wuh oh... Kavanaugh is a #metoo

[Sausy]

Kavanaugh does not seem to have been a stand up guy in high school or college... a drinker, a partier, and someone who with his other popular jocks and boozer friends had some inappropriate fun at least with the girls.


He doesn't get a pass from his past if he won't be honest or sincerely apologetic. He has been neither, but arrogantly defiant and untruthful.

 

[frankfrank]

I personally believe this is a contrived and pre-arranged plot by Democrats to stall the process past the mid-term elections, just to scupper the election of a conservative justice to the Supreme Court.

No, I disagree. Sure, they don't like Kavanaugh, but it's NOT LIKE if Kavanaugh goes down in flames, Trump is going to go ahead and nominate a flaming liberal or anything.

And, for that matter, other than perhaps the Obergefell decision [same-gender marriage is legal and equal], the Court was ALREADY lost. I've made the point before that the retired Kennedy being a "swing vote" was really nothing more than a myth...he's voted with the conservatives on Citizens United, the "individual mandate" in Obamacare (which is of course a very strange, byzantine and arcane system for ANY non-USAn observers), every rollback of voting rights...it was actually Roberts who swung his vote in Obamacare's favor.

It can be assumed that no justice to the left of Kavanaugh will ever be named under this president. The allegations coming out are "smoky" enough that there is PROBABLY a real fire somewhere, and confirming a SCOTUS justice needs to be deliberated and considered about as carefully as electing a Pope. The rush to confirmation for him, after they refused to budge on Merrick Garland with even as much as a "kangaroo" hearing in more than 400 days (to at least PRETEND there was some good faith), shows the utmost hypocrisy. There's no reason that this has to wrap up in two more days or something. Congress has been known to have special sessions even into Christmas Day itself, and until January it will still be the SAME congress and president.

There is one important difference in getting Kavanaugh in, though: He is probably the deciding vote that would allow the president to basically have unlimited immunity from all ongoing inquiries and let him become a KING.

But again if this nomination fails, is he going to name the next pick as somebody who would ALSO vote in favor of these powers? OF COURSE. It's not like that's going to change.

 

[willhunt]

I'd not give him a pass because, regardless of his past. He is calling his accusers lairs which is a spoiler alert to his Supreme Court standing regarding women.

 

[peeonme]

I'd not give him a pass because, regardless of his past. He is calling his accusers lairs which is a spoiler alert to his Supreme Court standing regarding women.

If they are lying, then they are liars. Can you only use that word on males?

 

[willhunt]

If they are lying, then they are liars. Can you only use that word on males?

No. I use it when rhetoric confirms it.

 

[mikey3000]

And both these women are politically active liars. Wait and see, just give them enough rope.

 

[Sausy]

I'd not give him a pass because, regardless of his past. He is calling his accusers lairs which is a spoiler alert to his Supreme Court standing regarding women.

What I meant by "giving him a pass" is that there are a lot of people who do very regrettable things when they are young. One mistake shouldn't define someone and destroy their reputation... IF they own up about those actions later and try their damnedest to make amends. It is clear Kavanaugh is NOT ashamed or remorseful, and several other indications of heavy drinking and partying during his Georgetown Academy and Yale days make his laughable claim last night he was a virgin those days an outrageous affront to women.


His positions for the most part have been staunchly conservative, stridently so in some areas. That in itself can't and shouldn't disqualify him as much as I don't like most of his key of his decisions. During his recent hearing, he came across as surprisingly reflective and fair, not a wild eyed conservative ideologue. But was very evasive and hesitant to go into some basic areas and outright lied about his strong behind the scenes influence on policies and judicial nominations during his time in the Bush White House. Of course the Republicans glossed over his evasiveness and misrepresentations and were well on their way to get a full fledged conservative takeover to the court above everything(though it's true Anthony Kennedy as the swing vote was largely myth in recent years except for Obergefell) but if it is true that Kennedy has lied about his past and won't own up, that he doubles down on accusations that are supported, at least made credible, by the info coming out that Kavanaugh was a wild drinker and partier (and the comment found on video recently that "What happens at Georgetown Academy stays at Georgetown Academy"(but he's a "virgin" in those years, btw)he should not be confirmed. One can be qualified intellectually but failure to own up to one's past and lying and doubling down on lies... that is disqualifying and the more I see of Kavanaugh, I see a phony and someone lacking in the character required of his position. Would he want his daughters to have to go what the girls he and his friends put through? I would think not, but he hasn't even owned up to the possible consequences of his behavior in younger days. So I don't see how he has the strength of character to sit on the highest court in the land, for a lifetime if he so chooses.

 

[willhunt]

^ Sausy, I think we have the same take on this. The Republicans will seat a judge, most likely, and the Court will be far from conservative. It will be Republican. I wish that the SCOTUS would be apolitical. I'm singling out both parties.

I am crestfallen that Justice is not blind.

 

[Sausy]

^ Sausy, I think we have the same take on this. The Republicans will seat a judge, most likely, and the Court will be far from conservative. It will be Republican. I wish that the SCOTUS would be apolitical. I'm singling out both parties.

I am crestfallen that Justice is not blind.

I wish people on both sides would remember that the Court is supposed to be the least politicized of our branches. I hate "litmus tests" …. judges are human and will have some political leanings. There outlooks will affect them, and influence them to some degree, no doubt. That is natural... but first and foremost, the Court is there to keep the other branches in check and working under the guidelines of the Constitution. Cases should for the most part be narrowly decided to the facts of the case at hand, not to push partisan, ideological outcomes for their own sake. I want judges who will be there to look for the interests of the American people as whole... not to carry the agenda of political factions. I see Kavanaugh's key decisions(and I wish I had nearly the gifted intellect those who closely follow the law have) and it appears for all his pretensions towards balance and independence he tends to emphasize the interests of the powerful over the people. Decision after decision while he may say are determined by his judicial philosophy seem to work perfectly with a partisan, establishment corporate agenda. Favors authority over the average person, the strong over the weak. Gorsuch is similar, and while intellectually qualified and the president has the right to put on the court any qualified judge who has a similar outlook politically and Gorsuch has none of the baggage of youthful indiscretions that Kavanaugh has been presenting, a court full of Gorsuch types like Kavanaugh is not in the interests of the American people.


Merrick Garland should have been on this court, and the Republicans denied him even a fair hearing.... liberals were underwhelmed because he was no progressive powerhouse. However, conservatives didn't want any more Obama influence on the Supreme Court... period. No matter that as the kind of judge who should be on the court at this time, Garland was a great choice. Now we have a Court which unless the Democrats can take control of the Senate(and still keep some Red State Dems voting with the party as a whole here) is poised to become not a court of conservative balance but one instituting core political conservative agenda for the next 10-15 years at a minimum. We shouldn't in turn want a Supreme Court in defense of a progressive political agenda, either. We have to have an independent Court which values justice, fairness and integrity above all. Not institute or promote policy... that's for the executive and legislative branch to work out though there are occasions the Court must make clear the parameters of the law like Brown and Obergefell, where the states and federal government have failed to defend the constitution and the Court must speak forcefully. Those occasions should be RARE, not commonplace. Let justice prevail, not politics.

 

[nyctopgam]

What is key here is that there will be no FBI investigation. Easier to have a political committee make a decision as the aim is not to uncover the truth but to get Kavanaugh into the SC.

Too bad the Dem leadership is neither strong enough nor willing to force an FBI investigation. A kangaroo court will sit in judgment on Ford.

 

[willhunt]

^ True That. Here was my last ray of hope. And I cannot forgive the Republicans for their backpedaling.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...rland-for-supreme-court-idUSTRE6456QY20100506

 

[nyctopgam]

^^ You are a better man than I. It is the Democratic "lesser evil" Party I cannot forgive.

 

[KaraBulut]

I wish people on both sides would remember that the Court is supposed to be the least politicized of our branches. I hate "litmus tests" …. judges are human and will have some political leanings...

You've hit upon the real problem: the judicial appointment process has been broken for a while. Instead of trying to find learned jurists, legal academics or the best minds, there are now well-funded groups on both sides (left and right) whose purpose is to find "candidates" to get into the Federal court system.

It used to be that "advice and consent" meant that Senators recommended potential jurists from their State or that they could attest to personally. Now, big donor money comes with recommendations from the "think tanks" that they fund in order get their favorite candidates into the Court system. Court seats are given to the highest bidders.

Watch the Kavanaugh interview on Fox. It's like watching the Bill & Hillary interviews from the 1992 campaign about his "infidelities". Kavanaugh seems to have forgotten, he's being appointed the Supreme Court, not running for the Supreme Court.

 

[jaysizzles]

Brett Kavanaugh's High School Yearbook Sure Makes Him Seem Like A Douchebag

This article seems like it's a few days old, but a pretty good summary of Brett and Mark's high school yearbook.

What do you think the chances are that Brett will be questioned about whether he "boofed" in high school, from the Senate committee?

I think the thing I'm most curious about is the "Renate Alumni" that he and Mark Judge have listed on their senior pic page, as well under the football team photo I'd seen elsewhere. I was reading another article where Renate Dolphin said she didn't know there were all the references to her in the yearbook, or why it's in there. I have my theory that she may have done something long ago that she's not proud of or wants to be made public, and now is playing the deny all knowledge of it game. It'd be nice to get her on the stand, under oath, as well as Mark Judge to ask him if the blackout drunk puker Bart O'Kavanaugh and Brett Kavanaugh are the same guy (obviously).

 

[opinterph]

Deal with FACTS. If this or any other woman cannot provide legally indicting evidence, then no court could conceivably convict this man, or any other man.

It seems like maybe this woman should request that the FBI be tasked to develop some FACTS. It’d probably only take a few days.

Too bad the Dem leadership is neither strong enough nor willing to force an FBI investigation.

How would the Dem leadership go about forcing an FBI investigation?

 

[nyctopgam]

How would the Dem leadership go about forcing an FBI investigation?

No idea. I'm not a politician.

 

[Sausy]

You've hit upon the real problem: the judicial appointment process has been broken for a while. Instead of trying to find learned jurists, legal academics or the best minds, there are now well-funded groups on both sides (left and right) whose purpose is to find "candidates" to get into the Federal court system.

It used to be that "advice and consent" meant that Senators recommended potential jurists from their State or that they could attest to personally. Now, big donor money comes with recommendations from the "think tanks" that they fund in order get their favorite candidates into the Court system. Court seats are given to the highest bidders.

Watch the Kavanaugh interview on Fox. It's like watching the Bill & Hillary interviews from the 1992 campaign about his "infidelities". Kavanaugh seems to have forgotten, he's being appointed the Supreme Court, not running for the Supreme Court.

The interview was embarrassing... he literally related the same talking points over and over. You're so right about how well funded groups(most egregiously on the right) have taken over a process that used to be very much a working institutional situation of advice and consent. Our Founding Fathers would be aghast that think tanks like the Federalist and the Heritage Foundation now act as private contractors in the determination and vetting process of choosing our Judiciary.

 

[mikey3000]

Wait, didn't Shillary lie to the FBI?

PS: Straight-forward question, no need to dance around it's pretty direct. Are you supporting Kavanaugh's confirmation because you think he's innocent or because you don't care if he's guilty?

I believe in something called reasonable doubt. So far Ford hasn't proved anything, let alone beyond a reaaonable doubt. Until then believe he is innocent.

 

[nyctopgam]

I believe in something called reasonable doubt. So far Ford hasn't proved anything, let alone beyond a reaaonable doubt. Until then believe he is innocent.

Perfectly reasonable. Let the FBI investigate until Kavanaugh is proved innocent or Ford's and the other two's allegations have been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.

Until then, keep him off the nomination.

 

[KaraBulut]

And the hits just keep a-comin':
New allegations against Kavanaugh submitted to Senate committee

A woman has come forward with new allegations about Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, accusing him of inappropriate behavior while he was in high school. The allegations come from Julie Swetnick, who attended Gaithersburg High School in Maryland.
Swetnick says she attended "well over ten" parties where Kavanaugh was present and saw him "drink excessively at many of these parties and engage in abusive and physically aggressive behavior towards girls, including pressing girls against him without their consent, 'grinding' against girls and attempting to remove or shift girls' clothing to expose private body parts. "

How many is this now... 3? 4?