Kavanaugh SCOTUS hearings

[*michaelsean*]

(09-28-2018, 10:11 AM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: After sleeping on this testimony,

Kavanaugh came across to me as someone with too much righteous indignation and too much anger along with too much dismissiveness.

Ford came across with too much frailty and too much naïveté(spell check worked with this on).

They both needed to pull back a little and to me, this is all just a game being played on the American people.

Kavanaugh will be confirmed and Ford will be a hero.

I think if they are stupid enough to have a vote they will lose at least two Republicans.  I haven't heard if there are any red state Dems who might come over, but there is no way I would continue with him. 

[jj22]

She knew the house etc. Gave a lot of details. She faced 4+ hours of questioning from a prosecutor! Didn't blame or attack Republicans as a distraction. Gave enough info to discredit. She gave more details and info then Kav did. By far. All Kav did was blame Dems and Hillary. He didn't have to answer to much of anything. Wasn't even asked if he knew her. Who gave him so much alcohol at an early age. Where was his parents when he was breaking these laws? Didn't face any questions about his clear alcohol issues. Anger issues (that he showed and which has hurt him today in the day after analysis).

Republicans were quick to cut off the questioning to ensure he didn't have to answer any questions from the prosecutor who lit into Ford but couldn't land a blow because of her credibility. It would have been nice to see Kav be able to handle that kind of questioning (he should have been able to as a judge), but we didn't get to see that unfortunately.

[Belsnickel]

(09-28-2018, 10:15 AM)michaelsean Wrote: I think if they are stupid enough to have a vote they will lose at least two Republicans.  I haven't heard if there are any red state Dems who might come over, but there is no way I would continue with him. 

Collins, Murkowski, and Manchin will probably all vote the same way. They, along with Flake were in a meeting after the testimony. Flake has announced support as of this morning, so it is looking like he will get confirmed.

[jj22]

They'll all vote for Kav. Sexual assault accusations (admittance) has never stopped Republicans from electing, nominating, and voting for an individual. We are expecting too much from the party of the "Religious" Right.

[fredtoast]

(09-27-2018, 10:58 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Bottomline everyone says they do not remember the occasion, hell her friend says she doesn't even know Kavs.

Her friend was also married to a Fox News commentator.

Here is why I believe her.  If she just wanted to get Kavanaugh she would never have inserted Mark Judge into the story.  Also she had told the story to other people before any of this confirmation stuff came up.

Was it ever explained how Ford new all of these people by name?

[jj22]

It's not far fetched that you don't remember if you aren't traumatized. All of us probably remember what we were doing on 9/11 when the towers were struck, but ask us what we were doing on 9/10 or 9/12 and we couldn't tell you. Why? Because those weren't traumatic events on those days.

[GMDino]

Vote delayed until 1:30.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/09/28/brett-kavanaugh-senate-judiciary-vote-christine-blasey-ford/1450809002/

Seems the GOP is untied on approval.

[fredtoast]

(09-28-2018, 10:12 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Pick holes how?  She doesn't give any details except what happened in a room.  She doesn't know what house. She doesn't know the date.  There's nothing to pin her down on.  

There are limited options.  First you try to come up with a motive for her to lie.  Next you try to find proof that she has lied before.

Believe it or not many crimes are committed that are not on video and do not leave any DNA evidence.  Those types of cases go to trial all the time. and if someone attacked you and the only evidence was your own statement then I assume you all would want that case to go to trial.

[GMDino]

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/09/27/brett-kavanaugh-american-bar-association-fbi-investigation/1452841002/

Quote:American Bar Association calls for FBI investigation into Kavanaugh allegations

The American Bar Association has asked the Senate Judiciary Committee to suspend its consideration of Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court until an FBI investigation is completed into multiple sexual assault allegations.


In a Thursday night letter that followed an emotional and compelling day of hearings at which Kavanaugh again denied the nearly four-decades-old allegations of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, one of three named accusers, the ABA sided with Senate Democrats out of its “respect for the rule of law and due process under law.”


More: Analysis: On Kavanaugh vs. Ford, a Supreme Court showdown hinges on whom you believe
More: Brett Kavanaugh confirmation hearings spark more protests


The four-paragraph letter, addressed to Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, and ranking Democrat Sen. Dianne Feinstein, represented a stunning turn of events. The ABA had bestowed its highest rating of unanimous, “well-qualified” for the Supreme Court, and Kavanaugh pointed to the ABA’s support during Thursday’s proceedings.


“Each appointment to our nation’s Highest Court (as with all others) is simply too important to rush to a vote,” ABA President Robert Carlson wrote in the letter. “Deciding to proceed without conducting additional investigation would not only have a lasting impact on the Senate’s reputation, but it will also negatively affect the great trust necessary for the American people to have in the Supreme Court.”

Senate Republicans, though, have deflected Democrats’ call for an FBI probe. A committee vote on Kavanaugh is expected Friday, with a vote on his nomination possible by as early as the weekend.



“For 12 years, everyone who has appeared before me on the D.C. Circuit has praised my judicial temperament,” Kavanaugh said Thursday. 

“That’s why I have the unanimous, well-qualified rating from the American Bar Association.”


Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-South Carolina, also pointed to the ABA’s grading as evidence of Kavanaugh’s qualifications on Thursday.


“Here’s my understanding, if you lived a good life, people will recognize it like the American Bar Association has, the gold standard,” he said. “His integrity is absolutely unquestioned.”


In the closing of his letter, Carlson wrote, “Respectfully, the Senate should recognize that a thorough FBI investigation will demonstrate its commitment to a Supreme Court that is above reproach.”


The religious America Magazine also walked back its previous support for Kavanaugh on Thursday, calling for his nomination to be withdrawn "in the best interests of the country."

[fredtoast]

Here is what I think will happen.

There will be no further investigation and Kavanaugh will get appointed.

[fredtoast]

(09-28-2018, 10:12 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Pick holes how?  She doesn't give any details except what happened in a room.  She doesn't know what house. She doesn't know the date.  There's nothing to pin her down on.  

That is not uncommon.  I have lots of vivid memories of things that happened at parties when I was in high school, but I have no idea what the date was or who drove me to them or took me home.

[Goalpost]

It's 11-10. All partisan. No Surprise. Actually the move to vote was 11-8 with two Dems, Booker and Harris not answering. Vote will happen at 130.

[fredtoast]

Kavanaugh's emotions neither prove his innocence or his guilt. I have seen people guilty as hell boil with self righteous indignation at being accused of any wrong doing.

But I don't think it look good for a Supreme Court Justice. As someone ales has already said it was more of a show for the senators and Trump than for anyone watching on TV.

[GMDino]

Interesting opinion piece.  I'm sure the real men will disagree.  Perhaps they will even scream and cry?

https://www.newyorker.com/news/current/brett-kavanaughs-adolescent-temper-tantrum-before-the-senate-judiciary-committee

Quote:Brett Kavanaugh and the Adolescent Aggression of Conservative Masculinity

“I love Kavanaugh’s tone,” Donald Trump, Jr., tweeted fifteen minutes into Brett Kavanaugh’s opening statement in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee. He was referring to the judge’s wildly emotional performance, in which he alternated between shouting, as he blamed the Clintons and the Democrats for conspiring to torpedo his nomination to the Supreme Court, and weeping, as he spoke about the pain that he and his family have experienced in the weeks since accusations of sexual assault against him became public. Kavanaugh choked up and sobbed as he described his father’s detailed calendars, which apparently inspired his own calendar-keeping practice; he seemed unable to gain control over himself, gasping and taking frequent sips of water. The initial impression was of naked emotional vulnerability, but Kavanaugh was setting a tone. Embedded in the histrionics were the unmistakable notes of fury and bullying. Kavanaugh shouted over Dianne Feinstein to complain about the “outrage” of not being allowed to testify earlier; when asked about his drinking, by Sheldon Whitehouse, he replied, “I like beer. You like beer? What do you like to drink, Senator?” with a note of aggressive petulance that is hard to square with his preferred self-image of judicious impartiality and pious Sunday churchgoing. Lindsey Graham eagerly took up the angry-man mantle, using his allotted five minutes of questioning to furiously shout at his Democratic colleagues.

What we are seeing is a model of American conservative masculinity that has become popular in the past few years, one that is directly tied to the loutish, aggressive frat-boy persona that Kavanaugh is purportedly seeking to dissociate himself from. Gone are the days of a terse John Wayne-style stoicism. Now we have Trump, ranting and raving at his rallies; we have Alex Jones, whose habit of screaming and floridly weeping as he spouts his conspiracy theories is a key part of his appeal to his audience. When Kavanaugh is not crying or shouting, he uses a distinctly adolescent tone that might best be described as “talking back.” He does not respond to senators. He negs them. His response, when he is asked about his drinking, is to flip the question and ask the senators how they like their alcohol; his refusal to say whether he would coöperate with an F.B.I. investigation brings to mind a teen-ager stonewalling his parents. If Kavanaugh is trying to convince the public that he could never have been capable, as a teen-ager, of aggression or peer pressure, this is an odd way to go about it.

This, in part, is what I mean when I say from a "PR perspective" his testimony was not a good look.

[*michaelsean*]

(09-28-2018, 11:21 AM)fredtoast Wrote: That is not uncommon.  I have lots of vivid memories of things that happened at parties when I was in high school, but I have no idea what the date was or who drove me to them or took me home.

I'm not saying she's lying, just responding to the not picking holes part.  Unless he was in Europe for the summer or something he can't come up with an alibi.  You can't say, well on July 3rd or whatever he was here, or you were there because there is no date.  

[*michaelsean*]

(09-28-2018, 11:22 AM)Goalpost Wrote: It's 11-10.  All partisan.  No Surprise.  Actually the move to vote was 11-8 with two Dems, Booker and Harris not answering.  Vote will happen at 130.

Oh I thought it wasn't supposed to be until Monday.

[Goalpost]

(09-28-2018, 11:46 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Oh I thought it wasn't supposed to be until Monday.

The committee will vote at 130 today.  

[GMDino]

(09-28-2018, 11:46 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Oh I thought it wasn't supposed to be until Monday.

They can't wait.  If it's Monday they'd have to be in their offices all week with reporters and constituents trying to talk to them.

[Belsnickel]

(09-28-2018, 11:46 AM)michaelsean Wrote: Oh I thought it wasn't supposed to be until Monday.

Committee vote, today. First round, tomorrow. Cloture on Monday, 30 hours of debate, then final vote (likely) on Tuesday.

[*bfine32*]

(09-28-2018, 10:54 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Her friend was also married to a Fox News commentator.

Here is why I believe her.  If she just wanted to get Kavanaugh she would never have inserted Mark Judge into the story.  Also she had told the story to other people before any of this confirmation stuff came up.

Was it ever explained how Ford new all of these people by name?

I'm willing to bet there were people a year behind me in school that knew my name and the folks I hung out with. of course I was a pretty big deal. Sure she told the story but never the names.

FWIW you never did reply to the follow up questions you could ask a 15 year old who had admitted to drinking at a party when you drew a blank. Is it because you believe her?