Brett Kavanaugh Confirmation Thread

[AtticusFinch 155]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Yeah, the procedure it to report to the ruling party.  Because the Republicans would have been so trustworthy with Dr Ford’s privacy 

Clearly the Democrats weren't.  They leaked it

[David Dennison 19542]

Just now, Incredulity said:

She should have disclosed it to the comitee who could have investigated it privately.  That happens ALL THE TIME.

It's funny that you actually believe this.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13731]

Just now, AtticusFinch said:

Not in the Senate.   Probably in the House

2018 was supposed to be the year of the large pickup for the gop senate. Perhaps get up to 60 as a stretch goal.  Now they’re doing everything they can to keep it at least 50-50.  Even retaining a majority is a loss for the gop.    

[Chad Fuck 18135]

1 minute ago, AtticusFinch said:

Supreme court justices get in fights over cases all the time.  Should we disqualify them all?  

Did any of them do it in their job interview? 

He plainly showed his lack of objectivity, self-control and temperament.  Period.  A SCOTUS Justice should be above the bullshit.  Instead, he chose to revel in self-pity and pursue a policy of evasiveness.  That was his choice.  It was a bad one and completely disqualifying.  

[David Dennison 19542]

4 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

Really good question and post. 

I think ultimately it harkens back to my first post on the subject. When it comes to these things, we all have our inherent biases and experiences that inform our perceptions and then our heuristics and then judgments. It's interesting to me that two people (perhaps you and I?) could have listened and read the same things and one thought "Nope, this is a railroading, not buyin' it" and the other thought "Dang, this asshole sexually assaulted this woman!"

Personally, I think there is a reason why a bunch of us who were awesome kick ass Bart O'Kavanaugh's in highschool have some sympathy for why he would (probably) lie to minimize being a douchebag (which we were, even though we were the aforementioned "awesome kick ass...", there's a duality there). If i were up for partner at my firm (lol im way not), and I had a bunch of people bring up shit I did in HS, I would probably against my better nature lie to minimize my behavior.

It's also why when Trump says things like "young men have it hard" or whatever he said the other day, a lot of people identify with that (because they've been young men) and a lot of other people think it's absurd and ridiculous (they aren't young men).

Just some random and extemporaneous thoughts your very incisive and great question prompted for me.

How kick ass were you?

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Grassley so mad

[Nice Guy Eddie 13731]

1 minute ago, Incredulity said:

She should have disclosed it to the comitee who could have investigated it privately.  That happens ALL THE TIME.

You don’t think that major, credible accusations against a scotus justice shouldn’t be public..    drain the swamp. 

[Nivek 17415]

He is an unhinged clown who lies, evades, and has little respect for the institution. Possibly a drunk. Possibly an attempted rapist. He also wants to cover for foreign agents who got involved in our elections and he wants to cover for his boy. He doesn’t give a shit about the long term health of the country and he feels entitled to the job.

He is a little bitch boy and doesn’t come across as particularly bright.

Since you cunts like being Russia’s puppet so much just fucking move there. I’ll buy the plane ticket for Tahoe. I would have picked ztejas but he is already there.

[retread 2951]

These sanctimonious, old fart Rs are embarrassing.

Edited October 4, 2018 by retread

[JimmyJames 12271]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Grassley so mad

What is he saying and why? 

[Pancho 46312]

2 minutes ago, Johnny Sack said:

I was pro gay marriage long before Hillary and Obama.  

I'm so fucking happy for you. 

Your party isn't and you support that party.  Republicans/Conservatives aren't.  You're putting it in your party platform for Texas Rs.  You're putting in place anti-LGBT judges, and you're promoting those who support this agenda to television shows and news stations to spread the "family values" word. It's been discussed numerous times would this pick allow for SCOTUS to overturn same sex marriage since it was announced trump would get a 2nd pick. 

Just stop pretending you are what you aren't.  

 

[Incredulity 11876]

Just now, Nice Guy Eddie said:

You don’t think that major, credible accusations against a scotus justice shouldn’t be public..    drain the swamp. 

Not at all what I said.

Feinstein's delay is blamed on Ford's request for confidentiality.  Feinstein is obligated to disclose the accusation to the SJC.  They could have investigated it privately. 

It was Ford's request.  NOT my preference.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

1 minute ago, JimmyJames said:

What is he saying and why? 

 

[Augustus 3061]

8 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

You are just begging the next Democratic White House and Senate to pack the court.

As if they wouldn't attempt to do so otherwise?

Both sides have and will attempt to do precisely that at every opportunity.

[jimmyjazz 47203]

2 hours ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

I love Laura and think she’d be great in bed 

As if you care.  She doesn't have a penis.

[David Dennison 19542]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

It's amazing they can't round up Republican votes.

 

[sachick 1189]

 

29 minutes ago, AtticusFinch said:

Who cares, when someone tries to destroy you, you fight back.  Statesmanship goes out the window when someone is trying to destroy you.  I don't think he was angry enough.  He was also accused of participating in a gang rape for God's sake.  Give me a break..

Not when you're trying to be a Supreme Court Justice. They are expected to be above that.  You act like a grown ass man and defend yourself forcefully without sounding like an unhinged entitled rich boy who isn't getting the toy he wants. Clarence Tomas was able to sound like an adult. And if you can't sound like an adult while forcefully defending yourself, then you don't deserve the position. Oh and you shouldn't be yelling about the Clinton/Democratic Conspiracy if you're also trying to prove you won't be biased. Regardless if he did or didn't assault anyone, his behavior was disqualifying. 

[Incredulity 11876]

Just now, Augustus said:

As if they wouldn't attempt to do so otherwise?

Both sides have and will attempt to do precisely that at every opportunity.

He is refering to increasing the number of justices and making them all Liberal at the time of increase.

That isn't happening.  Any attempt at such would be political suicide.

[Bateshorn 9991]

Prepare for Justice Dan Savage if the Dems ever retake the White House.

[pyrohornIII 4846]

46 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?

You could just as easily say he was accurately accused of these things since there is no evidence one way or the other.  He was simply accused, to throw in "falsely" is nearly subliminal in its slant of things.   I can understand the use of the term in the second point, because he is defending himself from something he supposedly knows first hand did not happen. 

I think his "freak out" has more to do with a display of a lack of self awareness on his part.  His inability to put himself in the shoes of those accusing him, trying to see it from their standpoint and then rebutting it with logical reasoning would have done him much more good than throwing that tantrum.   To separate from himself and judge himself, then develop a defense, that is what I feel he should have done.    I think the country is tired of the tantrums, after all this time with Trump, or at least a good deal of us are.

[David Dennison 19542]

Just now, Incredulity said:

He is refering to increasing the number of justices and making them all Liberal at the time of increase.

That isn't happening.  Any attempt at such would be political suicide.

Won't matter, got justices.

Which is what Republicans say about Kavanaugh. Also an act of political suicide.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[Bateshorn 9991]

2 minutes ago, sachick said:

 

Not when you're trying to be a Supreme Court Justice. They are expected to be above that.  You act like a grown ass man and defend yourself forcefully without sounding like an unhinged entitled rich boy who isn't getting the toy he wants. Clarence Tomas was able to sound like an adult. And if you can't sound like an adult while forcefully defending yourself, then you don't deserve the position. Oh and you shouldn't be yelling about the Clinton/Democratic Conspiracy if you're also trying to prove you won't be biased. Regardless if he did or didn't assault anyone, his behavior was disqualifying. 

This. There's a way to express outrage without coming completely unglued on national television.

Some of his behavior was on Grassley.  The first time he interrupted a Senator and asked rhetoricals, Grassley should have shut him down and insisted he treat the Senator's with the respect they deserve. 

[Pancho 46312]

 

[David Dennison 19542]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Death rattle. 

It's wonderful.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[seven 1368]

13 minutes ago, OatmealRaisinCookie said:

Really good question and post. 

I think ultimately it harkens back to my first post on the subject. When it comes to these things, we all have our inherent biases and experiences that inform our perceptions and then our heuristics and then judgments. It's interesting to me that two people (perhaps you and I?) could have listened and read the same things and one thought "Nope, this is a railroading, not buyin' it" and the other thought "Dang, this asshole sexually assaulted this woman!"

Personally, I think there is a reason why a bunch of us who were awesome kick ass Bart O'Kavanaugh's in highschool have some sympathy for why he would (probably) lie to minimize being a douchebag (which we were, even though we were the aforementioned "awesome kick ass...", there's a duality there). If i were up for partner at my firm (lol im way not), and I had a bunch of people bring up shit I did in HS, I would probably against my better nature lie to minimize my behavior.

It's also why when Trump says things like "young men have it hard" or whatever he said the other day, a lot of people identify with that (because they've been young men) and a lot of other people think it's absurd and ridiculous (they aren't young men).

Just some random and extemporaneous thoughts your very incisive and great question prompted for me.

Either you believe in innocent until proven guilty or you don't, give me some evidence, buddy

[sachick 1189]

4 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

Oh he mad. And they say women are too emotional. Geez, man up and stop crying. 

 

I finally looked up his age, I thought he was in his 70's. He's 85!! I'm note I want an 85 year old driving down the street never mind running the country. Term limits need to become a thing. 

[Caddox 952]

16 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Oh, sweetie. November is going to be a bloodbath for Republicans.

Curious what you're basing this on? We just heard from our guy who is supposed to be a bit of a washington insider on our equity research desk in DC (hes a democrat btw) who said he fully expects the republicans to keep control of congress, and that the Kavanuagh hearings have had a measurable impact on the polls. Fwiw, he has been saying the same thing about the elections for a while now. 

Edited October 4, 2018 by Caddox

[Bateshorn 9991]

Just now, seven said:

Either you believe in innocent until proven guilty or you don't, give me some evidence, buddy

What are you talking about?  This isn't a criminal proceeding.

[David Dennison 19542]

Just now, sachick said:

Oh he mad. And they say women are too emotional. Geez, man up and stop crying. 

 

I finally looked up his age, I thought he was in his 70's. He's 85!! I'm note I want an 85 year old driving down the street never mind running the country. Term limits need to become a thing. 

Democrats have the same problem. Feinstein is 85 and she's about to get re-elected to another six year term.

[hayden_horn 11402]

2 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

This. There's a way to express outrage without coming completely unglued on national television.

Some of his behavior was on Grassley.  The first time he interrupted a Senator and asked rhetoricals, Grassley should have shut him down and insisted he treat the Senator's with the respect they deserve. 

well, we can blame grassley until we remember that the whole fucking thing was orchestrated by don mcgahn in cahoots with the committee republicans and that virtually every part of that performance was scripted, all the way down to lindsey graham's little faux outrage.

[David Dennison 19542]

Just now, Caddox said:

Curious what you're basing this on? We just heard from our guy who is supposed to be a bit of a washington insider on or equity research desk in DC (hes a democrat btw) who said he fully expects the republicans to keep control of congress, and that the Kavanuagh hearings have had a measurable impact on the polls. Fwiw, he has been saying the same thing about the elections for a while now. 

I'm basing it on actual polls, not some guy you know. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Just now, Caddox said:

Curious what you're basing this on? We just heard from our guy who is supposed to be a bit of a washington insider on or equity research desk in DC (hes a democrat btw) who said he fully expects the republicans to keep control of congress, and that the Kavanuagh hearings have had a measurable impact on the polls. Fwiw, he has been saying the same thing about the elections for a while now. 

Have you not noticed the millions of people marching in the streets at various times over the past 19 months.

None of them were for Republican causes.

[SmokeyTheBear 5569]

8 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

"We got ours....and I'm happy to mend fences and work with whoever.....when we lose control after the mid-terms!!!"

[hayden_horn 11402]

2 minutes ago, sachick said:

Oh he mad. And they say women are too emotional. Geez, man up and stop crying. 

 

I finally looked up his age, I thought he was in his 70's. He's 85!! I'm note I want an 85 year old driving down the street never mind running the country. Term limits need to become a thing. 

i think mandatory retirement at 72 should be a thing for these guys. they can finish their term after they turn 72, but that's it.  

i mean, just look at those dudes. their combined age is in the 300s.

fuck being ruled by a bunch of octogenerians.

[JimmyJames 12271]

Watching Kavanaugh, a man who wanted Clinton questioned about blowjobs, masturbating in sinks and trash cans, and being all high and mighty righteous about Clinton lying under oath about those subjects, getting asked questions about Devil’s Triangle, being a blackout drunk and boofing and lying his ass off about all of that is just karma working overtime. He’s forever tainted and he knows it. Hence the crying whiny ass bullshit performance. At this point I don’t give a shit what happens. Karma will correct it in due course.

[hayden_horn 11402]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Democrats have the same problem. Feinstein is 85 and she's about to get re-elected to another six year term.

and yes, this. the democrats should have been able to hammer kavanaugh. instead, they appeared to struggle to gather their thoughts most times. feinstein, especially, as the first to question the guy had little to no direction in her questioning.

[Bateshorn 9991]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

I'm basing it on actual polls, not some guy you know. 

I mentioned this in the elections thread:  In 2016, the Access Hollywood tapes dropped on Oct. 7.  We have very short political memories. If Kavanaugh is sworn in next Monday, then Trump does something Stupid by Friday, all of this will be a memory and we will go back to the political norm we've been in for the last year or so.

[AtticusFinch 155]

9 minutes ago, Pancho Negro said:

11 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

Did any of them do it in their job interview? 

He plainly showed his lack of objectivity, self-control and temperament.  Period.  A SCOTUS Justice should be above the bullshit.  Instead, he chose to revel in self-pity and pursue a policy of evasiveness.  That was his choice.  It was a bad one and completely disqualifying.  

 

Ginsburg fell asleep during Obama's 2015 state of the union for what she claims to not being sober.  Perhaps she has a drinking problem and should be removed.  There are crazy stories about the justices throughout history.  Thousands of books.  They are people.  Nobody is infallible.

[seven 1368]

4 minutes ago, Bateshorn said:

What are you talking about?  This isn't a criminal proceeding.

That's the point

[deech 2391]

Just now, JimmyJames said:

Watching Kavanaugh, a man who wanted Clinton questioned about blowjobs, masturbating in sinks and trash cans, and being all high and mighty righteous about Clinton lying under oath about those subjects, getting asked questions about Devil’s Triangle, being a blackout drunk and boofing and lying his ass off about all of that is just karma working overtime. He’s forever tainted and he knows it. Hence the crying whiny ass bullshit performance. At this point I don’t give a shit what happens. Karma will correct it in due course.

If Karma = Lifetime appointment you may be on to something.

[Caddox 952]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

I'm basing it on actual polls, not some guy you know. 

The call was him referencing a bunch of polls, thus the "measurable" affect. 

[David Dennison 19542]

1 minute ago, Bateshorn said:

I mentioned this in the elections thread:  In 2016, the Access Hollywood tapes dropped on Oct. 7.  We have very short political memories. If Kavanaugh is sworn in next Monday, then Trump does something Stupid by Friday, all of this will be a memory and we will go back to the political norm we've been in for the last year or so.

This election is about Donald Trump and his numbers are dogshit.

[Bateshorn 9991]

Just now, AtticusFinch said:

Ginsburg fell asleep during Obama's 2015 state of the union for what she claims to not being sober.  Perhaps she has a drinking problem and should be removed.  There are crazy stories about the justices throughout history.  Thousands of books.  They are people.  Nobody is infallible.

Uh, she admitted to having a glass of wine at dinner.  Also, hot as hell in the crowded House chamber during SOTU.  Slow your roll, angry man online.

[yoladu 4191]

2 hours ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

I love Laura and think she’d be great in bed 

she goes for the liberal types.

[David Dennison 19542]

2 minutes ago, Caddox said:

The call was him referencing a bunch of polls, thus the "measurable" affect. 

Well your equities desk guy is super dialed in, I'm sure.

Edited October 4, 2018 by David Dennison

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

 

[AtticusFinch 155]

4 minutes ago, hayden_horn said:

i think mandatory retirement at 72 should be a thing for these guys. they can finish their term after they turn 72, but that's it.  

i mean, just look at those dudes. their combined age is in the 300s.

fuck being ruled by a bunch of octogenerians.

To be fair, the clerks do most of their writing.  Perhaps they should go through this process too.  Their drunken college escapades will be in recent memory.  Fun for all.

[David Dennison 19542]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

 

I can't wait to read it. 

I wonder when it will leak.