Kavanaugh
-
So look, I’m in favor of them moving on to the next candidate when that person will be just as much of a Republican attack dog. This isn’t about politics for me, it’s about the fact that he is a pathological liar.
-
Why Kavanaugh? That’s the real question for Republicans here. It’s not like Kavanaugh is the only conservative judge that could be nominated to the Supreme Court. There are at least two dozen justices out there with the type of background, as well as being very conservative in their rulings, that they could easily take Brett Kavanaugh’s place.
The GOP could have asked the President to pull the Kavanaugh nomination the instant the allegations surfaced and confirmed another conservative judge, even without any Democratic votes because the GOP has the majority. Instead, they insist that it has to be Kavanaugh despite the issues that have arisen, and despite the backlash it is causing, and despite his own handling of this.
When Clarence Thomas faced harassment allegations, you did not see him fly off the handle and go on an explosive, angry rant during his confirmation hearings.
Again, I ask simply - Why Kavanaugh? The GOP wants a conservative court. There are other judges that would be just as conservative, and some that would likely be even more conservative than Kavanaugh. If the goal is simply a conservative majority on the court, there are probably 20 other judges out there that could accomplish that goal.
So why Brett Kavanaugh?
-
John Cornyn is a piece of work.
“What good that could come out of this is if more women come forward with [allegations of sexual assault]”… So they too can be ignored.
-
Woodrow said:
@DoubleDD don’t forget he threw ice at someone !!
Yea all common sense goes out the window with these guys. But they are great KU basketball fans.
Funny thing he admitted under oath that he drank to much at times as a teenager. Yet somehow he lied? Just another claim without any evidence. I guess.
-
C-SPAN is showing Dick Durbins response, CNN and Fox are not
-
Its a good question you ask. Can’t say I really know. Though I can say contrary to popular belief by many among here. That Kavanaugh was more than qualified to be a supreme court justice. His judicial record is quite good, and is respected by many of his profession from both sides of the aisle.
My guess is the timing of the nominee and the political perception that would follow. Remember the Ford allegations didn’t break until he was about to be confirmed. With midterms coming not sure the Reps wanted to take the chance of starting over with a new nominee. As they were fearful of losing control of the House and the Senate. Making it impossible for a Trump nominee from ever making it to the Supreme Court.
-
Like Durbin said, according to the Republican narrative Ford is both a credible person and this is also a smear campaign. She’s either telling the truth or she isn’t. But they don’t need to choose which it is because they know Republican voters don’t care. Somehow Ford is credible but Kavanaugh is a good man that doesn’t lie. Its all magic.
-
To each it’s own. If you want to punish a person without any evidence and solely of the mere testimony of one person. Then that is your prerogative.
-
@DoubleDD do you know the following terms, boofing, Devil’s Triangle, and fffff?
-
@DoubleDD there are glaring omissions in your world view.
-
More of an opinion thought here. I wander if Grassly wouldn’t have stolen the Garland pick if things wouldn’t be so hostile on the Kavanaugh. pick. Just a thought.
Sometimes in life you reap what you sow.
-
-
@approxinfinity you’re wasting your breath, if God came down and told Dble d the facts, he still wouldn’t see them.
-
Charles Grassley is a mysogynistic piece of shit.
-
Crimsonorblue22 said:
@approxinfinity you’re wasting your breath, if God came down and told Dble d the facts, he still wouldn’t see them.
And what facts are those Crimson?
-
@DoubleDD Ok. Which piece of information am I failing to account for? Not which opinion or rhetoric I’m disagreeing with, which information am I ignoring? For instance,the fact that you repeatedly have referred to the one person accusing Kavanaugh, ignoring that there are other accusers. Am I omitting something like that? The fact that he lied about being of age to drink and downplayed the extent of his drinking saying he never didn’t know what was going on when many of his drinking friends have said they saw him drunk to the point of not knowing what was going on. Do you dispute that he mischaracterized his drinking? Do you dispute that he lied about drinking legally?
Here’s what he said:
My friends and I sometimes got together and had parties on weekends. The drinking age was 18 in Maryland for most of my time in high school, and was 18 in D.C. for all of my time in high school. I drank beer with my friends. Almost everyone did. Sometimes I had too many beers. Sometimes others did. I liked beer. I still like beer. But I did not drink beer to the point of blacking out, and I never sexually assaulted anyone.
-
It’s been more than three weeks since rumblings of the allegations became public, and two and a half weeks since Dr. Ford came forward. Had the GOP pulled the nomination then, they could have still put forward someone to confirm before the midterms.
Allegations surfaced on Sept 12. Blasey Ford came forward Sept 16.
If the GOP does an investigation to see if this allegation has legs, they can still decide by the 20th that they want to pull the nomination. Trump nominates someone new on the 24th, and the GOP provides documentation that same day (or soon after).
Remember, many Republican senators didn’t want to proceed with Kavanaugh anyway because of his huge paper trail from his time working in Ken Starr’s office and in the W. Bush White House.
If they pull him and nominate someone with a less voluminous paper trail, he or she could have been nominated, vetted and a vote scheduled for three weeks from today.
Would the Democrats have liked this new pick? Probably not, because it still would have been a conservative. But it would not have been as politically troublesome as this has become. There was an easier path than this.
-
The Democrats would have thrown a fit over anyone that Trump nominated. That seems to be the new thing for them. The damn NY Times ran a article about Kavanaugh throwing ice at someone! Seriously step back and think about that for a minute. It is laughable that people think if Trump and the Republicans nominated someone else that the Democrats wouldn’t have found something else to bitch about.
-
Ricky Rubio, today, speaking about Ford’s allegations…
“it was also wrong to dismiss these allegations without looking into them as some did, almost like a reflex.”
Ricky Rubio on Friday, Sept 28th, when he was in favor of voting on Kavanaugh and not having an FBI investigation:
“This entire ordeal is indicative of something that goes beyond the nomination before us. It has revealed how our culture has become increasingly sick and demented, unmoored from the values upon which this great nation was founded and which have allowed our society to flourish.I will not vote against the nomination of someone who I am otherwise inclined to support and in the process add credence to charges which have already done permanent damage to his reputation, on the basis of allegations for which there is no independent corroboration and which are at odds with everything else we have heard about his character". He also said Senators against had “disgraced themselves” and that this was a “dark moment in the Senate’s history.”
Such BS. Just own it dude.
-
justanotherfan said:
Why Kavanaugh? That’s the real question for Republicans here. It’s not like Kavanaugh is the only conservative judge that could be nominated to the Supreme Court. There are at least two dozen justices out there with the type of background, as well as being very conservative in their rulings, that they could easily take Brett Kavanaugh’s place.
The GOP could have asked the President to pull the Kavanaugh nomination the instant the allegations surfaced and confirmed another conservative judge, even without any Democratic votes because the GOP has the majority. Instead, they insist that it has to be Kavanaugh despite the issues that have arisen, and despite the backlash it is causing, and despite his own handling of this.
When Clarence Thomas faced harassment allegations, you did not see him fly off the handle and go on an explosive, angry rant during his confirmation hearings.
Again, I ask simply - Why Kavanaugh? The GOP wants a conservative court. There are other judges that would be just as conservative, and some that would likely be even more conservative than Kavanaugh. If the goal is simply a conservative majority on the court, there are probably 20 other judges out there that could accomplish that goal.
So why Brett Kavanaugh?
Trump believes Kavanaugh would provide cover since Kavanaugh has indicated he doesn’t believe a sitting president can be held accountable should he be charged with certain acts that may be criminal. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2018/07/11/does-brett-kavanaugh-think-the-president-is-immune-from-criminal-charges/?utm_term=.9d7a5b052919 Apparently other potential SCOTUS judicial candidates do not agree with Kavanaugh’s position, making Kavanaugh Trump’s “golden boy.”
-
Roy Blunt, on Merrick Garland treatment being compared to Kavanaugh’s treatment: "theres no comparison. Before Merrick Garland, the last time a Supreme Court nominee was confirmed when nominated in a president’s last year was 1985.
Guess why? Because Supreme Court justices don’t decide to die.
Potter Stewart (1915–1985)
Antonin Scalia (1936–2016)
The transparent BS parade continues.
… and “we talked to all the witnesses I know of, regarding credible charges”.
-
Writing appears to be on the wall and he’ll be confirmed regardless how any of us feel. I don’t know which base will be most fired up come November. But the timing of this will certainly make sure people get out and vote.
-
James Inhofe “innocent until proven guilty, thats what is on trial here”. No, it’s not a criminal trial, but good job toeing the party talking points.
-
Susan Collins decrying dark money while confirming Kavanaugh. Ohhhhhh the irony.
-
@BShark You referring to this? https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2018/oct/05/jon-tester/how-much-dark-money-fueling-kavanaugh-confirmation/
-
Shame on you, Senator Collins. Game over.
-
approxinfinity said:
Shame on you, Senator Collins. Game over.
-
@BShark Hey man I feel really blessed lol - the President gonna be in town tomorrow ought to be fun lol
-
@jayballer73 blessed are the meek for they shall be the subject of our president’s rally ridicule.
-
approxinfinity said:
@jayballer73 blessed are the meek for they shall be the subject of our president’s rally ridicule.
lol, hell I’m just mad cause they are going to have my boulevard blocked - - -can’t get to Walmart- - -or Sonic lmao
-
Two things only:
-
Polygraph - why won’t they share the notes and video of the polygraph? Indications are that there were only 2 questions, something along the lines of “Do you believe your statement is true”. But let’s see the facts about it.
-
As to witnesses asking for an investigation and your extensive background with that.
How many of those cases took place in a highly charged political climate with balance of Supreme Court in the balance and a midterm election pending that had implications on said SCOTUS “advise and consent” power of the Senate?
I’m gonna to presume to take a wild guess at this having no knowledge beyond what you provided here on KU Buckets about your background and experience, and answer ZERO.
Therefore, your circumstantial evidence kinda falls into all the other supporting arguments like “most women who…”
Zero relevance to the facts at hand which all add up, when including circumstantial and “hard” ( since there weren’t any) facts to also ZERO.
The glove does not fit, you must acquit!
-
-
@approxinfinity I might, but I find it inconsequential to even consider it. As will all fair-minded Americans.
-
@approxinfinity hey, bring a blue dress with a stain on it and we’ll listen to you on this.
-
@DoubleDD yeah, I didn’t see many complain about Obama’s smoking pot. That at least was an illegal substance - despite recent trends in lawmaking to the contrary.
-
@approxinfinity well you are partly right, last second unsubstantiated character assassination and smearing is below standard Senatorial behavior.
-
@approxinfinity so Keith Ellison, vice-Chair of the DNC and Minnesota AG candidate should quit that race?
-
@approxinfinity the issue isn’t ignoring the meat of the issue. It’s having seen the accusations, we’re left asking, “Where’s the beef?” - Wendy
-
@DoubleDD it’s not even “He said, she said”. It’s “She said” and he wasn’t even there.
-
@Woodrow I heard a neighbor from his childhood would testify that he pulled a girls hair when he was 6. But only would come forward if there was an FBI investigation.
-
@approxinfinity barely watch it since I don’t have cable or satellite.
-
@BShark yawn
-
@justanotherfan Kavanaugh is probably more a centrist or barely center-right. You’ll gonna love it when Amy Barrett is nominated to take Notorious RBG’s spot when she finally slips off into that final sleep. What’s the over-under on days until that, and will it occur while sitting in session?
-
@approxinfinity she’s not credible. None of her details add up or have remained consistent.
-
@BShark don’t you have to believe the woman?
-
@approxinfinity if all of this crap is a lie (as I do, and many others) and you look at all the real evidence about his life and character,M then yes, he’s a good man.
Maybe not as good a man as Sen Booker’s friend T-Bone, but he’s right there!
-
That was a lengthy victory lap hoss.
-
@Bwag No, mine only included several murder cases, a death penalty case, and about 10 people in prison under life sentences. Not anything as momentous as a Senate committee taking testimony.
-
Half my family is outrageously happy- the other half is certain life as we know it will cease to exist. As for me, it’s all Kabuki Theatre. The Bible doesn’t say America saves the world. If they can’t get Trump out, then they’ll crash the stock market, and get him out that way. I’ll say it again: it’s much bigger than Repubs vs. Dems. Both sides have been compromised. We’re the frog sitting in the cooking pan not noticing the heat is being turned up. The entire South American continent is on the verge of complete economic collapse. Country after country across the world are experiencing terrible financial woes. The bond market bubble is about to pop, and all that fake money, hot off the printing presses, is about to become worthless. Once a week, we see a story where someone is warning us that it’s going to explode. In fact, the chairman of the FED said our great economic news isn’t real. Now, Trump supporters probably shook that off as another sleight from the Trump derangers, but I think he was simply trying to cover his backside when it all goes to hell in a hand basket.
-
@DoubleDD no, the problem with the entire thing is that they delved into whether he drank beer while in high school - come on, get real…! Glad that I haven’t been nominated to the Supreme Court (the witness list would be extremely long, and America would grow bored and tired, having learned too much about themselves).
-
lol
