Brett Kavanaugh Confirmation Thread

[Bozo_Casanova 26488]

9 hours ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

Watch some CNN and MSNBC. Hear how many of their commentators mention Kav’s race and privilege and how both should be negatives against him. That’s what the progressive left has in store with “intersectionality”. I will never support a party that actively encourages supporters of bs like that no matter how “bad” the Republican Party becomes. Jews, traditional allies of the left, have been made to feel unwelcome by the woke leftists because of their support of Israel. I have always considered myself as part of the majority despite my ethnic background. My interests are more firmly aligned than ever with the Republican Party. The best thing about is that we might not proclaim it loudly or think we are cool as fuck for having the right candidate’s t-shirt or yard sign displayed. The strength is shown at the voting booth and I appreciate the Republican Party trying to consolidate and hold on to power by any means necessary. That’s why getting Kavanaugh confirmed is worth whatever losses we suffer in November. Janus was huge and will help us get the power of public sector unions and their Democratic allies. I’m hoping a stacked SC provides us with Republican wins like that in the future.

this is all bullshit

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Full SNL Opening 

 

[Enchubben 5510]

8 hours ago, yoladu said:

i am almost certain, the FBI will not produced anything that leads to Jeff Flake believing that Kavanaugh lied.

According to the news, Trump has directed the FBI to not focus on the drinking or any of the stupid high school stuff Kavanugh lied about.

Probably because neither of those things actually matter. There are a lot of people out there that don’t care how much he drank in high school/college years or if he put some naughty words in a yearbook. 

[horncyclist 1391]

Probably because neither of those things actually matter. There are a lot of people out there that don’t care how much he drank in high school/college years or if he put some naughty words in a yearbook. 

It matters if he lied about it and a key part of his defense is that he never blacked out so if he doesn't remember it, it didn't happen.

[SubliminalHorn 6806]

Iconoclast appreciates the GOP doing everything to consolidate and hold onto power? He learned well from the autocratic governments from which he came. Now he wants that here. 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13515]

8 minutes ago, Enchubben said:

Probably because neither of those things actually matter. There are a lot of people out there that don’t care how much he drank in high school/college years or if he put some naughty words in a yearbook. 

I agree.  What’s matters is that he lied to Congress while under oath.  And if he would lie about inconsequential items what else was he lie about?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[Js1 85412]

14 minutes ago, SubliminalHorn said:

Iconoclast appreciates the GOP doing everything to consolidate and hold onto power? He learned well from the autocratic governments from which he came. Now he wants that here. 

But don’t forget he hates immigration because every nation should get to choose their ethnic makeup. The GOP of today wouldn’t have taken his scary brown family in 

[Homercles 10206]

Does www.methfueledorgies.com have a politics board?

I’ve been around you assholes since 2011, and I recall the CR being pretty right-leaning during the obama era with cries about budget, bow and apologize, migration, tan suits (mostly trolls there), stimulus and bailouts, Iran, the terror wars, etc.

Gotta say I’m actually proud of a huge swath of y’all seeing this administration for what it is and maintaining your traditional conservative views as principles you believe in while verbally standing for country-over-party.

Point being this place isn’t a leftist echo chamber, it’s an echo chamber of people who were able to step outside their sphere and calling a spade a spade.

[Js1 85412]

5 minutes ago, Homercles said:

 

 

I’ve been around you assholes since 2011, and I recall the CR being pretty right-leaning during the obama era with cries about budget, bow and apologize, migration, tan suits (mostly trolls there), stimulus and bailouts, Iran, the terror wars, etc

 

90% of the listed above was threads started by Tahoe.

[CooterBrown 18014]

This right here.  I was raised in a strongly Republican household, and was a member of the Young Conservatives at UT.  While my views on social issues have moved left, my fiscal views have remained staunchly conservative.  I started to feel left behind when religion started to work it's way into Republican policy.  I was able to hold my nose the compassionate conservative movement, but as the religious aspect started to reach deeper and deeper into heart of the party, it began moving further toward the fringes until eventually only the most radical remained.   With Trump, the GOP is no longer a political party...it's a cult.  

The GOP is the Scientology of politics. Spew bullshit for the feeble minded to latch on to so those in charge can line their pockets.

[Loco 3752]

https://v.redd.it/cvi236jj9bp11/DASH_4_8_M

[horncyclist 1391]

Lol, the lady lawyer submitted a memo of her "independent assessment." Morons will eat this up. Question to her, do you usually make prosecutorial determinations without an investigation?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-memo-outside-prosecutor-argues-why-she-would-not-bring-criminal-charges-against-kavanaugh/2018/09/30/4e096654-c520-11e8-9158-09630a6d8725_story.html

[Js1 85412]

1 minute ago, horncyclist said:

Lol, the lady lawyer submitted a memo of her "independent assessment." Morons will eat this up. Question to her, do you usually make prosecutorial determinations without an investigation?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/in-memo-outside-prosecutor-argues-why-she-would-not-bring-criminal-charges-against-kavanaugh/2018/09/30/4e096654-c520-11e8-9158-09630a6d8725_story.html
 

Is anyone demanding he be brought up on criminal charges?  Like, I've seen it mentioned, but only from republicans/Trumptards that "THERE ISNT ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO PROSECUTE HIM!"

He doesn't need to be jail (unless it has to do with that debt that mysteriously disappeared).  He needs to be unemployed by the Judicial Branch of the federal government because he clearly lacks the temperament and ability to be non-partisan to hold a lifetime position and because he lies a lot.

[Brandywine 1316]

13 hours ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

It’s not that simple. If that was true, Kavanaugh would have been confirmed already.

Many GOP Senators are paying a high political price for Kavanaugh if confirmed.  These guys operate solely out of self interest, they’re mercenaries.

I honestly believe several Senators want a way out of Kavanaugh but without the cost of alienating the Trump base. 

The war is currently with a handful of GOP Senators and the White House.  The democrats are pouring gasoline on this fire, as they should.

A question, has the “Trump base” become such a massive voting block that everyone’s afraid of them? That alone scares the shit out of me. All because they follow statements that fit on a bumper sticker.

[Js1 85412]

Just now, Brandywine said:

A question, has the “Trump base” become such a massive voting block that everyone’s afraid of them? That alone scares the shit out of me. All because they follow statements that fit on a bumper sticker.

Yes. They tend to follow Trump and if he tweets out against someone, they won't vote for him.

It's a much bigger phenomenon in the primaries.  We don't know yet how this base will translate to midterms without Trump or Hillary on the ballot.  I actually think Trump's base will end up exactly like the hardcore Obama voters - reluctant to show up when he's not on the ballot.

[MixtyMotions 102]

8 hours ago, TDunk said:

Too bad she isn't a man.  

And she doesn't have only one eye.  And the committee isn't a land.  And the other Senators aren't blind.  And ...

I need to teach Metaphor 101.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Her memo did raise interesting points.  Why wouldn't she release  the Dr's notes that just relate to the assault episode ?  That would go a long way for many.  Her memory of some details seems oddly specific, and others very vague or even contradictory (Yah yeah, it's to a court of law so evidence isn't important, its words). That's the same charge levied against Kavannaugh about his testimony.

[atomheartbevo 89730]

1 hour ago, Enchubben said:

Probably because neither of those things actually matter. There are a lot of people out there that don’t care how much he drank in high school/college years or if he put some naughty words in a yearbook. 

 

[horncyclist 1391]

Her memo did raise interesting points.  Why wouldn't she release  the Dr's notes that just relate to the assault episode ?  That would go a long way for many.  Her memory of some details seems oddly specific, and others very vague or even contradictory (Yah yeah, it's to a court of law so evidence isn't important, its words). That's the same charge levied against Kavannaugh about his testimony.

Maybe because she doesn't want the people making death threats against her to see what issues she had with her marriage? And if she redacted it, all the morons would say: "what is she hiding? And assume the redacted part says "Brett Kavanaugh was definitely NOT my attacker"

Her memory lapses are entirely consistent with how memory works, which has been discussed a ton. Kavanaugh's are not.

[WhatTheBuck 28788]

13 hours ago, Al Bundy's Napoleon Hand said:

Violent drunk not best drunk

Be Best. 

[Fozzz 152]

#releasethenotes

 

 

[horncyclist 1391]

#releasethenotes
 
 

Oh God. And they wonder why women don't come forward?

[Js1 85412]

The Escriva/Wulaw of conservative circles - Erick Erickson, noted evangelical and Trump ball licker.

[horncyclist 1391]

If she's up to it, Dr. Ford should do an Oprah interview. She shouldnt let them run her name through the mud.

[GHOSTUSER 361]

https://www.wsj.com/articles/this-is-no-mere-job-interview-1538313919

This Is No Mere ‘Job Interview’

Even in the court of public opinion, basic fairness should preclude conviction without clear evidence.

Alan M. Dershowitz

Sept. 30, 2018 9:25 a.m. ET

Until Judge Brett Kavanaugh was accused of horrible crimes—sexual assault, lewd conduct and even gang rape—his confirmation hearings could fairly, if not entirely accurately, be characterized as a “job interview.” The burden was on him to demonstrate his suitability to serve on the Supreme Court. He apparently met that burden in the eyes of a majority, a partisan one to be sure, and seemed on the way to getting the job. 

But now everything has changed. So should the burden of persuasion. The behavior of which Judge Kavanaugh has been accused is so serious and devastating that it requires a high level of proof before forming the basis for his rejection. There is an enormous and dispositive difference between a candidate’s rejection on ideological grounds, as was the case with Robert Bork, and rejection on the ground that he has committed crimes warranting lifetime imprisonment rather than a lifetime appointment.

Being on the Supreme Court is a privilege, not a right. But being disqualified based on a false accusation of a crime would be a violation of the fundamental right to fairness. Some will argue that the issue of Judge Kavanaugh’s ideological and professional qualifications should be merged with the sexual allegations and that doubts should be resolved against a lifetime appointment. 

In some cases that would be a plausible argument. But it is too late for that kind of nuanced approach now, because these accusations have received world-wide attention. Judge Kavanaugh is on trial for his life. At stake are his career, his family, his legacy and a reputation earned over many decades as a lawyer and judge. 

If he is now denied the appointment, it will be because he has been depicted as a sexual predator who deserves contempt, derision and possible imprisonment. He may no longer be able to teach law, coach sports or expect to be treated respectfully. He could be forced to resign his current judicial position, because having a “convicted” rapist on the bench is unseemly. For these reasons, he now has the right—perhaps not a legal right, but a right based on fundamental fairness—to have the charges against him put to the test of clear and convincing evidence or some standard close to that.

The court of public opinion is different from a court of law, but it too is an important court. Wouldn’t anyone rather be convicted in a court of law of drunken driving—also a serious crime—than convicted in the court of public opinion of being a serial sex predator? Many would even rather go to prison for a year on drunken driving charges than be labeled a sexual predator for life. In a nation dedicated to fairness and due process, explicit constitutional rights often serve as a metaphor and guide in the kind of basic fairness we demand even in nonlegal proceedings. That model should operate here as well. 

Had Judge Kavanaugh been rejected on ideological or professional grounds before these sordid accusations were leveled, he could go back to his life, as Robert Bork did. But if the Senate fails to confirm him now, his life will never be the same.

Some would argue that if Judge Kavanaugh is now confirmed in the face of these serious accusations, it will have an equally damaging effect on the life, reputation and credibility of his accusers. That is false. Even if he is confirmed, those accusers will be treated as heroes by the many people who believe them. It will not have close to the impact on them that a failure to be confirmed will have on Judge Kavanaugh. The best evidence of that is Anita Hill, who has gone on to a distinguished career as an academic, writer, commentator and feminist. The stakes are simply not comparable.

I don’t know whether Judge Kavanaugh is guilty, innocent or somewhere in between. I don’t know whether he told the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Judge Kavanaugh wouldn’t have been my candidate of choice for the Supreme Court. I am a liberal Democrat who believes Republicans improperly denied Judge Merrick Garland a seat on the high court. 

But this is no longer about who would make the best Supreme Court justice. It is about the most fundamental issues of fairness this country has faced since the McCarthy era, when innocent people were accused of trying to overthrow the government and had their lives ruined based on false accusations, while being denied all semblance of due process or fairness. The American Civil Liberties Union stood strong against McCarthyism by demanding due process and hard evidence. But the ACLU now argues that “unresolved questions regarding credible allegations of sexual assault” be resolved against the accused nominee. 

We have come a long way since McCarthyism, but we now live in an age that risks a new form of sexual McCarthyism. We must not go to that even darker place. The best way of assuring that we don’t is to accord every person regardless of his status, the kind of fundamental fairness we would expect for ourselves if we were accused.

Mr. Dershowitz is a professor emeritus at Harvard Law School and author of “The Case Against Impeaching Trump.”

[Chad Fuck 17685]

10 hours ago, yoladu said:

wow, the Bill Clinton perjury defense! Go Matt Walsh!

Yup, I was like, "Man, I have heard this before...OH YEAH!"

 

[horncyclist 1391]

That memo has ZERO analysis of Kavanaugh's testimony and makes a lot of conclusory unsupported statements about Ford's. It cannot be written in good faith and if it was she should be embarrassed.

The only fact that gives me pause about Dr. Ford's story is not knowing how she got home. I kind of wonder if she's trying to keep Squi out of the story for some reason. Unfortunate if so but that's the only thing that gives me pause. Though, as I shared before when I recall things that happened when I was 15, I cannot necessarily recall what happened before and after the memorable events. So I think that's a minor thing overall.

[sachick 1189]

12 hours ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

Garlanding him would have been fine with me. Attacking the man’s character on what I consider to be a bs charge is going too far but it is straight out of Ted Kennedy’s Borking playbook.

You mean the way Dr. Ford's character has been attacked? According to you she's either lying or her little lady brain doesn't know what she saw. It has never occurred to you that she's telling the truth and that your boy got drunk and blacked out and doesn't remember.

[G650 14263]

12 hours ago, ChiTownDoc said:

LOL, yes, that's what we need.  More people at the top looking after their own interests...won't more people think of us poor millionaires?  GFY

It's really mind boggling.

[G650 14263]

2 hours ago, Js1 said:

But don’t forget he hates immigration because every nation should get to choose their ethnic makeup. The GOP of today wouldn’t have taken his scary brown family in 

What generation is he? There is a non zero chance some of his family could get deported, which would be some delicious irony.

[retread 2951]

12 minutes ago, sachick said:

You mean the way Dr. Ford's character has been attacked? According to you she's either lying or her little lady brain doesn't know what she saw. It has never occurred to you that she's telling the truth and that your boy got drunk and blacked out and doesn't remember.

Not to mention that multiple accusers have come forward.

[UTDD 362]

If Kavanaugh's previous classmate at Yale is credible and can account for drinking issues, I would find that highly relevant because of prior testimony from Kavanaugh.  We will have to see how it goes.

[jimmyjazz 45976]

17 minutes ago, sachick said:

You mean the way Dr. Ford's character has been attacked? According to you she's either lying or her little lady brain doesn't know what she saw. It has never occurred to you that she's telling the truth and that your boy got drunk and blacked out and doesn't remember.

Oh, it's more than just lying or a failure of memory.  The current talking point circulating among the best and brightest of the Far Right Moron Society is that Dr. Ford is mentally ill, and (get this) . . . a key marker is the way that her voice sounds.  No shit.  Because she modulates her voice with what sounds like a vocal fry, she's mentally ill and likely the victim of childhood sexual assault.  Never mind that (a) it might be her natural voice (b) she might have a physiological issue that makes her sound that way and (c) there is no strong correlation between vocal fry and mental illness.  None of that matters.  She's mentally ill.

[Judge Roybeanbag 11819]

5 minutes ago, UTDD said:

If Kavanaugh's previous classmate at Yale is credible and can account for drinking issues, I would find that highly relevant because of prior testimony from Kavanaugh.  We will have to see how it goes.

I thought they (FBI) weren't going to be allowed to consider/investigate any of that.  Has that changed?

[MixtyMotions 102]

3 minutes ago, UTDD said:

If Kavanaugh's previous classmate at Yale is credible and can account for drinking issues, I would find that highly relevant because of prior testimony from Kavanaugh.  We will have to see how it goes.

I believe that Flake, Murkowski and Collins will listen to witnesses who can say either: (1) Kavanaugh was at a party with Ford, Judge, PJ and a few others in the Summer of '82 or (2) they saw Kavanaugh expose himself to Debbie Ramirez while at a party at Yale.  Stories about drinking won't cut it.

 

My guess reading the goat's entrails.

 

[Js1 85412]

2 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

I thought they (FBI) weren't going to be allowed to consider/investigate any of that.  Has that changed?

Dotard tweeted NO RESTRICTIONS on the investigation. 

FBI should run with that and tell McGahn to suck an egg.  Trump tweets are official WH statements.

[retread 2951]

5 minutes ago, Judge Roybeanbag said:

I thought they (FBI) weren't going to be allowed to consider/investigate any of that.  Has that changed?

I'm not sure anyone is certain what the parameters are.

 

[Js1 85412]

 

[GHOSTUSER 361]

24 minutes ago, sachick said:

You mean the way Dr. Ford's character has been attacked? According to you she's either lying or her little lady brain doesn't know what she saw. It has never occurred to you that she's telling the truth and that your boy got drunk and blacked out and doesn't remember.

She has been treated with kid gloves by everyone. If it was up to me, I would have gone after her because she is not credible in my eyes and her motivations are suspect. She is trying to ruin this man’s reputation. I don’t believe her.

[David Dennison 18922]

2 minutes ago, retread said:

I'm not sure anyone is certain what the parameters are.

 

Get in your car and physically go to your FBI field office and ask to speak with the Special Agent in Charge.

If they stonewall, call the press.

 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

58 minutes ago, horncyclist said:

Maybe because she doesn't want the people making death threats against her to see what issues she had with her marriage? And if she redacted it, all the morons would say: "what is she hiding? And assume the redacted part says "Brett Kavanaugh was definitely NOT my attacker"

Her memory lapses are entirely consistent with how memory works, which has been discussed a ton. Kavanaugh's are not.

I said only the portion of the doctors notes that relate to the sexual assault incident

[David Dennison 18922]

Just now, Iconoclast Texan said:

She has been treated with kid gloves by everyone. If it was up to me, I would have gone after her because she is not credible in my eyes and her motivations are suspect. She is trying to ruin this man’s reputation. I don’t believe her.

He's already ruined his reputation with his pathetic performance on Thursday. That is a fait accompli. It will follow him forever.

[troph 24854]

The more I think about this the more I think Roberts saves his own court by going a tad more liberal especially when stare decisis is in play. I think Roe and other cases are going to be fine. I just can’t see the court giving trump the carte Blanche authority on pardon power either. I don’t have an issue with immunity from prosecution during his term - impeachment and conviction or other constitutional routes remain.

Maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t see Roberts letting the court turn into trumps Kavanaugh court.

I just don’t see it.

[David Dennison 18922]

1 minute ago, troph said:

The more I think about this the more I think Roberts saves his own court by going a tad more liberal especially when stare decisis is in play. I think Roe and other cases are going to be fine. I just can’t see the court giving trump the carte Blanche authority on pardon power either. I don’t have an issue with immunity from prosecution during his term - impeachment and conviction or other constitutional routes remain.

Maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t see Roberts letting the court turn into trumps Kavanaugh court.

I just don’t see it.

After what went down on Thursday, John Roberts wants nothing to do with Brett Kavanaugh.

[Js1 85412]

2 minutes ago, troph said:

The more I think about this the more I think Roberts saves his own court by going a tad more liberal especially when stare decisis is in play. I think Roe and other cases are going to be fine. I just can’t see the court giving trump the carte Blanche authority on pardon power either. I don’t have an issue with immunity from prosecution during his term - impeachment and conviction or other constitutional routes remain.

Maybe I’m wrong, but I don’t see Roberts letting the court turn into trumps Kavanaugh court.

I just don’t see it.

I don't see Roberts overturning precedent on Roe either.  He is 100% going to focus on the legacy of his court now, which may force him to side with the liberals.

[troph 24854]

And on the limited scope - Dems need to round up affidavits under penalties of perjury and hold a press conference with all these witnesses present and present that case to the public. Stop being stupid.

Give me another Gorsuch and I’ll be quiet. This Kavanaugh asshole is everything wrong with the US right now.

[troph 24854]

I don't see Roberts overturning precedent on Roe either.  He is 100% going to focus on the legacy of his court now, which may force him to side with the liberals.

That’s exactly right IMO - a lot of justices will get lost in history but when talking about the Court the Warren Court, the Rehnquist Court and the Roberts Court and all others are remembered. He will die protecting the institution.

RBG needs to hold on. Thomas is next and who knows when but the doomsday views I think can be tempered - EXCEPT the the fact that a shitstain of a human looks to be on his way up there.

[DDD Dad 14339]

15 minutes ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

She has been treated with kid gloves by everyone. If it was up to me, I would have gone after her because she is not credible in my eyes and her motivations are suspect. She is trying to ruin this man’s reputation. I don’t believe her.

Shocking.

[DDD Dad 14339]

15 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

He's already ruined his reputation with his pathetic performance on Thursday. That is a fait accompli. It will follow him forever.

Eh, probably not if he sits on the court.  It's a little early for Scotch but I'm feeling a little thirsty.