Brett Kavanaugh Confirmation Thread

[Anastasis 23,329]

3 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

To whom?

This is the point. There is no actual reason that the lack of a contemporary report should matter. No one who is challenging her account now is doing so in good faith. Yet here you are, trying to pretend that bad faith arguments are actually good faith arguments.

The Senators that will consider confirmation of Kavanaugh. I have not challenged her account. I've indicated how I see this playing out politically, and the aspects that will influence how this will play out politically. 

[wildcat09 29,146]

33 minutes ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

How confirmation process resembles a trial.

1. Testimony from witnesses under oath

2. “Evidence” submitted to the committee

3. Purpose - Making a decision on the qualification of the nominee based on the 1st 2 items. 

Need I say more?

This is really stupid.

[bad_teammate 13,115]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

The Senators that will consider confirmation of Kavanaugh. I have not challenged her account. I've indicated how I see this playing out politically, and the aspects that will influence how this will play out politically. 

Name the Senators you think would have different feelings about this if she had reported him immediately to the police in the 1980s as a 15-year-old girl at a party with booze.

While you compile your list, I'll take a BIG, DEEP breath so I can laugh in your face.

Edited September 18, 2018 by bad_teammate

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

It was knee jerk because she didn’t give Franken any kind of due process. She just assumed all the allegations were true and that photo was bullshit. 

I’ll admit Franken was probably guilty of inappropriate behavior but I have a hard time believing he’s some sort of serial sexual predator.   I would have liked to heard more from the accusers and Franken’s response.  Which is precisely what Kavanaugh is getting.  Except with Kavanaugh, he’s being appointed to a lifetime position in one of the highest offices in the country.  The voters will have zero say to remove him once he’s confirmed.  

And Gillibrand wasn’t running Franken off because it was the right thing to do.  She was doing it to score her own political points.  

Again with the due process.   Due process has no applicability to encouraging someone to resign from a job.   The photo was not bullshit; it was hard proof of his joking sexual humiliation of an unconscious woman.   And Franken had plenty of time to explain everything.  His explanation wasn't that he didn't grope a bunch of women, but rather that he takes lots of photos and doesn't remember the women in question.   That doesn't cut it.  Gillibrand and the Dems writ large were right to pressure him out when they did. 

[Judge Roybeanbag 11,772]

This reminds me of a high stakes poker game.  Everyone accusing her of bluffing, but is she?  I couldn't think of anything better than her having a hole-card, a corroborating witness, and springing it on the Senate after Kavanaugh has denied it again for the umpteenth time.

[bad_teammate 13,115]

What the accuser has to gain by lying:

What Kavanaugh has to gain by lying:

- 

[Incredulity 11,440]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

What the accuser has to gain by lying:

What Kavanaugh has to gain by lying:

- 

This would be passable, if Kavanaughs hearing hadn't been interupted ad-nauseum with, "Brett = Death" chants.

 

[David Dennison 18,487]

Just now, Incredulity said:

This would be passable, if Kavanaughs hearing hadn't been interupted ad-nauseum with, "Brett = Death" chants.

God bless America.

[retread 2,951]

5 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

What the accuser has to gain by lying:...

There's something really sick and malignant about all of these instances of power and abuse. Penn St., Mich. St., Catholic priests, etc. All of these victims were very reluctant to come forward. Doesn't speak well of our culture.

Edited September 18, 2018 by retread

[Horn Dog 9,584]

39 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

Ignore her at your peril Grass man.  She's looking for a reason to vote no.

 

[retread 2,951]

what a clown show

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,355]

7 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Again with the due process.   Due process has no applicability to encouraging someone to resign from a job.   The photo was not bullshit; it was hard proof of his joking sexual humiliation of an unconscious woman.   And Franken had plenty of time to explain everything.  His explanation wasn't that he didn't grope a bunch of women, but rather that he takes lots of photos and doesn't remember the women in question.   That doesn't cut it.  Gillibrand and the Dems writ large were right to pressure him out when they did. 

Gillibrand didn’t go behind closed doors and ask Franken to resign.  No, she did it publicly to make herself the avenger for women everywhere and the democrats followed suit because at that point the narrative was set in stone.

The photo was inappropriate and in bad taste but FRANKEN was a COMEDIAN at the time.  He obviously had poor judgment in that moment in time but FFS there wasn’t anything malicious meant by it.  The photo was release was also obviously politically motivated with premeditation.

[wildcat09 29,146]

9 minutes ago, Incredulity said:

This would be passable, if Kavanaughs hearing hadn't been interupted ad-nauseum with, "Brett = Death" chants.

 

How do you think this is in any way responsive to what you quoted?

[wildcat09 29,146]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Gillibrand didn’t go behind closed doors and ask Franken to resign.  No, she did it publicly to make herself the avenger for women everywhere and the democrats followed suit because at that point the narrative was set in stone.

The photo was inappropriate and in bad taste but FRANKEN was a COMEDIAN at the time.  He obviously had poor judgment in that moment in time but FFS there wasn’t anything malicious meant by it.  The photo was release was also obviously politically motivated with premeditation.

Jesus christ shut the fuck up with the bitching about Gillibrand.

[GHOSTUSER 361]

23 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

This is really stupid.

Really what’s the purpose behind these hearings?

[Horn Dog 9,584]

2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Gillibrand didn’t go behind closed doors and ask Franken to resign.  No, she did it publicly to make herself the avenger for women everywhere and the democrats followed suit because at that point the narrative was set in stone.

The photo was inappropriate and in bad taste but FRANKEN was a COMEDIAN at the time.  He obviously had poor judgment in that moment in time but FFS there wasn’t anything malicious meant by it.  The photo was release was also obviously politically motivated with premeditation.

Also, in the photo, his hands are clearly several inches away from her, they are hoovering over her and you can see the shadows of his hands.  He is clearly trying doing a crude joke, but he is not assaulting her in that photo.  

[GHOSTUSER 361]

Just now, wildcat09 said:

Jesus christ shut the fuck up with the bitching about Gillibrand.

Fuck you. He has a point. Franken was fucked over too. 

[realgreggym 832]

1 hour ago, bad_teammate said:

Do you believe Bill Clinton sexually assaulted women in his past?

Absolutely 100% yes and so does Hillary.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

3 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Gillibrand didn’t go behind closed doors and ask Franken to resign.  No, she did it publicly to make herself the avenger for women everywhere and the democrats followed suit because at that point the narrative was set in stone.

The photo was inappropriate and in bad taste but FRANKEN was a COMEDIAN at the time.  He obviously had poor judgment in that moment in time but FFS there wasn’t anything malicious meant by it.  The photo was release was also obviously politically motivated with premeditation.

Not sure what point you're driving at with public vs. private.  Sounds like you're building your own narrative about her intentions.   Taking public stands is the essence of a politician's job.   She did the right thing in exactly the right way. 

And I don't really care about the motivation behind the release of the photo, any more than I care whether the Dems have political motivations behind the way they released this information against Kavanaugh, or whether the person who leaked the Trump Access Hollywood tape wanted to bring down Trump.   The important question is whether the accused deserves the great privilege of holding public office. 

I strongly disagree with your minimization of the Franken photo, but it's largely moot, because it was the subsequent string of credible groping and harassment allegations that ultimately brought him down. 

[triplehorn 2,664]

 

[Anastasis 23,329]

32 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Name the Senators you think would have different feelings about this if she had reported him immediately to the police in the 1980s as a 15-year-old girl at a party with booze.

 While you compile your list, I'll take a BIG, DEEP breath so I can laugh in your face.

His confirmation is dead in the water if there is any contemporary corroboration of the Dr's account.  It doesn't even have to meet the level of reporting the assault.  I have already outlined my thoughts up thread.  Corroboration by anybody else at the party that she was there, Kavanaugh was there, and he was blitzed should more than do it. I am not sure that the last one is necessary, but it would seal the deal. 

Edited September 18, 2018 by Anastasis

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,355]

37 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Duh. It's politics. Al Franken made the decision to cut and run. Kirsten Gillibrand didn't owe him shit.

Oh, so now it’s politics.  Let’s play politics.

The point I’m trying to make here is not to defend Franken but illustrate how badly the democrats got played by the Republicans with Franken.  

They wanted Franken run off and they got the democrats to do it for them, which happened.

If the tables were turned and Franken was Republican, nothing would have happened because fuck you that why. 

That’s why the Republicans are winners and the Democrats are losers.  The democrats will cut their own hand off because “it’s the right thing to do” while they’re getting their faces bashed in by the Republicans who don’t give a fuck.

That’s the political reality of our current situation and why there is an important lesson to be learned from the Franken case.

Edited September 18, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[tantric superman 4,667]

1 hour ago, Chrispy said:

No, I’m not. I’m asking for proof of sexual assault, that’s it. But I’m being told that the accusation is all the matters, which is total nonsense.  

So let's be clear.  You don't care about corroborating evidence.

Corroborating evidence (or corroboration) is evidence that tends to support a proposition that is already supported by some initial evidence, therefore confirming the proposition.

You in fact are simply creating a burden of proof which she will not be able to meet and which will allow you to maintain your troll-ish position.

 

[tantric superman 4,667]

The important thing to learn from the Franken case is that he made a decision that seemed to be the right thing in his mind and the mind of his constituents.

Good enough for me.

 

[atomheartbevo 89,304]

9 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

His confirmation is dead in the water if there is any contemporary corroboration of the Dr's account.  It doesn't even have to meet the level of reporting the assault.  I have already outlined my thoughts up thread.  Corroboration by anybody else at the party that she was there, Kavanaugh was there, and he was blitzed should more than do it. I am not sure that the last one is necessary, but it would seal the deal. 

There were already a few Rs who were probably not cool with his past appearances before Congress, and the amount of documents being held back.   It’s not gonna take much to sink him.  

[bad_teammate 13,115]

 

9 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

His confirmation is dead in the water if there is any contemporary corroboration of the Dr's account.  It doesn't even have to meet the level of reporting the assault.  I have already outlined my thoughts up thread.  Corroboration by anybody else at the party that she was there, Kavanaugh was there, and he was blitzed should more than do it. I am not sure that the last one is necessary, but it would seal the deal. 

Name names.

Who, specifically, is unconvinced now but would be convinced because of her contemporaneous reporting as a 15-year-old in the 1980s at a party with booze?

[GHOSTUSER 361]

The question now is whether Dr. Ford is going to even show up on Monday for the hearing.   Neither her nor her lawyer have responded to requests from the Senate Judiciary Committee. Maybe she is a very disturbed individual. I hope she gets help.

[jimmyjazz 45,428]

4 minutes ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

The question now is whether Dr. Ford is going to even show up on Monday for the hearing.   Neither her nor her lawyer have responded to requests from the Senate Judiciary Committee. Maybe she is a very disturbed individual. I hope she gets help.

That seems a bit of a leap.  You know, given your bipartisan rational bad self.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

6 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Oh, so now it’s politics.  Let’s play politics.

The point I’m trying to make here is not to defend Franken but illustrate how badly the democrats got played by the Republicans with Franken.  

They wanted Franken run off and they got the democrats to do it for them, which happened.

If the tables were turned and Franken was Republican, nothing would have happened because fuck you that why. 

That’s why the Republicans are winners and the Democrats are losers.  The democrats will cut their own hand off because “it’s the right thing to do” while they’re getting their faces bashed in by the Republicans who don’t give a fuck.

That’s the political reality of our current situation and why there is an important lesson to be learned from the Franken case.

That's an incredibly short-sighted take.  Al Franken wasn't some irreplaceable magical wizard.  He was replaced by another solid Dem.  Meanwhile the Dems gained credibility on an important issue while the GOP descends into a party that supports numerous sexual abusers.   Support for Dems among women is spiking and will have a significant impact this Fall. 

I also believe that doing the right thing adds up over time, and doing the wrong thing does as well.   Even if there were a political cost to ditching Franken, it would be worth it to take that stand against groping and harassment. 

[tantric superman 4,667]

4 minutes ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

The question now is whether Dr. Ford is going to even show up on Monday for the hearing.   Neither her nor her lawyer have responded to requests from the Senate Judiciary Committee. Maybe she is a very disturbed individual. I hope she gets help.

She's going to be there Monday morning, yearnin', burnin', snappin' necks and cashin' checks.

[bad_teammate 13,115]

I think it's hilarious and sad that people thing Collins is some kind of hero for suggesting that a sexual assault victim get cross-examined by a lawyer in front of the Senate judiciary committee.

Up against the wall, all of you.

[tantric superman 4,667]

1 hour ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

 

Others on this thread and in the media think he should have his nomination pulled. That’s not giving him due process  

Damn them.  I hate "Others".

[Chrispy 132]

15 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

So let's be clear.  You don't care about corroborating evidence.

Corroborating evidence (or corroboration) is evidence that tends to support a proposition that is already supported by some initial evidence, therefore confirming the proposition.

You in fact are simply creating a burden of proof which she will not be able to meet and which will allow you to maintain your troll-ish position.

 

If the burden of proof can’t be met, then he should be confirmed. 

[GHOSTUSER 361]

I hope the GOP has a plan of attack if she does show up. 

[tantric superman 4,667]

Is this Ford broad hotter'n than Anita Hill?

[tantric superman 4,667]

1 minute ago, Chrispy said:

If the burden of proof can’t be met, then he should be confirmed.  

Got it.

[bad_teammate 13,115]

1 minute ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

I hope the GOP has a plan of attack if she does show up. 

~*~*~*~*~*~ Very Anastasishly ~*~*~*~*~*~

"These fair-minded, good-faith people would see reason if only we did one more thing!"

[troph 24,498]

I hope the GOP has a plan of attack if she does show up. 

They’ll just say she’s disturbed and they hope she gets help.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,355]

2 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

That's an incredibly short-sighted take.  Al Franken wasn't some irreplaceable magical wizard.  He was replaced by another solid Dem.  Meanwhile the Dems gained credibility on an important issue while the GOP descends into a party that supports numerous sexual abusers.   Support for Dems among women is spiking and will have a significant impact this Fall. 

I also believe that doing the right thing adds up over time, and doing the wrong thing does as well.   Even if there were a political cost to ditching Franken, it would be worth it to take that stand against groping and harassment. 

Nothing was gained politically for the Democrats by Franken resigning.  Nothing.  

They lost one of their most influential Senate leaders who was replaced by I don’t know who.  

It was a net win for the GOP.

[GHOSTUSER 361]

4 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

~*~*~*~*~*~ Very Anastasishly ~*~*~*~*~*~

"These fair-minded, good-faith people would see reason if only we did one more thing!"

I would love to see her under tough cross-examination, get destroyed and recant publically which would make great TV. That wouldn’t be very Christian of me to wish that. I wouldn’t want washpark to accuse me of being a misogynist again and give him an ammo to back it up.

Edited September 18, 2018 by Iconoclast Texan

[Huckleberry 32,660]

Interesting that you aren't simply looking for the truth, whatever it may be, to be revealed.

[GHOSTUSER 361]

5 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Nothing was gained politically for the Democrats by Franken resigning.  Nothing.  

They lost one of their most influential Senate leaders who was replaced by I don’t know who.  

It was a net win for the GOP.

I feel like I’m taking crazy pills. I completely agree with Hugo. It’s  like when Orca and I were on the same page on the desirability of targeted assassinations versus economic sanctions. It just shows that even in such polarized times that consensus can be reached on important issues 

[hayden_horn 11,358]

4 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Interesting that you aren't simply looking for the truth, whatever it may be, to be revealed.

Nope. He wants that bitch DESTROYED on national television. That's all that matters. 

[DDD Dad 14,144]

7 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Nothing was gained politically for the Democrats by Franken resigning.  Nothing.  

They lost one of their most influential Senate leaders who was replaced by I don’t know who.  

It was a net win for the GOP.

Stahp

[GHOSTUSER 361]

5 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Interesting that you aren't simply looking for the truth, whatever it may be, to be revealed.

Give me a fucking break. Y’all want to derail this nomination and we want to ram it through. No one is looking for the truth. No one

[troph 24,498]

I would love to see her under tough cross-examination, get destroyed and recant publically which would make great TV. That wouldn’t be very Christian of me to wish that. I wouldn’t want washpark to accuse me of being a misogynist again and give him an ammo to back it up.

Too late.

[Mojo Hand 4,580]

4 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Nothing was gained politically for the Democrats by Franken resigning.  Nothing.  

They lost one of their most influential Senate leaders who was replaced by I don’t know who.  

It was a net win for the GOP.

This kind of unprincipled partisanship is exactly why Trump is president right now.  And the GOP will eventually regret it, despite their short-term wins.

[DDD Dad 14,144]

6 minutes ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

Give me a fucking break. Y’all want to derail this nomination and we want to ram it through. No one is looking for the truth. No one

I am.

To be clear (and to restate what I've said in the past here), I have not drawn any final conclusion on whether Kavanaugh should be confirmed.  I'm generally in favor of confirming any qualified judge selected by the president, barring a disqualifying matter (such as perjury, corruption, or an admitted unwillingness to follow appropriate standards of judicial conduct).

Further, to the extent it matters and for what it's worth, my legal background is far from liberal.  I was founding member and president of the Federalist Society in my law school back in the 1980's.  That was, of course, before it (in my opinion) went off the rails largely due to the influence of the Christian Coalition and evangelical right.

So, on a number of points (particularly basic jurisprudential ones) I have more in common with Kavanaugh than most of those on this thread.  

Edited September 18, 2018 by DDD Dad

[bad_teammate 13,115]

8 minutes ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

I would love to see her under tough cross-examination, get destroyed and recant publically which would make great TV. That wouldn’t be very Christian of me to wish that. I wouldn’t want washpark to accuse me of being a misogynist again and give him an ammo to back it up.

It's actually very Christian of you.

[Mack Tripper 693]

1 hour ago, realgreggym said:

 

There have been numerous women coming forward to talk about their rape or attempted rape. Every one has said when something that traumatic happens. you remember every detail. Every single detail., This woman cant seem to remember very much and thats why many doubt her story. And now there are approximately 200 hundred women that have come forward in support of Kavanaugh. He has been in the public eye for decades and not once has it been reported that any woman came forward on anything regarding Kavanaugh.

The only thing missing is a coke can with a pubic hair. 

BTW, there is news coming out and for the sake of the board libs, I hope its fake. Supposedly the reason Feinstein with held this letter is because she received a similar one from the same woman during the Gorsuch hearings. Again, for the libs sake I hope its fake.

So lack of a perfect memory about an event makes you not credible? Kavanaugh conveniently couldn't remember many things that occurred much more recently, like whether he had a conversation within the last few months about the special counsel's investigation. 

Edited September 18, 2018 by Mack Tripper