Brett Kavanaugh Confirmation Thread

[troph 24781]

Look, I can buy that argument when there is one person who hasn't testified under oath yet.  But we are up to at least three now. 

Maybe 4 and Kavanaugh has tried to portray himself as a church going virgin who rarely drank. He lied under oath about stuff that mattered but it’s too esoteric for folks to care, now he’s lying about his partying past and expecting us to believe he wasn’t a deranged attempted or actual rapist.

Republicans should be asking themselves what if this guy is a bad dude? What then. But they won’t bc it’s the boogeymen Democrats that are calling him out.

[horncyclist 1387]

So how many GOP senators in close races would have to vote for this guy? Cruz, Heller, any others? That could be the difference in those races.

[jimmyjazz 45895]

9 hours ago, Johnny Sack said:

Gorsuch wasn’t up for hearing 6 weeks before midterms.  

If 34 weeks prior to an election is too close, then 6 weeks is definitely too close.  The people need the chance to put legislators in place who will accurately reflect their viewpoints in approval of all appointed high offices.  It's only fair, you see.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

7 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Why wouldn't these come up in the initial background checks ?

This is a legitimate question and there are a few reasonable explanations.

1. Background checks typically only go back to the age of 18 so Dr. Ford’s allegation wouldn’t have been detected.

2.  They didn’t really look for this because it was so far back and the persons with knowledge of the bad behavior would have been too far removed from Kavanaugh at the time of the check.

3.  Kavanaugh’s circle of associates did a good job of covering for him when questioned if they had any knowledge of bad behavior.  Typical good old boy network.

[troph 24781]

Why wouldn't these come up in the initial background checks ?

 

I suspect the republicans knew. They withheld or made confidential an astonishing number of emails and documents from his record. Some of that points to his carousing and some points to his bias toward overturning roe v Wade. All of which were relevant and some of which establish he’s a liar.

 

No way the background check if it was a deep dive investigation failed to turn up the yearbook crap. I suspect republicans knew he was shady but this is the guy trump wants. Maybe they knew about the accusations but the boys club can be tight lipped y’all know that. The FBI may not have caught the scent or trail. Or maybe they did. The FBI isn’t pulling a nominee only reporting to the senators.

 

What ever deal was made Mitch McConnell agreed to it and that included this guy. He’s tried to ram him through and it’s not working. Mitch doesn’t want an FBI investigation because they already know enough to know he’s a real problem.

 

I think you are seeing Republican hubris at its finest.

[Anastasis 23464]

 

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

This is a legitimate question and there are a few reasonable explanations.

1. Background checks typically only go back to the age of 18 so Dr. Ford’s allegation wouldn’t have been detected.

2.  They didn’t really look for this because it was so far back and the persons with knowledge of the bad behavior would have been too far removed from Kavanaugh at the time of the check.

3.  Kavanaugh’s circle of associates did a good job of covering for him when questioned if they had any knowledge of bad behavior.  Typical good old boy network.

Surprising that the FBI never looked into this Bart O'Kavanaugh character.  That guys sounds like bad news. 

[troph 24781]

Anyone seen a factual account of Kavanaughs lies all in one place? Example - he’s a virgin church boy juxtaposed to his yearbook and FFFFFourth of July crap, etc. also his more dry perjury re: court appointments.

 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

16 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Why wouldn't these come up in the initial background checks ?

Because they didn’t happen 

[David Dennison 18851]

Just now, Anastasis said:

Surprising that the FBI never looked into this Bart O'Kavanaugh character.  That guys sounds like bad news. 

[Aqua Buddha 14582]

Remember when conservatives lamented activist judges and judicial activism?

[David Dennison 18851]

1 minute ago, Johnny Sack said:

Because they didn’t happen 

Why do you believe him?

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

This is a legitimate question and there are a few reasonable explanations.

1. Background checks typically only go back to the age of 18 so Dr. Ford’s allegation wouldn’t have been detected.

2.  They didn’t really look for this because it was so far back and the persons with knowledge of the bad behavior would have been too far removed from Kavanaugh at the time of the check.

3.  Kavanaugh’s circle of associates did a good job of covering for him when questioned if they had any knowledge of bad behavior.  Typical good old boy network.

Yeah those all seem legit, but these latest allegations aren't HS related are they ?

Regarding 3, when they investigate they don't just talk to family and friends. They get names of other people who would have  known or come in contact with him, then they get names from those people who may have  known him.  

Our son just finished getting his top secret clearance, and the people they talked to were way out side his circle of friends and family.  I don't know how much more thorough that kind of investigation is, but I'd imagine the protocol for these kinds of background checks are similar in scope.  I also believe they spoke to people from his HS days so not sure I agree about the 18 year old thing, mostly because of the drug angle I think.

[bolverk 29659]

Setting aside the merits (or lack thereof) for the allegations from 3-4 different women, after what the Republicans did to Merrick Garland, they have forfeited their right to bitch about tactics and partisanship. Where do you assholes get off thinking that this "political theater" is beyond the pale? Y'all not only lowered the bar in 2016, you fucking snapped it in half and tossed it aside. You can all go get fucked.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

8 minutes ago, troph said:

 

I suspect the republicans knew. They withheld or made confidential an astonishing number of emails and documents from his record. Some of that points to his carousing and some points to his bias toward overturning roe v Wade. All of which were relevant and some of which establish he’s a liar.

 

No way the background check if it was a deep dive investigation failed to turn up the yearbook crap. I suspect republicans knew he was shady but this is the guy trump wants. Maybe they knew about the accusations but the boys club can be tight lipped y’all know that. The FBI may not have caught the scent or trail. Or maybe they did. The FBI isn’t pulling a nominee only reporting to the senators.

 

What ever deal was made Mitch McConnell agreed to it and that included this guy. He’s tried to ram him through and it’s not working. Mitch doesn’t want an FBI investigation because they already know enough to know he’s a real problem.

 

I think you are seeing Republican hubris at its finest.

Those reports aren't just given to one party. Anyone on the committee would see them I'm betting.

[Anastasis 23464]

1 minute ago, bolverk said:

Setting aside the merits (or lack thereof) for the allegations from 3-4 different women, after what the Republicans did to Merrick Garland, they have forfeited their right to bitch about tactics and partisanship. Where do you assholes get off thinking that this "political theater" is beyond the pale? Y'all not only lowered the bar in 2016, you fucking snapped it in half and tossed it aside. You can all go get fucked.

The Democrats are going to rawdog the GOP so FFFFF'n hard and use their tears as lube when they take total control. 

[troph 24781]

Those reports aren't just given to one party. Anyone on the committee would see them I'm betting.

I don’t know. But it doesn’t technically disqualify him. And it may not have turned anything up bc folks remained silent. Did they go back to freshman year of Yale? Maybe maybe not. If there is a report then release it. Either way if the initial FBI investigation is so relevant then either they caught it then / confirmed it was a lie or truth or they missed it. Show us. And if it was missed or outside the scope then if this initial report is so important then supplement with further questioning.

[Chuckie Finster 22694]

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-gops-least-worst-option-is-if-kavanaugh-withdraws-and-soon/

 

[triplehorn 2664]

22 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Why wouldn't these come up in the initial background checks ?

Re sexual misconduct, if you're a motivated and convincing liar, and there's been no previously known formal complaint or school/legal disciplinary action for a couple decades, it initially slips by.  

How A judge making about 200k was able to pay a 92k country club initiation fee and put a cash down payment exceeding his entire net worth on a million dollar home is a separate matter and appears to have happened since his last background checks.  Senate GOP is not inviting FBI to ask him to show how those transactions were made possible.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, troph said:

I don’t know. But it doesn’t technically disqualify him. And it may not have turned anything up bc folks remained silent. Did they go back to freshman year of Yale? Maybe maybe not. If there is a report then release it. Either way if the initial FBI investigation is so relevant then either they caught it then / confirmed it was a lie or truth or they missed it. Show us. And if it was missed or outside the scope then if this initial report is so important then supplement with further questioning.

No, these investigations and background checks go to at least college if not before. That's their job, investigating and gathering info. Any report of a sexual assault incident (by multiple people especially) is going to be front and center of a report, unless the investigators are excluding it from their report.  If they find incidents they're going to dig deeper then, not later.

[Chuckie Finster 22694]

In other news, finally realized who Kavanaugh reminds me of... he's Stevie Janowski and Saul Goodman's love child.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, triplehorn said:

Re sexual misconduct, if you're a motivated and convincing liar, and there's been no previously known formal complaint or school/legal disciplinary action for a couple decades, it initially slips by.  

How A judge making about 200k was able to pay a 92k country club initiation fee and put a cash down payment exceeding his entire net worth on a million dollar home is a separate matter and appears to have happened since his last background checks.  Senate GOP is not inviting FBI to ask him to show how those transactions were made possible.

The background checks aren't conducted as closed interviews of just the candidate. They interview his friends, family, friends of friends, teachers, former bosses.  

That's the thing that concerns me the most. Either they found this stuff, and the republicans sat on it, and then so did the democrats (till it was politically opportune not to. Both sides are playing politics with an appointment that's alleged above politics...  yeah right.....  The FBI needs to investigate this stuff if they haven't.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

9 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

Re sexual misconduct, if you're a motivated and convincing liar, and there's been no previously known formal complaint or school/legal disciplinary action for a couple decades, it initially slips by.  

How A judge making about 200k was able to pay a 92k country club initiation fee and put a cash down payment exceeding his entire net worth on a million dollar home is a separate matter and appears to have happened since his last background checks.  Senate GOP is not inviting FBI to ask him to show how those transactions were made possible.

No idea about how he got his money, but his wife also worked, so I'm Betting she was making some decent coin. Beyond that who knows how he/they got money, but it should be transparent and or traceable like maybe thru......say ............ cattle future sales.

[WhatTheBuck 28775]

22 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Remember when conservatives lamented activist judges and judicial activism?

Another example of every accusation being a confession. 

[troph 24781]

The background checks aren't conducted as closed interviews of just the candidate. They interview his friends, family, friends of friends, teachers, former bosses.  
That's the thing that concerns me the most. Either they found this stuff, and the republicans sat on it, and then so did the democrats (till it was politically opportune not to. Both sides are playing politics with an appointment that's alleged above politics...  yeah right.....  The FBI needs to investigate this stuff if they haven't.

We agree - if the initial report caught it - disclose it. If the initial report didn’t catch it bc it slipped by or was out of scope, investigate. I don’t know who gets the report but if both sides got it I wonder why it hasn’t come out at all for which ever side it worked for. Makes me wonder if it’s only given to the WH since Trump is the one who nominated him. Even then, it might benefit Trump to leak it, or not.

I really would like to know who gets the report and why has it not been leaked?

[yoladu 4093]

25 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

Because they didn’t happen 

Kavanaugh accuser count up to 4 women.

Bill Clinton accuser count was 4 women, as well. Something else that didn't happen, amirite?

[triplehorn 2664]

11 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

The background checks aren't conducted as closed interviews of just the candidate. They interview his friends, family, friends of friends, teachers, former bosses.  

That's the thing that concerns me the most. Either they found this stuff, and the republicans sat on it, and then so did the democrats (till it was politically opportune not to. Both sides are playing politics with an appointment that's alleged above politics...  yeah right.....  The FBI needs to investigate this stuff if they haven't.

I'm aware - I've been interviewed twice by federal investigators about non-family individuals seeking a higher classification status.  A major concern they have in mind is blackmail potential - usually legal, financial, sexual.  I can see how high school/college stuff in the pre-internet social media, digital camera days of the 80's simply gets lost with lack of documentary evidence and convincing lying.

BK's financial shadiness needs to be explained - that's his apparent blackmail vulnerability.  The sexual misconduct is about character with potential criminal exposure in Maryland.

 

Edited September 25, 2018 by triplehorn

[Gil Bang 25922]

Maybe. Maybe not. No one on this thread knows.

If the Republicans had any sack they would go ahead with the vote and say “Impeach him if you can.” Hell why wasn’t he impeached during the last 12 years as a justice on the 2nd highest court?

Oh. I know. I fucking know. It became crystal clear the first time he spoke publicly as the nominee. The bullshit that he spewed was fascinating.

[Chuckie Finster 22694]

So, uh, looks like Kavanaugh's first big lie from last night has been discovered:

Transcript from his interview:

Quote

And yes, there were parties. And the drinking age was 18, and yes, the seniors were legal and had beer there. And yes, people might have had too many beers on occasion and people generally in high school – I think all of us have probably done things we look back on in high school and regret or cringe a bit, but that’s not what we’re talking about.

Kavanugh turned 18 on February 12, 1983.

On July 1, 1982, Maryland raised the drinking age to 21.

https://one.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/research/FewerYoungDrivers/appendix.htm

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

4 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

I'm aware - I've been interviewed twice by federal investigators about non-family individuals seeking a higher classification status.  A major concern they have in mind is blackmail potential - usually legal, financial, sexual.  I can see how high school/college stuff in the pre-internet social media, digital camera days of the 80's simply gets lost with lack of documentary evidence and convincing lying.

BK's financial shadiness needs to be explained - that's his apparent blackmail vulnerability.  The sexual misconduct is about character with potential criminal exposure in Maryland.

 

Again, his wife worked as well, they were probably pulling in $300k at least between the two of them. The financial stuff is/ should be easy to trace.  

True they are looking for blackmail potential, but the other issues that come up they go in the report as well.  The background checks when conducted would reveal these issues that are now suddenly coming to light, unless they were concealed from the report or all the victims kept their mouths shut. 

 

[Whitman 694]

xxx

Edited September 25, 2018 by Whitman

[Chuckie Finster 22694]

5 minutes ago, Whitman said:

I went to high school in Maryland around this time, and if I recall, we were grandfathered in to keep being allowed beer.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1982/01/29/md-unit-votes-drinking-age-increase-to-21/7e0e1a40-6319-4117-a869-1dd500abd4b8/?utm_term=.262b834d0be1

Quote

The committee approved a compromise bill to raise the age to 21 and to "grandfather" in those persons now legally allowed to drink. Under that bill, anyone who turns 18 after July 1 would have to wait three years to drink. Anyone 18 years old before July 1 could continue to drink legally.

Unless Kavanaugh coincidentally had a bunch of friends who had been held back, this would not have applied to anyone in his class.

Edited to add: I understand that Kavanaugh's age group was the first Senior class who had to deal with these laws and I'm sure many people had no problem with 18 year-olds drinking.  I'm not saying he should be retroactively punished for underage drinking or anything of the sort.  But when you are being given a lifetime appointment to the SUPREME FUCKING COURT, recollection of little details like this matter, especially when you are using them as a defense.

Edited September 25, 2018 by Chuckie Finster

[lemonlime 5503]

6 minutes ago, Whitman said:

I went to high school in Maryland around this time, and if I recall, we were grandfathered in to keep being allowed beer.

Someone who turned 18 after the law changed would not have been grandfathered in.

[Anastasis 23464]

@Chuckie Finster I didn't watch the interview, but assuming that that quote is the full response, there isn't a lie there. Parse his words as if you were a slime ball lawyer. 

[RomaVicta 29902]

2 hours ago, Buzzrock said:

There is zero chance, IMO, that any other candidate was going to “sail through”

Others have with this Congress. Unless they were Dems.

You have little basis for your guess. The funny business in this nomination has all come from the GOP side including the late release of thousands of documents allowing the minority insufficient time for review. And there is the repeated lying by both GOP officials and some of your colleagues on here to muddy the waters. 

This issue could have been investigated by the FBI by now. Why is the White House reluctant?

Why nominate a candidate already iffy and now beset? Why?

[Whitman 694]

4 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/local/1982/01/29/md-unit-votes-drinking-age-increase-to-21/7e0e1a40-6319-4117-a869-1dd500abd4b8/?utm_term=.262b834d0be1

Unless Kavanaugh coincidentally had a bunch of friends who had been held back, this would not have applied to anyone in his class.

yea, I was't sure so I deleted my post, I think that was right.  It was nice going to WV to college because it was 18 for everything there back then.  Also, we had several people of a couple of age ranges in our class who had "redshirted" kindergarten, or gap yeared at a prep school before going off to college.

Edited September 25, 2018 by Whitman

[David Dennison 18851]

It's kind of funny watching Bart O tap dance around the fact that he was a big ol' high school and college drunk.

 

[Fozzz 152]

lol.  Obviously the impression he is trying to make there is that he and his friends weren't doing anything illegal by drinking as seniors.  What other relevancy would that statement have?  Does he just like to list irrelevant facts for the shits and giggles?

[Chuckie Finster 22694]

2 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

@Chuckie Finster I didn't watch the interview, but assuming that that quote is the full response, there isn't a lie there. Parse his words as if you were a slime ball lawyer. 

This is true, and I did honestly forget that the accusations are from when Kavanaugh was 17.  Therefore, it is accurate to say that the seniors could have been drinking beer.  I mean, it's bullshit because Kavanaugh was obviously trying to insinuate that HE was not doing anything illegal, but you are correct in saying that Kavanugh did not technically tell a lie.

Edited September 25, 2018 by Chuckie Finster

[Fozzz 152]

Anastasis has an annoying habit of latching onto the dumbest, most pointless shit

[RomaVicta 29902]

2 hours ago, Buzzrock said:

If the Republicans had any sack they would go ahead with the vote and say “Impeach him if you can.”

This and Johnny Sack's hope that the justice, if confirmed, goes on a jihad against liberal rulings indicate at what level some people choose to consider national policy and issues. You want Josey Wales squinting down from the bench. GOPs like watching the tanks roll and the bombs fall because it's manly in their eyes, and they can vicariously take part.

It's not football. It's not teams. I know writing this has no impact.

[Anastasis 23464]

Just now, Fozzz said:

Anastasis has an annoying habit of latching onto the dumbest, most pointless shit

We've uncovered the first big lie from an interview.

Nope, not really. Read it again. 

Anastasis always latches onto the dumbest most pointless shit.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

For being a legal expert, Kavanaugh sure does make a shitty witness as far as establishing his own credibility.  

He seems more and more like a sociopath every time he answers questions in a way that attempts to warp reality only favorable to him.

Edited September 25, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Anastasis 23464]

2 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

This is true, and I did honestly forget that the accusations are from when Kavanaugh was 17.  Therefore, it is accurate to say that the seniors could have been drinking beer.  I mean, it's bullshit because Kavanaugh was obviously trying to insinuate that HE was not doing anything illegal, but you are correct in saying that Kavanugh did not technically tell a lie.

Fucking lawyers man. 

[BrickHorn 18217]

Kavanaugh said “the seniors were legal.”  Applying a strict textualist interpretation of that statement, it applies to all of the seniors.  There is no grammatical indication that the claim is limited to only a subset of seniors (e.g., “some of the seniors”).  If Kavanaugh was a 17 year-old senior at the time, then he was not legal and his statement is untrue.

[Fozzz 152]

What would it matter if he had lied versus what he did?  In either case he's trying to create a false impression among people watching the interview.  You're hanging onto a choice in tactics when that lead to the same end.  

[pyrohornIII 4814]

32 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

No idea about how he got his money, but his wife also worked, so I'm Betting she was making some decent coin. Beyond that who knows how he/they got money, but it should be transparent and or traceable like maybe thru......say ............ cattle future sales.

She was W's personal secretary (that is how they met) and now holds this position:

Quote

Today, Ashley is the Town Manager of The Village of Chevy Chase Section 5 in Maryland, according to her LinkedIn. The incorporated municipality was established in 1922 (but became an incorporated municipality in 1982.) According to the village’s website, it’s a small community of 227 houses and one restaurant, known for its tree-lined streets and friendly atmosphere.

So I doubt she is bringing in much bankroll.  He also has taught on the side at Harvard and other schools.  Maybe another 100K a year combined? 

[BrickHorn 18217]

And we’re missing the bigger picture: Kavanaugh’s own defense is plagued with sloppy legal research and analysis.  Seems like a relevant concern in evaluating a potential Supreme Court Justice.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Dear Republicans, do yourself a favor and pull Kavanaugh.  

If I was a left wing partisan hack, I would love nothing more than for you force Kananaugh through.  

Moreover, if I was Jeff Flake and looking to run for President one day, I would absolutely vote NO on Kavanaugh just for the political capital gained.

[David Dennison 18851]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Dear Republicans, do yourself a favor and pull Kavanaugh.  

If I was a left wing partisan hack, I would love nothing more than for you force Kananaugh through.  

Moreover, if I was Jeff Flake and looking to run for President one day, I would absolutely vote NO on Kavanaugh just for the political capital gained.

Getting him confirmed will be great for Democrats. Republicans seem to forget that they will be out of power soon and lib cucks will be confirming judges for lifetime appointments. They are begging the next Democrat in the White House to nominate the most progressive judges out there.

 

[lemonlime 5503]

1 minute ago, BrickHorn said:

And we’re missing the bigger picture: Kavanaugh’s own defense is plagued with sloppy legal research and analysis.  Seems like a relevant concern in evaluating a potential Supreme Court Justice.

It's not even research.  there's no way he doesn't remember when he took his first legal drink, unless he was too black out drunk to remember.  He remembers that when he was in high school that he couldn't drink legally.  He exaggerates everything--how Trump picked him, when he lost his virginity.  This is his mo.