Brett Kavanaugh Confirmation Thread

[Brisketexan 104940]

1 minute ago, A Cellar Honker said:

This is hyperbole but not entirely wrong.  Power accretion in the Executive and Judicial branches (at the expense of the Congress) predates Trump by many years.  I had hoped that the Republicans and Democrats unhappy with Trump would work together to defang the Executive branch and devolve power to the states.  But that’s not going to happen.

Very good point.

The ridiculous cession of power by Congress to the executive -- which has been a rolling and increasing problem for several decades -- is perhaps the root of all of these problems.  Congress is singularly focused on one thing, and one thing  only: remaining in office.  Everything they do is calculated to achieve one thing: being re-elected.  Gotta please the donors, gotta please the base.  And that's it.  There is no "governance" happening in Congress that is not singularly motivated by retaining power.  That goal has so expanded as to exclude any other purpose.

[bad_teammate 13183]

Why did you put "gotta please the base" in there like that's a bad thing?

[FondrenRoad 4378]

42 minutes ago, alincoln said:

Yup.  Kavanaugh being confirmed and establishing a conservative majority on the court is definitely the best outcome for the Ds.  Exactly what they were hoping for.

That's resolvable in 2020 with a Dem President and a Dem majority in both houses.  New Judiciary Act.

[Yuk 1532]

Just now, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

Because guys like Brisket think they know what's best for everyone and think the "base" is made up of a bunch of people who shouldn't get their way.

When they fantasize about military tribunals and turning the reflection pool to a giant execution pit, the base probably shouldn't get their way.

[elfenix 34218]

is whining mitch still whining this morning?

yup

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Just now, elfenix said:

is whining mitch still whining this morning?

yup

I detect dissent within the ranks. 

[Aqua Buddha 14581]

10 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Why did you put "gotta please the base" in there like that's a bad thing?

Because the political leadership are leaders over the country as a whole and sometimes the base needs to told no.  Trump acts like he's president of the base and at no time has told them no on anything.

[Brandywine 1315]

17 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

No.  He’s not a moderate.  I don’t want him elected for the same reason the lefties on here do — he will be a solid yes for every liberal policy Schumer has. 

Which is different with Cruz and the right, how? You’ll only vote for a dem if he does what the Right wants. Ummm.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33857]

16 minutes ago, Fozzz said:

Do you want a Senator from Texas supporting (((Soros))) policies?  Cus that's what voting for Beto will get you.

i think you stumbled into the wrong thread.

[Brandywine 1315]

For some reason I feel like Flake conned us all. Including Coons.

Edited October 4, 2018 by Brandywine

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Just now, Brandywine said:

For some reason I feel like Flake conned us all.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

1 minute ago, Brandywine said:

For some reason I feel like Flake conned us all. Including Coon. 

[TheRealRonWeaver? 1258]

This despicable stunt by the Democrats will be a boon for the GOP at the midterms. As Laura Ingraham said last night, conservatives haven’t been this united since possibly 9/11. The 10% advantage in the enthusiasm gap that the Dems had going into the mid terms has evaporated. I have never voted straight ticket Republican before because I think it’s lazy and uninformed. I’m making exception this November. The entire Democratic brand needs a serious rebuke from the silent majority. I hope we further consolidate power.

BARTENDER!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[SaucyJack 3488]

57 minutes ago, Lagunamadre said:

Let's look on the bright side fellas. Abortion being outlawed in Texas will be a boon to Nuevo Laredo. This could be the catalyst we needed to revive the Cadillac, El Dorado and Papagayos. I'll see y'all at the La Posada. 

You forgot Dallas Cowboys

[Patrick Bateman 3910]

2 minutes ago, Brandywine said:

For some reason I feel like Flake conned us all. Including Coon. 

This is what Flake does..... he waxes poetic about the ugliness of it all and then goes and kisses the ring.... every single time.  Everyone wants him to white knight (sarcasm included) himself, but Jeff is one of the poorest congressmen on the Hill.  He was never going to cut off his money train on K street after his term.  Coons was probably just trying to buy time to see if they could get another ground swell going like last week.  Dems needed another credible huge allegation to come forward this week.... they didn't get any.  Kavanaugh's a liar, everyone but the most partisan hacks understands this, but it was never about his rampant lying.... It had to be another sex scandal.

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Flake isn't comfortable publicly embracing the nihilism but he will vote for it.  

[hayden_horn 11362]

13 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Flake isn't comfortable publicly embracing the nihilism but he will vote for it.  

sad flake is sad.

so conflicted.

much concern.

will vote in lockstep always.

Edited October 4, 2018 by hayden_horn

[Patrick Bateman 3910]

 

[pyrohornIII 4814]

28 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

If you believe in democracy above all else, then technically they should....

But we don't have a purely representative democracy.  We have electoral colleges, gerrymandering, superdelegates and other mechanisms to deter the popular vote.   

[hayden_horn 11362]

2 minutes ago, Patrick Bateman said:

 

she doesn't matter. collins + flake + pence = supreme court justice kavanaugh

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[elfenix 34218]

nm

Edited October 4, 2018 by elfenix
maybe not

[hayden_horn 11362]

the thing is, you don't even have to believe dr ford's accusation to see that this guy is not qualified for the supreme court based on his performance.

but it doesn't matter.

because team.

 

Edited October 4, 2018 by hayden_horn

[horncyclist 1387]

she doesn't matter. collins + flake + pence = supreme court justice kavanaugh

She needs cover to vote no. This is it. I could Manchin and Heitkamp going yes. Move on.

[Brisketexan 104940]

27 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

If you believe in democracy above all else, then technically they should....

But I don't believe in absolute democracy.  I believe in the representative republic, with three branches of institutional government, that we organized under the Constitution.  That's something that protects against governance by the whim of the people and/or tyranny of the majority.  That's a good principle to have no matter which "side" is in power as of a given moment.

27 minutes ago, Aqua Buddha said:

Because the political leadership are leaders over the country as a whole and sometimes the base needs to told no.  Trump acts like he's president of the base and at no time has told them no on anything.

This.  If we have anything close to a 50/50 nation and election, and govern only for the extremes, then we lurch from guardrail to guardrail, smashing into them with increasing force until we eventually break through and go over the edge.  I don't mind if we periodically drift into the right lane.  I don't mind if we periodically drift into the left lane. So long as we stay in a lane and on the road.  The government governs ALL the people.  Right now, we have created a mindset that there are two classes of citizens: the victorious and the subjugated.  That is anathema to our system, and is a recipe for destruction from within.  And the currently "victorious" are celebrating that with glee.  I don't want the subjugated to become the victors, and make the same play (although goddamn, it's really hard to fight that temptation a lot of times, and I do give in to it).  I want the governed to be the governed -- for the benefit of "we the people."

But, I ain't getting what I wished for.  The die has been cast.  Lurching from guardrail to guardrail is the only future we have in front of us....

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

1 minute ago, hayden_horn said:

she doesn't matter. collins + flake + pence = supreme court justice kavanaugh

She can fall on the sword to drag this shit out another week...to the benifit of the GOP in midterms.  

“Pulling a Flake.” 

[RomaVicta 29878]

1 hour ago, FondrenRoad said:

For all we know, Trump assigned it directly to a lackey who did nothing but write a sunshine pumping report. 

That can't be true! Trump publicly stated that he was going to lift restrictions and "didn't mind" if the FBI talked to whomever they wanted.

Would the President of the United States of America tell such a bald faced lie?

On different note, Kavanaugh wouldn't be impeached for any of the actions we know about. He could be impeached for conspiring with Trump to hide illegal activities. Eventually, there will be a president who doesn't interfere with the FBI. When that happens, who knows what might turn up.

This whole process disgraces this country as well as revealing how despicable a large part of our electorate can be.

[hayden_horn 11362]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

But I don't believe in absolute democracy.  I believe in the representative republic, with three branches of institutional government, that we organized under the Constitution.  That's something that protects against governance by the whim of the people and/or tyranny of the majority.  That's a good principle to have no matter which "side" is in power as of a given moment.

[Brisketexan 104940]

Just now, hayden_horn said:

When Monty Python demonstrates more political wisdom than any of our current three branches of government....well, we're headed for this:

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[hayden_horn 11362]

5 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

When Monty Python demonstrates more political wisdom than any of our current three branches of government....well, we're headed for this:

this is more like it:

[elfenix 34218]

<to hugo's tweet spam> to determine if one particular child of privilege may be allowed to be a member of a tribunal of unelected oligarchs sitting in judgment of the rest of us

Edited October 4, 2018 by elfenix

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

A president who is under investigation for conspiring in the subversion of his own election and obstruction of justice apparently rigged the investigation of his Supreme Court nominee, who thinks presidents shouldn’t be investigated.

[David Dennison 18826]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

A president who is under investigation for conspiring in the subversion of his own election and obstruction of justice apparently rigged the investigation of his Supreme Court nominee, who thinks presidents shouldn’t be investigated.

It's not going to matter.

Donald Trump is fucked.

[David Dennison 18826]

Just now, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

So here is, what is to me, a compelling argument for those like Hayden who are Anti-Kavanaugh because of Decorum:

Start first with whether you instinctively believe in the brand of sex assault/rape that Kav was accused with, if you tend to think in terms of "probably didn't happen that way, no proof and 'not buying it'", then you look at it in the following light:

• Kav was falsely accused of something horrendous. It's one of the worst things a man can be falsely accused of. There is probably a bit of subconscious sympathy built in right there.
• Kav responded in a very emotional way; the way a man would if he was being railroaded and falsely accused of rape/sexual assault
• Kav has had like a decade or longer as a Federal Judge. There is plenty of film on him as a judge that his judicial decorum can be extrapolated from and can tell the real tale of the tape as far as if he's fit or unfit demeanor-wise.
• This is as opposed to trying to say, "See! He freaked out after being accused of something horrible that could ruin his life so he won't continue to be a great judge!"

Now, if you believe he did sexually assualt this woman, then the calculus changes. Which is why I think the lynchpin is on the issue of, do you think Kavanaugh did this or not. Which to further drill down is basically, do you believe in the modality of Guilty until proven Innocent (at least in this case) or the Innocent until proven Guilty?

You can believe he's innocent until proven guilty and believe him to be guilty based solely on the testimony of Ford.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

It's not going to matter.

Donald Trump is fucked.

[David Dennison 18826]

Just now, Johnny Sack said:

We'll see.

[AtticusFinch 155]

11 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Not really.  If she wants justice she can file a criminal complaint with the local authorities.   For some reason, she hasn't done that.

[RomaVicta 29878]

1 hour ago, CowboyFred said:

Everybody thought "no way dotard wins" but here we are.

I never predict the outcome of elections. I've outgrown any notion that reason plays much of a role in elections. Even when someone I want gets elected or something I want done gets done, it's never for the right reason.

The Trump GOP voters are stupid and malevolent. The Dem voters are stupid and well-meaning. I vote Dem because occasionally they stumble into doing something good for the people. They also cowered when it was time to vote against the Iraq War.

The GOPs in the senate face their own Iraq War moment although tens of thousands of lives are not at stake. How do you go to sleep at night after complicity in the smear of Dr. Ford and embracing the web of lies that is supposed to cloak the reality of Brett Kavanaugh?

In both the case of the Iraq War vote and now this confirmation, wouldn't you rather vote your conscience and risk losing your seat than proving to yourself that you're a mercenary degenerate? I would, and I'm not that special.

[David Dennison 18826]

Just now, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

Sure you can. But when it's a he-said/she-said thing and you believe one story over the other without evidence/proof/corroboration, what are you buying on? Probably not something that rock-solid that can't turn out to be pretty flimsy and wrong.

The evidence is in their testimony. His testimony leads me to believe he is lying about this an a whole lot of other things.

[horncyclist 1387]

I never predict the outcome of elections. I've outgrown any notion that reason plays much of a role in elections. Even when someone I want gets elected or something I want done gets done, it's never for the right reason.
The Trump GOP voters are stupid and malevolent. The Dem voters are stupid and well-meaning. I vote Dem because occasionally they stumble into doing something good for the people. They also cowered when it was time to vote against the Iraq War.
The GOPs in the senate face their own Iraq War moment although tens of thousands of lives are not at stake. How do you go to sleep at night after complicity in the smear of Dr. Ford and embracing the web of lies that is supposed to cloak the reality of Brett Kavanaugh?
In both the case of the Iraq War vote and now this confirmation, wouldn't you rather vote your conscience and risk losing your seat than proving to yourself that you're a mercenary degenerate? I would, and I'm not that special.

They'll sleep great like they always do. This probably isn't in the top 10 most despicable things they've done for most of them.

[AtticusFinch 155]

6 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

So here is, what is to me, a compelling argument for those like Hayden who are Anti-Kavanaugh because of Decorum:

Start first with whether you instinctively believe in the brand of sex assault/rape that Kav was accused with, if you tend to think in terms of "probably didn't happen that way, no proof and 'not buying it'", then you look at it in the following light:

• Kav was falsely accused of something horrendous. It's one of the worst things a man can be falsely accused of. There is probably a bit of subconscious sympathy built in right there.
• Kav responded in a very emotional way; the way a man would if he was being railroaded and falsely accused of rape/sexual assault
• Kav has had like a decade or longer as a Federal Judge. There is plenty of film on him as a judge that his judicial decorum can be extrapolated from and can tell the real tale of the tape as far as if he's fit or unfit demeanor-wise.
• This is as opposed to trying to say, "See! He freaked out after being accused of something horrible that could ruin his life so he won't continue to be a great judge!"

Now, if you believe he did sexually assualt this woman, then the calculus changes. Which is why I think the lynchpin is on the issue of, do you think Kavanaugh did this or not. Which to further drill down is basically, do you believe in the modality of Guilty until proven Innocent (at least in this case) or the Innocent until proven Guilty?

I like the testimony of that other woman that NBC put on the air without vetting at all apparently who accused Kavannah of spiking a punch bowl so she got raped over and over.  Apparently, she liked it too because she kept going back to the same party every time it was put on.  Of course, no corroborating witnesses.  

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

3 minutes ago, AtticusFinch said:

Not really.  If she wants justice she can file a criminal complaint with the local authorities.   For some reason, she hasn't done that.

Would it make more of a difference now or after he becomes a Supreme Court Justice?

Seems like she’s been begging for the FBI to investigate but they aren’t interviewing her.

[hayden_horn 11362]

9 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

So here is, what is to me, a compelling argument for those like Hayden who are Anti-Kavanaugh because of Decorum:

Start first with whether you instinctively believe in the brand of sex assault/rape that Kav was accused with, if you tend to think in terms of "probably didn't happen that way, no proof and 'not buying it'", then you look at it in the following light:

• Kav was falsely accused of something horrendous. It's one of the worst things a man can be falsely accused of. There is probably a bit of subconscious sympathy built in right there.
• Kav responded in a very emotional way; the way a man would if he was being railroaded and falsely accused of rape/sexual assault
• Kav has had like a decade or longer as a Federal Judge. There is plenty of film on him as a judge that his judicial decorum can be extrapolated from and can tell the real tale of the tape as far as if he's fit or unfit demeanor-wise.
• This is as opposed to trying to say, "See! He freaked out after being accused of something horrible that could ruin his life so he won't continue to be a great judge!"

Now, if you believe he did sexually assualt this woman, then the calculus changes. Which is why I think the lynchpin is on the issue of, do you think Kavanaugh did this or not. Which to further drill down is basically, do you believe in the modality of Guilty until proven Innocent (at least in this case) or the Innocent until proven Guilty?

he also lied about stupid shit. if people lie about stupid shit, what else will they lie about? that alone is disqualifying for me.

[tantric superman 4667]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

The evidence is in their testimony.

I'm not sure why so many people have a problem with this idea.

Yeah, it would be more compelling if there was additional evidence from third parties, or documentary evidence, but this is all you have.

Nothing frustrates me more (as an employment attorney) when an investigator says they could not make a determination because it was "he said/she said". 

Yep, that is a hard determination.  Would be easier if you had some other witnesses.  But you don't.

[David Dennison 18826]

1 minute ago, horncyclist said:

3 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

I never predict the outcome of elections. I've outgrown any notion that reason plays much of a role in elections. Even when someone I want gets elected or something I want done gets done, it's never for the right reason.
The Trump GOP voters are stupid and malevolent. The Dem voters are stupid and well-meaning. I vote Dem because occasionally they stumble into doing something good for the people. They also cowered when it was time to vote against the Iraq War.
The GOPs in the senate face their own Iraq War moment although tens of thousands of lives are not at stake. How do you go to sleep at night after complicity in the smear of Dr. Ford and embracing the web of lies that is supposed to cloak the reality of Brett Kavanaugh?
In both the case of the Iraq War vote and now this confirmation, wouldn't you rather vote your conscience and risk losing your seat than proving to yourself that you're a mercenary degenerate? I would, and I'm not that special.

Read more  

They'll sleep great like they always do. This probably isn't in the top 10 most despicable things they've done for most of them.

It's also wise to remember that all of our representatives in Washington are neo-liberal capitalists, even Bernie Sanders. They are all on the same team. The differences really are minor when you put it in the context of political economy.

Our representatives are there to protect capital at all costs.

[tantric superman 4667]

4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

The evidence is in their testimony. His testimony leads me to believe he is lying about this an a whole lot of other things.

I believe that too, but barely.  If he had been just a tad more credible in his testimony, her long delay in coming forward and the presumption against innocence would have weighed it in his favor. 

[RomaVicta 29878]

1 hour ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

His father in law was smuggling coke and he gets tagged with the nickname in an ad. That’s as lame as Ted Cruz’s national anthem ad

The ads were created by a GOP candidate in the West Virginia GOP primary. The guy is a rich, corrupt loon. Don Blankenship.

[lemonlime 5503]

Heidkamp's a no.

[David Dennison 18826]

1 minute ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

That's not evidence. That's a feeling or emotion you are having that is informing your perception and how you judge something. We all have it and do it. And it's notoriously flimsy and tricky and we aren't robots; we fail and get tricked all the time. That is why the wikipedia list of named cognitive biases is like 500 names long lol.

But you are proving my point in that the lynchpin of all this goes back to whether, without evidence, proof or corroboration, you believe he sexually assaulted or whether he is being railroaded and falsely accused

Yes, I believe he assaulted her. I think it's obvious based on his reaction and his testimony.