Official Kavanaugh hearing thread

[homersapien 11,498]

4 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

I did as well Ben.  You are raising hell about 17 +- year old kids and their yearbook. Plus a lady with that several holes in her story. 

Are you suggesting he should get a pass for being only 17?

[SaltyTiger 7,900]

10 minutes ago, AUDub said:

And he couldn’t quit lying about s*** I might have passed off as youthful indiscretion, otherwise. For ****’s sake, dude, just own it.  You drank. You ******. Same s*** I did in high school. 

************** 

[AUFAN78 3,943]

1 minute ago, SaltyTiger said:

************** 

Thank you Salty. Perhaps the most insightful post of the evening. And I needed it. 

[homersapien 11,498]

4 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Thank you Salty. Perhaps the most insightful post of the evening. And I needed it. 

One of his better arguments.

[SaltyTiger 7,900]

7 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Are you suggesting he should get a pass for being only 17?

I do not think BK lied about a thing today. I have not even considered your question. My comment is that the circus today was about a mans life as a kid.

[AUDub 11,204]

12 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

I do not think BK lied about a thing today. I have not even considered your question. My comment is that the circus today was about a mans life as a kid.

Really? Really? 

[SaltyTiger 7,900]

3 minutes ago, AUDub said:

Really? Really? 

Yes really, drummed up charges about a mans life at 17. 

[AUDub 11,204]

6 minutes ago, SaltyTiger said:

Yes really, drummed up charges about a mans life at 17. 

Really? 

[NolaAuTiger 3,295]

3 hours ago, AUDub said:

I honestly don't think people in the conservative bubble realize how angry folks are really getting.  You can almost feel the pressure in the very atmosphere.

Interesting. I feel the same way about Dems 

[AUDub 11,204]

4 minutes ago, NolaAuTiger said:

Interesting. I feel the same way about Dems 

Right. Try this in the middle of the #metoo movement. Watch the Ds go to town. 

[Mikey 16,777]

3 hours ago, AUDub said:

Putting Barrett on the court would seriously soften the blow. Better an ultra conservative than this farcical nonsense. 

No. Putting anyone other than Kavanaugh on the court rewards a tactic of conveniently revealing unfounded accusations and getting the desired result from those unfounded accusations. Unless there is solid proof that Kavanaugh assaulted the Ford woman or any other woman, her testimony should be considered a political ploy and this entire farce ignored except as a lesson to those who tried to pull this stuff off and failed.

[Brad_ATX 13,654]

5 minutes ago, Mikey said:

No. Putting anyone other than Kavanaugh on the court rewards a tactic of conveniently revealing unfounded accusations and getting the desired result from those unfounded accusations. Unless there is solid proof that Kavanaugh assaulted the Ford woman or any other woman, her testimony should be considered a political ploy and this entire farce ignored except as a lesson to those who tried to pull this stuff off and failed.

How much "solid proof" was there against Bill Cosby?  How about the Catholic Church and the crisis they've had for years now?  What about Jerry Sandusky?  Sexual assault cases rarely have physical evidence.

[alexava 6,973]

How such a thing could be so damn partisan is genuinely sad. I wish I was surprised. 

[DKW 86 7,479]

11 hours ago, AUDub said:

Putting Barrett on the court would seriously soften the blow. Better an ultra conservative than this farcical nonsense. 

You are not paying attention. The Borking Machine DARED Trump to pick Barret. They wanted to destroy her and her "religiousness" more than BK. Name her, this would have been 2x worse. 

[TitanTiger 20,538]

10 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

You are not paying attention. The Borking Machine DARED Trump to pick Barret. They wanted to destroy her and her "religiousness" more than BK. Name her, this would have been 2x worse. 

DKW, Dub (and I for that matter) are paying attention just fine.  The Republicans have 51 votes.  None of them are going to bail over her being too religious.  There are at 2-3 Democrats who are from states who voted for Trump in the presidential election, such as Joe Manchin from West Virginia who would be unlikely to oppose her over religious issues.  Yes, the Democrats would make a fuss for a few days over her Catholicism, the American public would largely shrug, and she'd be rather easily confirmed and it would be nothing close to the shitshow we've watched for the last 10 days.

[DKW 86 7,479]

Dr Ford was not convincing. Sorry. I have been too close to people that were abused, molested, etc. They remember every frickin detail of it. They remember the smells, the feel of the day's air. They certainly remembered the place and other details of how they got there. Her testimony just doesnt come close to meeting any standard of convincingness for me. To be smeared and slandered over absolutely nothing charges 30+ years later.with, to be very blunt, no detail at all is a waste of time.

Sorry, but after everything else, all I saw was a woman dying to put her ***** hat on and parade around the room. 

I still dont think BK should be placed on the court though. I have read his findings and his history, his resume. He should never have been named. His ties to the Bush Admin do that for me alone. When we need another over-privileged Ivy League a**hole on SCOTUS, I'll let you know. Hint, it wont be in your lifetime.

So there we have it, IMHO.
1) A nominee that I am repulsed by getting squashed from his nomination...Tepid yes!
2) Knowing that the US Senate just permanently went from Advise & Consent to Search & Destroy is stomach turning. There wont be another nomination process that wont be this bad from this day forward. This permanently changed the Senate into a bunch of attack dogs.

Sad. By my count, the Democrats have now Borked three candidates. Two were qualified academics. So throw out that BS about qualified. That has zero to do with it. SCOTUS Nominations are now forever 100% political. Really no need to name good ones anymore. Do you have the numbers is all that matters.

And our Nominees themselves? We will never again get justices, all we will get is party hacks willing to endure the unimaginable. 

[DKW 86 7,479]

5 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

DKW, Dub (and I for that matter) are paying attention just fine.  The Republicans have 51 votes.  None of them are going to bail over her being too religious.  There are at 2-3 Democrats who are from states who voted for Trump in the presidential election, such as Joe Manchin from West Virginia who would be unlikely to oppose her over religious issues.  Yes, the Democrats would make a fuss for a few days over her Catholicism, the American public would largely shrug, and she'd be rather easily confirmed and it would be nothing close to the shitshow we've watched for the last 10 days.

Sir, you are just flat wrong. THEY WANTED THE FIGHT OVER BARRET. They wanted to do Search and Destroy on her. DF was already armed from her last confirmation. 

[SaturdayGT 719]

   Dr fords story is convincing,......Shes got a lot of background in psychology, so if she were lying, she should be able to easily make it convincing. Not saying she is or isnt, but, yes...shes got the tools. I cant deny my sympathy, so I tend to want to think that something truly did happen to her, I just dont think it was Kavanaugh.   I believe that if you are a rapist, or have the lack of control or humanity to do the things described, your like that for life basically.  You just dont do it at 17 and then live the next 40 something years as an upstanding citizen and carry such positions as he has. 

[TitanTiger 20,538]

6 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

Sir, you are just flat wrong. THEY WANTED THE FIGHT OVER BARRET. They wanted to do Search and Destroy on her. DF was already armed from her last confirmation. 

Ok.  I disagree and think you're flat wrong.  I doubt we'll get to test that theory, but while I do believe the Dems preferred Kavanaugh over Barrett before all this stuff came out, Barrett would sail through after an initial flapping of feathers and squawking.

I also think Trump would prefer to keep her in the wings in case Ginsburg has to step down before his term ends.  I think he'd like to have a conservative woman nominee to replace her to blunt criticism of women losing a SCOTUS slot.  So it might just be that the test is just delayed, not off the table completely.

[AUDub 11,204]

8 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

Sir, you are just flat wrong. THEY WANTED THE FIGHT OVER BARRET. They wanted to do Search and Destroy on her. DF was already armed from her last confirmation. 

Armed with what? Unless it’s something beyond the pale - a rape allegation, like there is with Kavanaugh, for example - Feinstein can’t stop her. They can paint her as anti-woman (good luck with that), anti-abortion etc until they’re blue in the face. The Rs have full control of the process and can push her through anyway. 

[TitanTiger 20,538]

1 minute ago, SaturdayGT said:

   Dr fords story is convincing,......Shes got a lot of background in psychology, so if she were lying, she should be able to easily make it convincing. Not saying she is or isnt, but, yes...shes got the tools. I cant deny my sympathy, so I tend to want to think that something truly did happen to her, I just dont think it was Kavanaugh.   I believe that if you are a rapist, or have the lack of control or humanity to do the things described, your like that for life basically.  You just dont do it at 17 and then live the next 40 something years as an upstanding citizen and carry such positions as he has. 

I think it's ludicrous to think she got sexually assaulted at a gathering where she knew or was acquainted with everyone there and that she misidentified her attacker.  That may happen if it's a rape or attempted rape by a total stranger in a dark public park while jogging or something.  But there's no way in six hells she got assaulted by someone else at this party and mistook him for Kavanaugh later.  I find it far more reasonable to simply say you don't believe her story than to believe that.

[AUDub 11,204]

Just now, TitanTiger said:

I think it's ludicrous to think she got sexually assaulted at a gathering where she knew or was acquainted with everyone there and that she misidentified her attacker.  That may happen if it's a rape or attempted rape by a total stranger in a dark public park while jogging or something.  But there's no way in six hells she got assaulted by someone else at this party and mistook him for Kavanaugh later.  I find it far more reasonable to simply say you don't believe her story than to believe that.

This. The misidentification defense is an absolute non starter. 

[Mikey 16,777]

8 hours ago, Brad_ATX said:

How much "solid proof" was there against Bill Cosby?  How about the Catholic Church and the crisis they've had for years now?  What about Jerry Sandusky?  Sexual assault cases rarely have physical evidence.

Substitute "numerous complainants that recall details of their unfortunate experiences" for "solid proof" then. The current case doesn't even clme close to that. Add in the political expediency of Ms. Ford's revelations and this doesn't pass the smell test.

[TitanTiger 20,538]

3 minutes ago, AUDub said:

Armed with what? Unless it’s something beyond the pale - a rape allegation, like there is with Kavanaugh, for example - Feinstein can’t stop her. They can paint her as anti-woman (good luck with that), anti-abortion etc until they’re blue in the face. The Rs have full control of the process and can push her through anyway. 

It also would be hard to paint her as significantly more conservative or religious than Gorsuch.  Somewhat?  Sure.  Enough to have any hope of derailing her confirmation?  Not a chance in hell.

[AUDub 11,204]

The ABA has rescinded their endorsement pending an investigation.