Brett Kavanaugh, how to get a SC Nomination

[ryoder 1,381]

kallend

***He will be confirmed

Probably. The GOP is so anxious to get a right wing ideologue on the SCOTUS before the mid-terms that they'd confirm Jeffrey Dahmer if he were far enough to the right.

Dahmer isn't available, but David Berkowitz is.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[Faicon9493 114]

Jeff Flake says that if "demonstrable lies" are found, it's a deal breaker. Demonstrable lies? Where does this fall on the line between "alternative facts" and "truth is not truth"?

[yoink 321]

Demonstrable lies by a Supreme Court nominee are a deal breaker but there’re not worth mentioning if they’re by the president?

Way to have a spine there,Flake.

[billvon 2,395]

>Jeff Flake says that if "demonstrable lies" are found, it's a deal breaker.

I guess they will have to tell the FBI not to find any demonstrable lies, then.

The Atlantic interviewed Frank Figliuzzi, a former FBI assistant director. He said:

==========================
“I sense a degree of frustration inside” the bureau “with the public’s expectation that the FBI is conducting a full-court press when they’re not being permitted to do so,” Figliuzzi says. There is also “increasing concern that the White House and Senate will use the FBI as an excuse to say, ‘This has been fully investigated,’” when it actually hasn’t been. It is not conceivable, moreover, that the bureau has decided to ignore walk-ins and calls made to tip lines, Figliuzzi says. (Such calls have been ignored.) But, he added, “the White House is still tightly controlling this investigation in a way that may preclude agents from pursuing tips."
===========================

[billvon 2,395]

In terms of people who have spoken against Kavanaughs' "choir boy" portrayal, we have:

Christine Ford
Deborah Ramirez
Julie Swetnick
Lynne Brookes
Liz Swisher
James Roche
Chad Ludington.

Number eight is Daniel Livan, who lived in Kavanaugh’s dorm. “I definitely saw him on multiple occasions stumbling drunk where he could not have rational control over his actions or clear recollections of them."

[DJL 232]

The question is, do we bar people who aren't choir boys? Of all the people on that list the worst verifiable offense is when he pulled his wiener out and the next is whether he was lying under oath.

Ford: I believe her but we have to give him the same benefit of the doubt we do her until it can be verified. I don't think this window dressing of an FBI investigation will accomplish that.

Ramirez: Sounds like it definitely happened although Ramirez is the only first hand account. The issue of him lying about knowing about this is a real issue but we haven't seen the proof.

Swetnik: She's now contradicted her statement by saying that K was only near a punch bowl and she suspected that he was spiking it. So basically he was doing exactly what you do at a drinking party if he was even the one doing it and not just drinking it like everyone else. Contradicted her statement about him being in a line outside of a room by saying she remembers him being in a hallway with other people talking and laughing and there was a door near them. Contradicted her statement that he was in the room while she was gang raped by saying that he was at the party and probably in the proximity of the room when she was assaulted. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hq_aFCg6bKY

All others: Confirm he's full of it about not drinking to excess.

So, lying under oath. If it can be shown he was suppressing the Ramirez story and then lied about knowing about it he'll be disbarred, much less be eligible to join the SC. The other things are much more difficult to prove in a court because there's a much higher standard for proof, STILL, that can be used as an assessment because again, this is an interview not a trial.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[billvon 2,395]

>The question is, do we bar people who aren't choir boys?

Of course not. And had Kavanaugh gotten up and said "I was no choir boy - I drank a lot in college - but I never did anything like that" then it would be much less of an issue.

>Of all the people on that list the worst verifiable offense is when he pulled his wiener
>out and the next is whether he was lying under oath.

Right. And nominating a perjurer to the highest court in the land - who presumably may be called to hear a case about the president's perjury - is probably a bad idea.

>Ramirez: Sounds like it definitely happened although Ramirez is the only first hand
>account. The issue of him lying about knowing about this is a real issue but we haven't
>seen the proof.

And again, it's not whether he did it or not. It's the lying to cover it up - and the attempts to silence Ramirez.

[DJL 232]

Quote

And again, it's not whether he did it or not. It's the lying to cover it up - and the attempts to silence Ramirez.

In the previously posted link about that it said the text messages "indicated" that Kavanaugh of some people associated with him were trying to keep that story quiet. ABC News has seen them but they're the only ones so far. They need to be shown to everyone.

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[jakee 1,254]

DJL

The question is, do we bar people who aren't choir boys? Of all the people on that list the worst verifiable offense is when he pulled his wiener out and the next is whether he was lying under oath.

Then there's his general behaviour and hyper-partisan party political statements during the senate hearings.

If you consider the statement "this is a privilege not a right" then appointment to the Supreme Court is the privilege to end all privileges, and it should be strictly safeguarded. If there's a hint that he's not the right kind of person for the job then he doesn't deserve the job.

Frankly I thought Flake's statement that he was constitutionlly bound to vote for Kavanaugh's confirmation unless he could be proved guilty was abhorrent. Try getting Flake and his right wing friends to vote for a bill that says business owners have to give a job to any applicant who isn't a proven criminal. Would they support that, or would they say you should be able to refuse to give a job to any person for any reason? Craven, spineless hypocrites

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[DJL 232]

Quote

Then there's his general behaviour and hyper-partisan party political statements during the senate hearings.

That was way over the top. Could you imagine the Fox News outrage if a Democratic appointee said that?

"I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher

[ryoder 1,381]

The Hill: Retired Justice Stevens: Kavanaugh should not be confirmed

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/409987-former-justice-stevens-says-kavanaugh-should-not-be-confirmed

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[billvon 2,395]

>The Hill: Retired Justice Stevens: Kavanaugh should not be confirmed

Eh, what does he know about the Supreme Court.

[ryoder 1,381]

How to do an investigation without really trying:

1.) Set artificial deadline
2.) Dictate which witnesses can be interviewed
3.) Decline to follow new leads
4.) Purposefully exclude main witnesses
5.) Declare vindication

White House made sure the fix was in from the beginning.

-- Rep Adam Schiff (on Twitter)

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[ryoder 1,381]

Seen on another forum:

"So the last time you had a job interview where you wept openly, became confrontational and belligerent, and repeatedly expressed your love for beer, how did it go?"

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[RonD1120 58]

On 2 Oct Q predicted approval, 53-47. Let's see what happens tomorrow.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[jcd11235 0]

DJL

The question is, do we bar people who aren't choir boys?

It's far better to pass on a qualified nominee than to confirm a poor one. It shouln't be about what's best or most fair to Kavanaugh. If there is reasonable doubt regarding his character or integrity, the SCOTUS deserves the nominee be rejected.

Of course, it's been a LONG time since Republicans have done anything that was in the countries best interests, so it's no surprise they'll continue their destructive rampage and approve the attempted rapist.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[SkyDekker 1,121]

RonD1120

On 2 Oct Q predicted approval, 53-47. Let's see what happens tomorrow.

51-49 in today's vote.

Does that mean Q was right or wrong?

[lummy 4]

SkyDekker

***On 2 Oct Q predicted approval, 53-47. Let's see what happens tomorrow.

51-49 in today's vote.

Does that mean Q was right or wrong?

The vote today was to end debate on his confirmation, it wasn't the actual confirmation vote, although I do expect it to be the same

I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. I promise not to TP Davis under canopy.. eat sushi, get smoochieTTK#1

[RonD1120 58]

SkyDekker

***On 2 Oct Q predicted approval, 53-47. Let's see what happens tomorrow.

51-49 in today's vote.

Does that mean Q was right or wrong?

I believe the up or down vote is Saturday. That is the vote predicted by Q. We shall see.

Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them.

[Channman 2]

Susan Collins is a YES.

All this WINNING, and WINNING and WINNING.

Now have to wait and see if it all pans out tomorrow.

[jakee 1,254]

SkyDekker

***On 2 Oct Q predicted approval, 53-47. Let's see what happens tomorrow.

51-49 in today's vote.

Does that mean Q was right or wrong?
Given that I don't think anyone believes there are more than 3 or 4 swing votes in play anymore you could give the available options to a blind monkey and it'd have a 25% chance of 'predicting' the result.

I wonder what Ron thinks it would prove if Qanon is either right or wrong? Scratch that, Qanon could never be wrong. If it ever seemed to be wrong it'd really be a clever double, triple or even quadruple bluff against the democrats, right?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[ryoder 1,381]

I pair of Tweets today from Kurt Eichenwald:
‏

Quote

"Victory above all" is breaking us.

Spoke to a guy raging about opponents of Kavanaugh. Hoping for a normal convo, I asked his thoughts of Joan Larsen.

He called her "a lying whore"

I was shocked. I told him Larsen is a federal judge on Trump's SCOTUS list. He stormed off.

Quote

...some of the folks reacting to this are saying this is a consequence of the man being uneducated.

Nope. College and grad school. Well off. But massive Fox News fan.

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[gowlerk 1,905]

Yes, it looks like he will be confirmed. Probably a costly move for the GOP politically. But they are in a corner. There can be no good outcome for them from this.

Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

[rushmc 18]

as I said earlier he will be confirmed. The Republicans finally grew a spine under Trump's leadership and will no longer Bend and fold to the Democratic bullshit machine. Murkowski gave a speech on the Senate floor that summed it up very well.

at this point I want to say thank you to all of you who follow this line of bullshit and pushed this storyline so far! It is because of you I am now really looking forward to the midterm elections. Thank you!

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jakee 1,254]

Quote

as I said earlier he will be confirmed.

Predicting that the party with the White House and a Senate majority would get a nominee confirmed. Amazing, if it goes down that way we might as well start calling you Nostradamusmc.

Quote

The Republicans finally grew a spine under Trump's leadership and will no longer Bend and fold to the Democratic bullshit machine.

Yeah, they'll probably manage to get their own nominee confirmed using their own votes. That's hardly groing a spine, it's what they're supposed to be able to do. The fact that they managed to come this close to fucking it up is nothing short of miraculous, to be honest.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?