Justice Kavanaugh Confirmation Hearing *DISCUSSION AND LIVE COMMENTARY*

[Beet]

As much as I think both sides of the Court debate have gotten too partisan, liberals are the ones who opened up this can of worms during the Warren Court. If they had not gone in a 2-decade binge of judicial activism, the Court would never have been politicized to begin with. They started the fight, but couldn't finish it.

[Beet]

As much as I think both sides of the Court debate have gotten too partisan, liberals are the ones who opened up this can of worms during the Warren Court. If they had not gone in a 2-decade binge of judicial activism, the Court would never have been politicized to begin with. They started the fight, but couldn't finish it.

This is all nonsense....every court is guilty of some form of judicial activism. This did not start with the Warren Court

The Warren Court ramped it up to 11.

[Beet]

The hot and cold whiplash is aggravating.

Her lawyers are making it seem like she'd be forced to appear "on national television" when the Republicans offered her a closed hearing. Now she wants the FBI to investigate when it's not the FBI's job to investigate decades old sexual assault allegations. Kavanaugh was already checked by the FBI six times. At the end of the day you have to stand on the side of reason. No one's being unfair to this woman.

[Beet]

Patrick J. Smyth, who Ford claims was in the room during the incident, has now said it never happened: https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/3rd-person-room-kavanaugh-attack-comes-forward-blows-story-apart/?utm_source=push&utm_medium=westernjournalism&utm_content=2018-09-20&utm_campaign=manualpost

So now we have the word of 3 people vs. the word of 1 person. NOT saying Beet is correct about this being some decades long revenge plot (in fact Beet shouldn't even be allowed to be a mod), but unless there's some material evidence, which there likely isn't, this is looking kind of fishy. Maybe Ford is misremembering who assaulted her?

I never said it was a decades long revenge plot. In fact I explicitly said it was NOT about revenge and NOT even supposed to go public until a confidential letter leaked. Also I said it was just a theory. The value of my theory is that before it, no one had come up with a plausible reason why Dr. Blasey would want to lie. I came up with one. If you're going to attack me and my modding at least don't lie about what I said.

[Beet]

Another question I have is... why was she at a "small party" with three boys none of which went to her school or is apparently willing to vouch for her decades later? Who did she go to this party with? Who invited her? How did she get home? The only reason I ask is because Brett, Mark, and PJ are all students at Georgetown Prep who still like each other decades later. Christine is the odd one out.

[Beet]

Looks like some progress on the whole testimony front:

https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1042933382722805761

What is this, the Twenty-One Demands? The July Ultimatum? If I were telling the truth about this I would not object to being cross examined or going first. This "pamper me" accuser might do well to change her name from Dr. Blasey Ford to Princess Blasey Ford because that's what she's acting like.

[Beet]

The ole I was a virgin excuse

https://mobile.twitter.com/grynbaum/status/1044342064450859009

What does being a virgin have to do with any of the things he was accused of? What a bizarre statement.

Well, the idea is if he was a virgin, he probably wasn't too aggressive with the ladies.

[Beet]

I just don't get what McConnell's doing.
Kavanaugh is becoming politically toxic, and could easily be replaced by Barrett.
Instead he's roaring ahead, in an attempt to muscle the nominee onto the court.

Either he's playing 12th dimensional chess, beyond the scope of my feeble mind, or he's losing his touch. If Cruz makes a gaffe during the testimony, or during voting, and actually puts Texas into play, then McConnell can only blame himself.

He's got less capital to threaten the Red-state Dems with, given how public the Kavanaugh allegations have become, and he's unnecessarily endangering Heller and Cruz by making them vote for a highly controversial nominee.

Not the mention the effect on the House.

Ignoring the questions of how long replacing Kavanaugh would take and whether they'd still have the votes to confirm someone by then, it would be demoralizing.  It would look like the Republicans either admitting they made a mistake in supporting him, or that they aren't loyal their people when they come under fire. 

I don't know why the Republicans are so resistant to this.  Look at what happened with Harriet Miers; after she withdrew, Alito was appointed and unanimously confirmed.  Surely no conservative can be unhappy with how he turned out on the bench.

Uh, Alito's confirmation vote was not unanimous. Check your history book and try again.

Plus Harriet Miers was not pulled a month before a national election, she was pulled earlier in the process, and conservative Senators were tepid at best in their support for her nomination.

My point is that Kavanaugh is not the only conservative judge around, and he could be replaced with an equally conservative candidate to get the same long-term result but without (more) controversy.  There's still time to get another nominee through, if they move expeditiously.  So it just seems to me like that would be the politically smart thing to do.

The problem is that if Kavanaugh goes down, any man can go down. Any man can be taken down at any time by any vengeful woman who claims they were assaulted in kindergarten 50 years ago. It'll be like the Salem Witch trial writ large.

[Beet]

Instead, this thing has been managed to where people now do have reason to launch false allegations.  At best, it gives people motive to inflate actual circumstances of bad behavior decades ago to the level of an unpunished sex crime.  There are those who would try this, and that will be a disaster when it happens.  But now we are in a lose-lose situation.  If Kavanaugh is confirmed, millions of Americans will believe there is a rapist on the Court.  If Kavanaugh is rejected, he will forever be a martyr by some, setting back the legitimate cause of sexual assault victims because there is little possibility of public consensus on this issue at this point.

I think America is better off if we say "No" to Kavanaugh at this point, but we have been harmed as a nation by the way this is turning out.

people who voted to make a rapist president of the united states have zero room to pontificate about How Harmful This Process Is To Our Nation here, buddy.

Y'all voted for a woman who protected her rapist husband and had no issues with the character assassination of his victims. How about we stop pretending the Dem candidate was any better?

Sure protecting a rapist husband is bad, but it's not as bad as being a rapist. The Dems still have the moral high ground on this one.

[Beet]

Well, the Julie Swetnick allegations involve so many people that more people may come forward to confirm or deny her statements. Something doesn't smell right about this. A "train" of men were lined up for gang rapes at parties with a lot of people and no one said anything? Not one man? This kind of accusation fits the pattern of false allegations - they tend to be wild and fantastical. They tend to be too perfect. Interesting that she does not remember who actually raped her but she somehow remembers Kavanaugh and Judge.

[Beet]

Well, the Julie Swetnick allegations involve so many people that more people may come forward to confirm or deny her statements. Something doesn't smell right about this. A "train" of men were lined up for gang rapes at parties with a lot of people and no one said anything? Not one man? This kind of accusation fits the pattern of false allegations - they tend to be wild and fantastical. They tend to be too perfect. Interesting that she does not remember who actually raped her but she somehow remembers Kavanaugh and Judge.

How many people knew or were assaulted by Cosby yet it took decades to say something.

Penn State administrators knew for years something was going on and nothing came out.

The Catholic Church.

Of course that doesn't speak to the truthfulness of her allegation but the amount of people plausibly involved isn't necessary a strong detriment to her credibility.

Sure, but those were all one-on-one affairs while they were actually happening. This person is alleging that a "train" of men regularly lined up and did this. That a "train" of men lined up and took turns with girls who were conscious but unable to move, and raped them. That defies all belief. It's bringing flashbacks to the UVA false rape accusation, or the Duke lacrosse case where it was alleged that an entire group of boys all participated. I think that is total BS.

[Beet]

Sure, but those were all one-on-one affairs while they were actually happening. This person is alleging that a "train" of men regularly lined up and did this. That a "train" of men lined up and took turns with girls who were conscious but unable to move, and raped them. That defies all belief. It's bringing flashbacks to the UVA false rape accusation, or the Duke lacrosse case where it was alleged that an entire group of boys all participated. I think that is total BS.

The part that "defies all belief," in your eyes, is that multiple men were involved and none of them have publicly confessed to rape? That's unimaginable to you?

Look, I agree that the vast majority of rapes end without legal punishment, particularly acquaintance rapes, and it's a huge problem. But that's because usually it's a crime that occurs in privacy between two people and thus, is hard to prove. It's much more rare to see an environment where rape is so openly condoned that a whole party of men is likely to just mutually agree to do it, and make it a habit again and again.

I'm still undecided on the other two accusers, but I have a rather large, Texas-sized dollop of skepticism for this Swetnick person. This story was not broken by the Post or the New Yorker but by Michael Avenatti. That alone should give you pause. But as I said, so many people are allegedly involved in this that we may hear from others.

[Beet]

What has Avenatti been wrong about, again? Remind me.

And Swetnick probably made the right hire for the statement she wanted to make. Look at how the media and Judiciary Committee have largely ignored Ramirez's counsel.

My problem isn't that Avenatti's representing her, but that he is the one who broke the story. Almost all credible sexual assault allegations are initially reported by a mainstream news outlet that has experience with due diligence.

[Beet]

lol@ guys here acting like the Internet hasn't has a HUGE impact on American politics.

No, Fuzzy Bear is either (a) making incredibly irrational voting decisions that deserve to be called out, or (b, more likely) being really disingenuous in an attempt to score points against New Frontier, which also deserves to be called out.

Yeah, because no one would ever react negatively to being told someone hates you or your group. /s

[Beet]

Everything about this sucks.

Remember when we used to nominate apolitical justices on merit and character?

No.

Totally apolitical, probably not... not nearly as partisan as it is now, definitely.

[Beet]

Fords attorneys refuse to provide video or charts for her polygraph.

Judiciary committee is reportedly talking to a man who claims he assaulted Ford and described the event in "some detail"!!

The anti-Kavanaugh campaign could be over soon.

[Beet]

Fords attorneys refuse to provide video or charts for her polygraph.

Judiciary committee is reportedly talking to a man who claims he assaulted Ford and described the event in "some detail"!!

The anti-Kavanaugh campaign could be over soon.

Can you please post your source (link) to this information ..... mod.

dmartosko on Twitter