FWIS3

Not to beat a dead horse, but I love this prosecutor and I can't stand Ford. Listening to her croaky, squeaky voice - she acts like a child, and I cannot stand her. Just so all my cards are on the table. This doesn't mean I'm a fan of Kavanaugh. And I'm not saying it's beyond the realm of possibility that he did something. But her testimony is really not compelling in the least.

So Ford's testimony is suspect because she sounds funny, stress or no... But Kavanaugh's isn't... because sounding funny is normal for someone under that much stress?

I feel quite strongly that this is a double standard. And have nothing but sympathy for Ford. I would be a much worse and less believable mess, if I had to talk about the shit I've survived in front of an audience (let alone the US Senate, let alone a Senate full of hostile old creeps).

SciFi Chick wrote:Not to beat a dead horse, but I love this prosecutor and I can't stand Ford. Listening to her croaky, squeaky voice - she acts like a child, and I cannot stand her. Just so all my cards are on the table. This doesn't mean I'm a fan of Kavanaugh. And I'm not saying it's beyond the realm of possibility that he did something. But her testimony is really not compelling in the least.

You are in a distinct minority. Seasoned prosecutors have stated that they dreamed of having witnesses as credible as she was.

So to ask the obvious follow up, why do you think she’s lying? It’s gotta be more than a squeaky voice.

Rommie wrote:So to ask the obvious follow up, why do you think she’s lying? It’s gotta be more than a squeaky voice.

I don't believe she's really on the verge of tears. And if she's not, then she's pretending to be, which makes me doubt her honesty altogether.

I also think Kavanaugh is lying about some stuff. His insistence that he's never been so drunk he forgot something, in spite of the fact that his friends say otherwise is not a good look.

I also don't think his family is destroyed by this.

But, imho, those are valid reasons for not believing him. This whole idea that just because he got really emotional, he's not to be believed bugs me.

I still agree with your assessment that no one accused Gorsuch of sexual assault, so this is purely academic.

Luckily, it's not my job to determine who's telling the truth and who is lying, so you all can relax.

I had one of my survivors watch this. They don't believe her. Don't believe Kavanaugh either. I just want the drama to go away. Nominate someone else. Or, alternatively, drag it out until November. Then nominate someone else.

All of the stuff about Kavanagh's 80's calendar is enough to work out that he's a garbage person. This stuff about "Boofing", Renate alumni, FFFFetc, he is clearly lying through his teeth. How stupid does he think people are? Apparently the right amount.

It seems likely he'll get rubber stamped unless FBI can produce a smoking gun in their ridiculously short one week investigation?

Trump will also be re-elected in a year, or whenever it is.

Worst.

squ1d wrote:All of the stuff about Kavanagh's 80's calendar is enough to work out that he's a garbage person. This stuff about "Boofing", Renate alumni, FFFFetc, he is clearly lying through his teeth. How stupid does he think people are? Apparently the right amount.

I don't know that he thinks they're stupid, so much as they'll put up with a LOT to overturn Roe v. Wade.

It seems likely he'll get rubber stamped unless FBI can produce a smoking gun in their ridiculously short one week investigation?

Trump will also be re-elected in a year, or whenever it is.

Worst.

It's not a criminal investigation, and I think the fact that he's such an obvious liar, at this point, should be enough to get rid of him. Clearly, politicians still don't give a shit what the voters think.

Well, we've all been distracted by smoke and mirrors. Here are the real reasons Kavanaugh shouldn't be on the Supreme Court. Democrats and Republicans should be agreeing on this. But we've all fallen for the hype.

Reality Check

I've only watched two videos by this guy. He doesn't seem to be partisan, and he certainly comes across as objective. But either way, the stuff he presents in this video is amazing. At least if you care about the 4th and 5th amendments and hate the PATRIOT Act.

BTW, it also establishes a long history of him being a liar. Thing is, the politicians making it about women are playing games.

SciFi Chick wrote:Well, we've all been distracted by smoke and mirrors. Here are the real reasons Kavanaugh shouldn't be on the Supreme Court. Democrats and Republicans should be agreeing on this. But we've all fallen for the hype.

Reality Check

I've only watched two videos by this guy. He doesn't seem to be partisan, and he certainly comes across as objective. But either way, the stuff he presents in this video is amazing. At least if you care about the 4th and 5th amendments and hate the PATRIOT Act.

BTW, it also establishes a long history of him being a liar. Thing is, the politicians making it about women are playing games.

The issues raised in the video have been brought up. As well as other things that Kavanaugh was involved in that he now claims he had nothing to do with. Unfortunately, the current situation is that the political arena is very polarized. And anyone who looks too much like they might be able to work with the other side is ousted. We have a situation where the Republican's just don't care about Kavanaugh's fitness to be on the Supreme Court as long as he will vote a certain way about the "important" issues like abortion rights or whether a president can be tried for crimes committed while in office.

The Democrats and maybe some independents were hoping that with these allegations and the way that Kavanaugh behaved it would be enough to sway Collins, Murkowski, and the Red State Democrats to vote no. At this time that looks like a forlorn hope.

SciFiFisher wrote:... The Democrats and maybe some independents were hoping that with these allegations and the way that Kavanaugh behaved it would be enough to sway Collins, Murkowski, and the Red State Democrats to vote no. At this time that looks like a forlorn hope.

I think that the Dems' angle was to provide cover for Red State Democrat Senators (which, so far seems to be working, at least three of them have said they will NOT vote for Kavanaugh) and maybe get people to show up to vote enough to flip two seats in the Senate (which, so far, looks like a long shot. Because it also riled up the 'Pubs). So. if you ask me, they knew from the start that Kavanaugh would become a Chief Justice. So, they figured they might as well use it to improve their chances to get the Senate.

Sigma_Orionis wrote:Kavanaugh would become a Chief Justice.

Just to nit pick because I'm in that mood (sorry). He may become an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. There is only one Chief Justice, John Roberts.

Thumper wrote:

Sigma_Orionis wrote:Kavanaugh would become a Chief Justice.

Just to nit pick because I'm in that mood (sorry). He may become an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court. There is only one Chief Justice, John Roberts.

Quite right. By now I ought to know that

And the confirmation is all but guaranteed. Manchin and Collins have both confirmed they will vote Yes. Somewhat of a surprise was Murkowski stating she was voting No. Flake, of course, he weaseled and will vote yes. There was never any doubt about that.

SciFiFisher wrote:And the confirmation is all but guaranteed. Manchin and Collins have both confirmed they will vote Yes. Somewhat of a surprise was Murkowski stating she was voting No. Flake, of course, he weaseled and will vote yes. There was never any doubt about that.

another surprise, but less of one, was learning that Heidi heitkamp would vote no. learning about susan collins was a shock.

code monkey wrote:

SciFiFisher wrote:And the confirmation is all but guaranteed. Manchin and Collins have both confirmed they will vote Yes. Somewhat of a surprise was Murkowski stating she was voting No. Flake, of course, he weaseled and will vote yes. There was never any doubt about that.

another surprise, but less of one, was learning that Heidi heitkamp would vote no. learning about susan collins was a shock.

I am merely speculating but I think the political calculation for Collins was that she could rely on the short memories of people in 2020 when she runs for re-election. Or, like so many of the rest of the cravens, she is not planning to run for re-election.

Heitkamp, I am not sure about. I think she probably understands her political landscape better than I do. I suppose I could assume she actually voted from principle and conscious. That would be a nice thought.

SciFiFisher wrote:

code monkey wrote:

SciFiFisher wrote:And the confirmation is all but guaranteed. Manchin and Collins have both confirmed they will vote Yes. Somewhat of a surprise was Murkowski stating she was voting No. Flake, of course, he weaseled and will vote yes. There was never any doubt about that.

another surprise, but less of one, was learning that Heidi heitkamp would vote no. learning about susan collins was a shock.

I am merely speculating but I think the political calculation for Collins was that she could rely on the short memories of people in 2020 when she runs for re-election. Or, like so many of the rest of the cravens, she is not planning to run for re-election.

Heitkamp, I am not sure about. I think she probably understands her political landscape better than I do. I suppose I could assume she actually voted from principle and conscious. That would be a nice thought.

Most polls already showed Heitkamp behind her Republican opponent before this started. I figure she said "screw this, I'm losing anyways" and bit the bullet. OTOH, i've read that Manchin's lead in the WV election would evaporate if he voted against.

[quote="Sigma_Orionis"
Most polls already showed Heitkamp behind her Republican opponent before this started. I figure she said "screw this, I'm losing anyways" and bit the bullet. t.[/quote]

such cynicism in one so young.

Just leaving this here: https://www.gofundme.com/help-christine-blasey-ford

I know Ford did not personally set up that gofundme but my understanding is that it supports the cost of security, which other people get for free from the government

SciFiFisher wrote:I am merely speculating but I think the political calculation for Collins was that she could rely on the short memories of people in 2020 when she runs for re-election. Or, like so many of the rest of the cravens, she is not planning to run for re-election.

Collins probably doesn't need to rely on short constituent memories. She has won her past elections by considerable margins.

Now that Justice Kavanaugh is seated, I'll wrap up a few of my thoughts on the matter.

1. As I've alluded to if not stated in the past, I do not like attempting to dive into a person's distant past to determine if they did anything criminal or unethical unless there is a criminal or judicial record to review. I believe in the reasoning behind the statutes of limitations doctrine, recognizing that the judicial nomination process is not a criminal procedure. It is far too easy for people to be accused and judged guilty in the court of public opinion without being able to reasonably defend themselves because events happened so long ago. I know I cannot remember squat about my high school years. And yes, I know that Kavanaugh kept a bizarre calendar that looked pretty bad, but my objection stands. That is not to say that I don't believe his accuser's story or that I am am not sympathetic to what she did in coming forward. I'm just saying it's too late for that, or at least, a nomination process is not the appropriate forum.

2. Kavanaugh is personally a horrible person. His conduct at the hearing clearly showed a man who hasn't matured and is far too emotional and lacking temperament. His jabs at senators who were simply asking questions, allbeit ones he did not like having to answer, were out of line and not something we expect to hear from Supreme Court nominees. That said, US Supreme Court justices do not decide cases in such a manner. It's not like the nine justices gather in a conference room and scream at each other until a majority decision is reached. It's not like a jury room. The process is much more deliberate and slow. It involves not just the justice's personal biases but tons of research into prior case law, mostly conducted by clerks, and reading preliminary drafts to see what they can agree on. In other words, Kavanaugh may be a flaming alcoholic asshole, but that doesn't mean he can't do the job in a judicial manner.

3. Speaking of, Kavanaugh has been an Associate Judge on the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit since 2006 and has authored literally hundreds of opinions in that time. For those who aren't aware of how the US circuit courts work, the DC Circuit, being based in Washington DC, hears most of the cases involving government agencies and regulations. It is generally regarded as the second most powerful court in the US, behind the Supreme Court. So, Kavanaugh has a ton of high-level judicial experience. All other things aside, his qualifications in that regard are superb. A veteran appeals court judge, especially from that court, is exactly who I would tap for the Supreme Court, which is no place for amateurs. Including Kavanaugh, there are now four justices on the Supreme Court who are alumi of the DC Circuit. Obama's nominee, Merrick Garland, is currently the Chief Judge of the DC Circuit.

4. Because of Kavanaugh's tenure on the DC Circuit bench, there is a ton of judicial history from which to predict his performance on the Supreme Court. And that is where we - and the US Senate - should have focused. What decisions has he made in the past? What dissents has he authored? Is his record on the court in line with that of the other judges or is he continually an outlier, a maverick? With a nominee with Kavanaugh's resume, there is absolutely no reason to look beyond his record on the bench. If you care to look into it, his record is here.

5. Kavanaugh's record is conservative, but not outrageously so. The US Supreme Court has a history of moderating the political leaning of its justices. Chief Justice John Roberts, for example, a conservative many liberals feared would destroy civil liberties, provided a crucial vote to uphold Obamacare. So, we'll see what Kavanaugh does on the court. It probably won't be good, but it may not be as bad as some doomsayers will have it.

Geo, what do you think about (what I perceived to be) the obvious lies he was telling with regards to "Renate Alumnis", "Devi's Triangle", etc? He seemed evasive and deceptive. Shouldn't that be worth something?

To be more specific, let's talk about the "Renate Alumnis". It is obvious to absolutely everyone that the photo depicted a bunch of dudes claiming to have shagged Renate.

Surely the blatantly obvious lie in denying such an obvious truth (presumably under oath) is of more concern legally speaking than his judicial record in DC?

The 'blatantly obvious lie' doesn't rise to the level of perjury. It's his term so he can define it however he wants, even if we all know it's bullshit.

And no, it's not more important than his judicial record. We put people on the court to do one thing and one thing only: decide cases where the matter of law is unclear or to correct injustices. That's pretty much all I care about because that is the only thing that affects me and the rest of the citizens of this country. And as I stated, that shouldn't even have been brought up.

Kavanaugh possibly did perjure himself on a few other, verifiable things. If that's the case (and I haven't looked into it real hard), in my mind, that disqualifies him from the court. You shouldn't be able to lie to Congress during a nomination hearing without repercussions.