attracted the interest and support of both parties. From Al Gore onward, it became a bludgeon to beat up the other party. Now sexual abuse, an issue originating in utmost seriousness, has been quickly captured and fashioned into a political weapon by the Democratic left. 

Politics as trench warfare has relieved the Democrats of the burden of thought. Extending the Pelosi Rule—we have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it—we now have the Gillibrand Standard. 

Commenting this week on Ford v. Kavanaugh, New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, another 2020 presidential aspirant, said, “I believe it is disqualifying, given what we know.” In other words, what she believes is based on next to nothing. 

Put on defense by these accusations, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley unsurprisingly agreed to a hearing in which Ms. Ford would tell her story and Judge Kavanaugh would speak. Then the senators would vote.

Consider the spectacle: Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination for the U.S. Supreme Court, the embodiment of a modern rule of law, is being decided in the Senate by the medieval practice of trial by ordeal, such as surviving immersion in fire or ice. Trial by ordeal was outlawed by the Lateran Council in 1215. 

Or worse, the standards of the mob in the Roman Colosseum, turning thumbs up or down on the combatants. Though unlike the Senate Democrats, the Roman mob at least had an open mind. 

Incidentally, the standard trope that Donald Trump has degraded our politics? We don’t need to hear that anymore. Or about the moral certitudes of the religious right.

Is there a sadder figure in the modern Democratic Party than Sen. Dianne Feinstein? Elected to the Senate in 1992, Mrs. Feinstein has produced a creditable career. Her above-it-all reputation was never quite deserved, but she has at least performed with dignity.

Now, seeking re-election at 85, she is getting heat from the progressive-dominated Democratic Party in California, the world capital of identity-only politics. By withholding from the committee the accusatory Ford letter that came into her possession nearly two months ago, Sen. Feinstein ensured the nomination’s descent into such a hapless, cynical moment. This will be the most remembered event in Sen. Feinstein’s career.

The Kavanaugh nomination, “given what we know,” has come down to an undiscoverable accusation. The defeat of a Supreme Court nominee on this basis would be a victory for a level of conscious political nullification not seen in the U.S. for a long time. Republicans in the Senate shouldn’t allow it, and voters in November should not affirm it. 

Write henninger@wsj.com.

[GHOSTUSER 361]

13 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

She may not show, though, and I wouldn't blame her.   And if she doesn't, I don't think it will hurt Republicans, who will just say they gave her a chance.   Voters don't care about process issues like her requests for an FBI investigation or not to sit at a table with Kavanaugh.  That's just reality. 

Hope you had a good Yom Kippur. I missed our Jewish members participating yesterday.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

Her request for an FBI investigation is reasonable and pretty much the opposite of someone trying to seek attention.   This is more of a background check issue than anything else.   And the Anita Hill FBI investigation only took three days, so this isn't about delay.  If they had acted when Feinstein referred it to them, it would likely already be completed. 

Kavanaugh has to testify before the Senate because he is the Supreme Court nominee, not to mention a prominent public official who has done this before.  Nothing obligates this poor woman to go before a firing squad of partisan Senators to be questioned by them about her sexual assault.   She didn't leak this story publicly and didn't want to come forward. 

I'm not questioning if it's reasonable in the sense that it sounds fair enough to me or the general public.  I'm inquiring about the rules and obligations for both parties in such situations.   

[sheeeit 129]

13 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

If they had acted when Feinstein referred it to them, it would likely already be completed. 

How? Feinstein sent the FBI a letter about an alleged sexual assault from 35 years ago and she REDACTED all of the names except for Kav and provided no specific date or location.  As part of Kav's background check, virtually everyone he knows has already been questioned by the FBI.  The vetting is intense and extremely comprehensive.  Not one single person questioned by the FBI in their check even hinted at anything like what is being alleged.  So what exactly did you want the FBI to do at that point?

 

 

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

19 minutes ago, Aphelion said:

I'm not questioning if it's reasonable in the sense that it sounds fair enough to me or the general public.  I'm inquiring about the rules and obligations for both parties in such situations.   

I wasn't responding to you.  I don't know why you'd think I was. 

[David Dennison 18,487]

 

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

He'll be taking a stand at the local mall, or wherever the teens today hang out. 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

I wasn't responding to you.  I don't know why you'd think I was. 

My mistake.  Your post seemed related to the question I asked a few posts before and I thought it was directed at it.  

[Longhorn_Fan68 33,779]

8 minutes ago, Aphelion said:

My mistake.  Your post seemed related to the question I asked a few posts before and I thought it was directed at it.  

and this is how political discourse should go. good job, guys

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,388]

there is nothing to stop Ford from appearing on Monday, give an opening statement detailing her accusation, calling for a FBI investigation, and then walking out.   It's very doubtful that Grassley could call for a vote at that point as long as Ford seemed credible and not nuts.

Ford doesn't have to answer any questions to pause the confirmation process.  But if she chooses to not show up at all, I don't blame the GOP from moving forward.  

[David Dennison 18,487]

Just now, Nice Guy Eddie said:

there is nothing to stop Ford from appearing on Monday, give an opening statement detailing her accusation, calling for a FBI investigation, and then walking out.   It's very doubtful that Grassley could call for a vote at that point as long as Ford seemed credible and not nuts.

Ford doesn't have to answer any questions to pause the confirmation process.  But if she chooses to not show up at all, I don't blame the GOP from moving forward.  

And that would be politically devastating for them, so I don't have any problem with it, either.

This entire process has gone about as poorly as possible for the GOP without a withdrawn nomination.

That makes me happy.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,388]

5 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

And that would be politically devastating for them, so I don't have any problem with it, either.

This entire process has gone about as poorly as possible for the GOP without a withdrawn nomination.

That makes me happy.

I don't know if its devastating for them.  Ford can't just outline her accusation and then dictate the timing and process.   If Monday is bad for her or she wants more time to prepare, then make the ask.   She also can't force an FBI investigation on her say so.  But if she gives the right statement or testimony to the Senate,  certain senators can make an FBI investigation happen.    If 2 or more GOP senators request an FBI investigation, it's a done deal or the confirmation is killed.  

[hornbri 1,348]

https://www.npr.org/2018/09/20/649787076/kavanaugh-accuser-classmate-that-it-happened-or-not-i-have-no-idea

 

So much for the facebook post that got so much attention a few pages back. 

[retread 2,951]

35 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

He'll be taking a stand at the local mall, or wherever the teens today hang out. 

This is where we are. An alleged sexual assault victim is very reluctant to come forward for fear that she will be demonized and have her life turned upside down. A slimeball like Moore feels comfortable enough to advocate for the Rs ramming this through. Sad.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,355]

We are getting a full display of the corruption of all three branches of government with this Kavanaugh debacle. 

 

Edited September 20, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,355]

3 minutes ago, hornbri said:

https://www.npr.org/2018/09/20/649787076/kavanaugh-accuser-classmate-that-it-happened-or-not-i-have-no-idea

 

So much for the facebook post that got so much attention a few pages back. 

This was insignificant to begin with. 

[David Dennison 18,487]

2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

We are getting a full display of the corruption of all three branches of government with this Kavanaugh debacle. 

 

I disagree. We are getting a full display of American politics. It's always been like this. Our romanticized notion is ahistorical.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,355]

Just now, David Dennison said:

I disagree. We are getting a full display of American politics. It's always been like this. Our romanticized notion is ahistorical.

Yeah no, the president is an un-indicted crime boss under multiple criminal investigations appointing his own crooked judge with a subservient and complicit congress.

It hasn't always been like this.

This is new.

[David Dennison 18,487]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Yeah no, the president is an un-indicted crime boss under multiple criminal investigations appointing his own crooked judge with a subservient and complicit congress.

It hasn't always been like this.

This is new.

Dude. Nixon.

Come on.

[Incredulity 11,444]

7 minutes ago, hornbri said:

https://www.npr.org/2018/09/20/649787076/kavanaugh-accuser-classmate-that-it-happened-or-not-i-have-no-idea

 

So much for the facebook post that got so much attention a few pages back. 

I heard this lady on the radio driving this morning.  

"I felt empowered when I wrote that"  What The HOLY FUCK.  

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,355]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Dude. Nixon.

Come on.

The Republicans in Congress checked Nixon.

With Trump, not so much.

[David Dennison 18,487]

4 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The Republicans in Congress checked Nixon.

With Trump, not so much.

Only because the tapes were released. Until then, they stuck by him.

Without the tapes, Nixon survives. The Republicans were not brave.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13,388]

I feel that most the GOP senators could care less about Kavanaugh.  Their main focus is getting a conservative justice on the bench.  If they see that Kavanaugh causes problems for them politically or that a delayed process could risk their chance to confirm a conservative to the supreme court, Kavanaugh is done.  

It's not like Kavanaugh is anything special that dozens of other candidates couldn't fit the bill.

 

[High Plains Drifter 10,961]

1 hour ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

This is the most relevant issue concerning his nomination in my book. How did he afford all of that on his salary. He gave an answer with respect to getting paid back for the baseball tickets he put on his card from his friends but I didn’t see an answer as to how he could afford those other items. Other than the embarrassing puff piece on the accuser, the WSJ has been killing it when it comes to coverage of this mess. 

I have no problem with the Dems playing hardball and pulling a Garland if they could. Smearing a man’s reputation on an uncorroborated flimsy accusation is channeling their inner Ted Kennedy. I just hate the posturing that anyone really actually gives a shit that this event actually happened or not. Dems are trying to stall until midterms and the Rep. are trying to ram this through. No one’s hand is clean. Packing the courts to match the objectives of the party in power is being done in Hungary and Poland. No surprise it’s happening here.

What Democrats Have Become

Brett Kavanaugh is a casualty of an anything-goes political resistance.

Daniel HenningerSept. 19, 2018 6:59 p.m. ET

As of the most recent available moment in this episode, Ms. Ford’s lawyer said her client would not appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee until there is a “full investigation by law-enforcement officials.” Like the Mueller excavations, that could run to the horizon, unable to find anything but unwilling to stop until it finds something. 

Let us posit that the one thing not at issue here is the truth. As a matter of law and fact, Ms. Ford’s accusation can be neither proved nor disproved. This is as obvious now as it must have been when Dianne Feinstein and the other Democrats came into possession of this incident. 

Surely someone pointed out that based on what was disclosed, this accusation could not be substantiated. To which the Democrats responded: So what? Its political value is that it cannot be disproved. They saw that six weeks before a crucial midterm election, the unresolvable case of Christine Blasey Ford would sit like a stalled hurricane over the entire Republican Party, drowning its candidates in a force they could not stop. 

In #MeToo, which began in the predations of Harvey Weinstein, Democrats and progressives finally have found a weapon against which there seems to be no defense. It can be used to exterminate political enemies. If one unprovable accusation doesn’t suffice, why not produce a second, or third? It’s a limitless standard.

The Democrats’ broader strategy is: Delay the vote past the election; win the Senate by convincing suburban women that Republicans are implacably hostile to them; seize power; and—the point of it all—take down the Trump government. 

This is the “resistance.” This is what Democrats have become. Resistance is a word and strategy normally found in a revolutionary context, which is precisely the argument made by the left to justify its actions against this presidency since the evening of Nov. 8, 2016. Anything goes. Whatever it takes. Brett Kavanaugh is not much more than a casualty of war. 

Rather than try to argue or win public issues on substance, the Democrats have become a party that seems to think it can win with muscle alone. Environmentalism emerged in the 1970s as a worthwhile idea that attracted the interest and support of both parties. From Al Gore onward, it became a bludgeon to beat up the other party. Now sexual abuse, an issue originating in utmost seriousness, has been quickly captured and fashioned into a political weapon by the Democratic left. 

Politics as trench warfare has relieved the Democrats of the burden of thought. Extending the Pelosi Rule—we have to pass the bill to find out what’s in it—we now have the Gillibrand Standard. 

Commenting this week on Ford v. Kavanaugh, New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, another 2020 presidential aspirant, said, “I believe it is disqualifying, given what we know.” In other words, what she believes is based on next to nothing. 

Put on defense by these accusations, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley unsurprisingly agreed to a hearing in which Ms. Ford would tell her story and Judge Kavanaugh would speak. Then the senators would vote.

Consider the spectacle: Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination for the U.S. Supreme Court, the embodiment of a modern rule of law, is being decided in the Senate by the medieval practice of trial by ordeal, such as surviving immersion in fire or ice. Trial by ordeal was outlawed by the Lateran Council in 1215. 

Or worse, the standards of the mob in the Roman Colosseum, turning thumbs up or down on the combatants. Though unlike the Senate Democrats, the Roman mob at least had an open mind. 

Incidentally, the standard trope that Donald Trump has degraded our politics? We don’t need to hear that anymore. Or about the moral certitudes of the religious right.

Is there a sadder figure in the modern Democratic Party than Sen. Dianne Feinstein? Elected to the Senate in 1992, Mrs. Feinstein has produced a creditable career. Her above-it-all reputation was never quite deserved, but she has at least performed with dignity.

Now, seeking re-election at 85, she is getting heat from the progressive-dominated Democratic Party in California, the world capital of identity-only politics. By withholding from the committee the accusatory Ford letter that came into her possession nearly two months ago, Sen. Feinstein ensured the nomination’s descent into such a hapless, cynical moment. This will be the most remembered event in Sen. Feinstein’s career.

The Kavanaugh nomination, “given what we know,” has come down to an undiscoverable accusation. The defeat of a Supreme Court nominee on this basis would be a victory for a level of conscious political nullification not seen in the U.S. for a long time. Republicans in the Senate shouldn’t allow it, and voters in November should not affirm it. 

Write henninger@wsj.com.

tldr: boo hoo, mean ol democrats using politics to swift boat a supreme court nominee.

 

No, seriously: Hey McConnell, you fucking piece of turtle shit, how does that feel, huh? Unhh Unhh, you like that? Take it all bitch.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,355]

4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Only because the tapes were released. Until then, they stuck by him.

Without the tapes, Nixon survives. The Republicans were not brave.

We don't need tapes with Trump. He confesses crimes publicly. 

Congressional inquiries: 0.0

Edited September 20, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Onboard 2.0 9,083]

4 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I feel that most the GOP senators could care less about Kavanaugh.  Their main focus is getting a conservative justice on the bench.  If they see that Kavanaugh causes problems for them politically or that a delayed process could risk their chance to confirm a conservative to the supreme court, Kavanaugh is done.  

It's not like Kavanaugh is anything special that dozens of other candidates couldn't fit the bill.

 

What they care about is a conservative hold on the Supreme Court, and the mid terms. I also don't think they like being second guessed or questioned. 

They could lose the majority, then its a whole 'nother proposition.

[David Dennison 18,487]

2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

We don't need tapes with Trump. He confesses crimes publicly. 

Congressional inquiries: 0.0

Well, yeah, his party controls Congress. That's probably going to change soon.

[scottsins 1,951]

At this point, if she doesn't testify and he is confirmed, that is a huge win for Republicans.
For the moment.
They will pay dearly in November. I think if he gets confirmed and her story blows up on them later, they lose both houses.

Pretty much the way I see it. And that’s exactly why I think doing 60 minutes AND releasing the polygraph results now would be the move to make.

[scottsins 1,951]

I'm not questioning if it's reasonable in the sense that it sounds fair enough to me or the general public.  I'm inquiring about the rules and obligations for both parties in such situations.   

This isn’t a court/legal proceeding so your question is pretty irrelevant to the issue at hand.

[RomaVicta 29,704]

9 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

It's not like Kavanaugh is anything special that dozens of other candidates couldn't fit the bill.

Again, his status as a conservative is just a cover. Trump and the GOPs could have easily found a better candidate with a cleaner record and conservative credentials.

Kavanaugh is a political hack. A slimeball who will do whatever he can to protect the party and those that put him in that sweet job. The hold up in releasing documents, the withholding of documents, the vague answers about his immediate past all suggest just how political this appointment is. This affair also suggests something about the desperation of the GOPs in the face of the Mueller investigation.

All of you GOPs on here talking about the value of a conservative SC would have valid positions if the nominated justice was a respected jurist who could be counted on to form his opinions based on his/her best judgment. I couldn't object to that. It's the way the mop flops.

Defending Kavanaugh as that justice is either ignorant or disingenuous. 

Slimeball

[MixtyMotions 102]

I think the nomination issue is over.  Everything now is about how this plays in the midterm.  But anybody analyzing this on a national basis is making a mistake.  Well, that may be ok for a vote here and there in the House.  But the real game is in the Senate.  And how this plays in each state is very different.  A national analysis won't work for, say, the West Virginia race.

[David Dennison 18,487]

2 minutes ago, MixtyMotions said:

I think the nomination issue is over.  Everything now is about how this plays in the midterm.  But anybody analyzing this on a national basis is making a mistake.  Well, that may be ok for a vote here and there in the House.  But the real game is in the Senate.  And how this plays in each state is very different.  A national analysis won't work for, say, the West Virginia race.

It's far from over. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,355]

4 minutes ago, MixtyMotions said:

I think the nomination issue is over.  Everything now is about how this plays in the midterm.  But anybody analyzing this on a national basis is making a mistake.  Well, that may be ok for a vote here and there in the House.  But the real game is in the Senate.  And how this plays in each state is very different.  A national analysis won't work for, say, the West Virginia race.

So are you saying Manchin can get away with voting NO on Kavanaugh? 

Because based on polling, I think he can.

Edited September 20, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Chuckie Finster 22,571]

6 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

I feel that most the GOP senators could care less about Kavanaugh.  Their main focus is getting a conservative justice on the bench.  If they see that Kavanaugh causes problems for them politically or that a delayed process could risk their chance to confirm a conservative to the supreme court, Kavanaugh is done.  

It's not like Kavanaugh is anything special that dozens of other candidates couldn't fit the bill.

 

This was what I thought initially, but their reluctance to kick this guy to the curb is making me thing HE is special to them, for some reason.  Even before these accusations, this whole nomination process has felt slimy.  There are dozens of other Gorsuch-like judges who could be confirmed without incident.  I mean, I'm sure the Democrats would protest, but we wouldn't have to deal with hiding documents or perjury or potential assault.

The fact that he hasn't been nixed yet and that Republicans are willing to drag this out is enough to raise an eyebrow with me.  If this was simply about the majority, he would have been replaced last week.

[David Dennison 18,487]

Just now, Chuckie Finster said:

This was what I thought initially, but their reluctance to kick this guy to the curb is making me thing HE is special to them, for some reason.  Even before these accusations, this whole nomination process has felt slimy.  There are dozens of other Gorsuch-like judges who could be confirmed without incident.  I mean, I'm sure the Democrats would protest, but we wouldn't have to deal with hiding documents or perjury or potential assault.

The fact that he hasn't been nixed yet and that Republicans are willing to drag this out is enough to raise an eyebrow with me.  If this was simply about the majority, he would have been replaced last week.

If he does get confirmed, the right's head is going to explode when Chief Justice Roberts moves to the center and becomes the swing vote on cases conservatives view as lay ups.

I can see him being the vote that saves Roe.

[wildcat09 29,146]

Just now, Chuckie Finster said:

This was what I thought initially, but their reluctance to kick this guy to the curb is making me thing HE is special to them, for some reason.  Even before these accusations, this whole nomination process has felt slimy.  There are dozens of other Gorsuch-like judges who could be confirmed without incident.  I mean, I'm sure the Democrats would protest, but we wouldn't have to deal with hiding documents or perjury or potential assault.

The fact that he hasn't been nixed yet and that Republicans are willing to drag this out is enough to raise an eyebrow with me.  If this was simply about the majority, he would have been replaced last week.

Alternatively, they're a bunch of old misogynists who revel in publicly reminding women that they're merely objects. 

[GHOSTUSER 361]

19 minutes ago, High Plains Drifter said:

tldr: boo hoo, mean ol democrats using politics to swift boat a supreme court nominee.

 

No, seriously: Hey McConnell, you fucking piece of turtle shit, how does that feel, huh? Unhh Unhh, you like that? Take it all bitch.

Feels fine to me as a conservative supportive of this nominee. This accusation is not going to even be a speed bump anymore. The only person that tried corroborate Dr. Ford’s accusation backtracked from her Facebook post. I’m sure Kavanaugh will be gracious on Monday despite the attempted smear job. 

[MixtyMotions 102]

2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

So are you saying Manchin can get away with voting NO on Kavanaugh? 

Because based on polling, I think he can.

I don't know.  I think:

- the drama for the midterm has not run its course.

- the way it will play out in West Virginia is not the same as the way it will play out in Nevada or Arizona.  All nine Senate seats in play will have their own story.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,355]

Just now, David Dennison said:

If he does get confirmed, the right's head is going to explode when Chief Justice Roberts moves to the center and becomes the swing vote on cases conservatives view as lay ups.

I can see him being the vote that saves Roe.

I can still see them kicking Kavanaugh to the curb and making him a martyr.  This narrative is clearly being developed right now and you can see it in some of the responses in this thread.

“You see! It was those evil democrats and their dirty tricks that did this to us.  That’s why we need your support this November to ensure our Supreme Court doesn’t fall into the wrong hands.”

[wildcat09 29,146]

Just now, MixtyMotions said:

I don't know.  I think:

- the drama for the midterm has not run its course.

- the way it will play out in West Virginia is not the same as the way it will play out in Nevada or Arizona.  All nine Senate seats in play will have their own story.

Swing voters in West Virginia are not basing their vote on how Manchin votes on this. Anyone who really wants a partisan Republican ratfucker justice is already a partisan Republican and is voting Republican.

[MixtyMotions 102]

4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

If he does get confirmed, the right's head is going to explode when Chief Justice Roberts moves to the center and becomes the swing vote on cases conservatives view as lay ups.

I can see him being the vote that saves Roe.

Roe is not going away.  Roe will lose some punch.  (The definition of "undue burden" will become higher.)