Comments regarding the Kavanaugh nomination

[Figueira]

Grassley has asked the FBI to investigate the man who made the fraudulent Rhode Island claim.

They should. I bet he's connected to Putin.

[Take your vitamins and say your prayers, Brother!]

People are speaking of this as a criminal proceeding, and it's not.  It's a purely political event about a purely political appointment where no one has guarantees, and an appointment can be denied for whatever reason the Senate chooses.

I'm a Senator.  I've heard a sworn statement from a PhD who describes what happened to her and clearly identiies Judge Kavanaugh as the person who did it.  I've heard Judge Kavanaugh's denial.  I've decided who I believe.  I'm not looking to take something from Judge Kavanaugh, but I've made up my mind that this man should not be elevated to the SCOTUS.

In situations such as this, people get to make a decision based on who they believe.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

So the FBI has been provided a list of people they’re allowed to interview for this sham of an investigation. They’re not allowed to look into Kavanaugh’s college drinking habits or Mark Judge’s employment records at Safeway. It’s difficult to believe they think they’re going to get away with this. It’s like a platonic example of consciousness of guilt.

Kavanaugh's college drinking habits aren't directly relevant to what happened in the summer before his high school senior year, and the investigation is supposed to be about the Blasey Ford allegation.  I'm not sure why they wouldn't be allowed to look at Safeway employment records but I seriously doubt a grocery store keeps detailed employment records for three and a half decades anyway.

They’re also looking into Ramirez, which happened during his college years. And his college drinking habits could certainly be relevant to corroborating claims about his high school drinking habits. And perhaps Safeway doesn’t keep those records, but why not let them ask and find out?

High school drinking habits shouldn't be a barrier to a Supreme Court nomination, nor should crude references in a yearbook.  The question is whether he raped anyone.  The FBI should be looking for evidence of that, not insinuations.

[Sestak]

So the FBI has been provided a list of people they’re allowed to interview for this sham of an investigation. They’re not allowed to look into Kavanaugh’s college drinking habits or Mark Judge’s employment records at Safeway. It’s difficult to believe they think they’re going to get away with this. It’s like a platonic example of consciousness of guilt.

Kavanaugh's college drinking habits aren't directly relevant to what happened in the summer before his high school senior year, and the investigation is supposed to be about the Blasey Ford allegation.  I'm not sure why they wouldn't be allowed to look at Safeway employment records but I seriously doubt a grocery store keeps detailed employment records for three and a half decades anyway.

They’re also looking into Ramirez, which happened during his college years. And his college drinking habits could certainly be relevant to corroborating claims about his high school drinking habits. And perhaps Safeway doesn’t keep those records, but why not let them ask and find out?

High school drinking habits shouldn't be a barrier to a Supreme Court nomination, nor should crude references in a yearbook.  The question is whether he raped anyone.  The FBI should be looking for evidence of that, not insinuations.

What about lying under oath at a hearing about whether he may have attempted to rape someone?

Also if “the question is whether he raped anyone” the FBI answer will be no (at least as far as they can look) - they are not looking into any allegations of successful rape.

[All Along The Watchtower]

People are speaking of this as a criminal proceeding, and it's not.  It's a purely political event about a purely political appointment where no one has guarantees, and an appointment can be denied for whatever reason the Senate chooses.

I'm a Senator.  I've heard a sworn statement from a PhD who describes what happened to her and clearly identiies Judge Kavanaugh as the person who did it.  I've heard Judge Kavanaugh's denial.  I've decided who I believe.  I'm not looking to take something from Judge Kavanaugh, but I've made up my mind that this man should not be elevated to the SCOTUS.

In situations such as this, people get to make a decision based on who they believe.

What do you make of the charge that Kavanaugh lied under oath in both his current Supreme Court confirmation hearings and his mid-2000s DC Circuit Court of Appeals confirmation hearings? Note that this not about any of the sexual assault allegations. Should someone who plays fast and loose with the truth, or even outright lies, be put on the Supreme Court?

It's one thing to elect someone with a long history of sketchy behavior and crass dishonesty to a city council or state legislative seat. It's more disturbing when it's a Congressional seat. It's extremely disturbing if such a person is elected President (see for example: Bill Clinton, Donald Trump). But the Supreme Court is not an elected body. It has no term limits. And what it says the Constitution means is what the Constitution means, at least ostensibly. It is the court of highest appeal, the final arbiter. And to those who wish to go against a Supreme Court decision in one way or another: Good luck.

The Supreme Court may be a fundamentally political, and indeed, hopelessly politicized court, but it's the least democratically accountable branch of the US government, by design - and it's not even close. Brett Kavanaugh is 53 years old. He could very well be on the Supreme Court in 2050. Let's be clear about what the stakes are here.

[Take your vitamins and say your prayers, Brother!]

So the FBI has been provided a list of people they’re allowed to interview for this sham of an investigation. They’re not allowed to look into Kavanaugh’s college drinking habits or Mark Judge’s employment records at Safeway. It’s difficult to believe they think they’re going to get away with this. It’s like a platonic example of consciousness of guilt.

Kavanaugh's college drinking habits aren't directly relevant to what happened in the summer before his high school senior year, and the investigation is supposed to be about the Blasey Ford allegation.  I'm not sure why they wouldn't be allowed to look at Safeway employment records but I seriously doubt a grocery store keeps detailed employment records for three and a half decades anyway.

They’re also looking into Ramirez, which happened during his college years. And his college drinking habits could certainly be relevant to corroborating claims about his high school drinking habits. And perhaps Safeway doesn’t keep those records, but why not let them ask and find out?

High school drinking habits shouldn't be a barrier to a Supreme Court nomination, nor should crude references in a yearbook.  The question is whether he raped anyone.  The FBI should be looking for evidence of that, not insinuations.

Current drinking habits ought to be an issue.  And if Kavanaugh "blacked out" while drinking as a teen, that's a strong indication that if he's not abstinent from alcohol now, then his drinking is CURRENTLY problematic.

[Slander and/or Libel]

So the FBI has been provided a list of people they’re allowed to interview for this sham of an investigation. They’re not allowed to look into Kavanaugh’s college drinking habits or Mark Judge’s employment records at Safeway. It’s difficult to believe they think they’re going to get away with this. It’s like a platonic example of consciousness of guilt.

Kavanaugh's college drinking habits aren't directly relevant to what happened in the summer before his high school senior year, and the investigation is supposed to be about the Blasey Ford allegation.  I'm not sure why they wouldn't be allowed to look at Safeway employment records but I seriously doubt a grocery store keeps detailed employment records for three and a half decades anyway.

They’re also looking into Ramirez, which happened during his college years. And his college drinking habits could certainly be relevant to corroborating claims about his high school drinking habits. And perhaps Safeway doesn’t keep those records, but why not let them ask and find out?

High school drinking habits shouldn't be a barrier to a Supreme Court nomination, nor should crude references in a yearbook.  The question is whether he raped anyone.  The FBI should be looking for evidence of that, not insinuations.

You’re being disingenuous. Nobody said the high school drinking habits themselves should be disqualifying. But lying about them, and whatever motivated the lie, could be.

[Koharu]

Grassley has asked the FBI to investigate the man who made the fraudulent Rhode Island claim.

Of course. But not Ms Swetnick, nope.

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

So the FBI has been provided a list of people they’re allowed to interview for this sham of an investigation. They’re not allowed to look into Kavanaugh’s college drinking habits or Mark Judge’s employment records at Safeway. It’s difficult to believe they think they’re going to get away with this. It’s like a platonic example of consciousness of guilt.

Kavanaugh's college drinking habits aren't directly relevant to what happened in the summer before his high school senior year, and the investigation is supposed to be about the Blasey Ford allegation.  I'm not sure why they wouldn't be allowed to look at Safeway employment records but I seriously doubt a grocery store keeps detailed employment records for three and a half decades anyway.

They’re also looking into Ramirez, which happened during his college years. And his college drinking habits could certainly be relevant to corroborating claims about his high school drinking habits. And perhaps Safeway doesn’t keep those records, but why not let them ask and find out?

High school drinking habits shouldn't be a barrier to a Supreme Court nomination, nor should crude references in a yearbook.  The question is whether he raped anyone.  The FBI should be looking for evidence of that, not insinuations.

You’re being disingenuous. Nobody said the high school drinking habits themselves should be disqualifying. But lying about them, and whatever motivated the lie, could be.

What's disingenuous is demanding an investigation to look into one thing and then using the investigation to catch them doing something else.   It's getting a warrant to search someone for evidence of murder and then looking for marijuana.  It's bullcrap.

[Frodo]

Politically and electorally speaking, it's actually a 'blessing in disguise' (to use Trump's term) for Democrats if Brett Kavanaugh is ultimately confirmed to the Supreme Court, especially if the vote was so narrow it required Vice-President Mike Pence to break the deadlock.  Then we can run for years and decades against an activist conservative court with at least two sexual predators making decisions that affect women's bodies...among other issues.

And give Republicans a taste of their own medicine. 

[libertpaulian]

So the FBI has been provided a list of people they’re allowed to interview for this sham of an investigation. They’re not allowed to look into Kavanaugh’s college drinking habits or Mark Judge’s employment records at Safeway. It’s difficult to believe they think they’re going to get away with this. It’s like a platonic example of consciousness of guilt.

Kavanaugh's college drinking habits aren't directly relevant to what happened in the summer before his high school senior year, and the investigation is supposed to be about the Blasey Ford allegation.  I'm not sure why they wouldn't be allowed to look at Safeway employment records but I seriously doubt a grocery store keeps detailed employment records for three and a half decades anyway.

They’re also looking into Ramirez, which happened during his college years. And his college drinking habits could certainly be relevant to corroborating claims about his high school drinking habits. And perhaps Safeway doesn’t keep those records, but why not let them ask and find out?

High school drinking habits shouldn't be a barrier to a Supreme Court nomination, nor should crude references in a yearbook.  The question is whether he raped anyone.  The FBI should be looking for evidence of that, not insinuations.

You’re being disingenuous. Nobody said the high school drinking habits themselves should be disqualifying. But lying about them, and whatever motivated the lie, could be.

What's disingenuous is demanding an investigation to look into one thing and then using the investigation to catch them doing something else.   It's getting a warrant to search someone for evidence of murder and then looking for marijuana.  It's bullcrap.

No, it's more like you find the murder weapon, but you see kiddy porn right next to it.

[OSR stands with Israel]

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/09/29/joe-donnelly-moves-no-maybe-kavanaugh-vote/

[TPIG]

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/09/29/joe-donnelly-moves-no-maybe-kavanaugh-vote/

Great news! The FBI investigation was the right thing to do, as it would bring red state Dems back to the table.

[cp]

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/09/29/joe-donnelly-moves-no-maybe-kavanaugh-vote/

Great news! The FBI investigation was the right thing to do, as it would bring red state Dems back to the table.

Yeah, the lede for this article is really inaccurate. Donnelly said he supports the FBI investigation because he wants to know what happened. He didn't indicate his vote had changed or anything like it.

Also, stop reading hotair. It's just agitprop for credulous conservatives and easily provoked liberals. It has zero independent investigatory or analytical content.

[OSR stands with Israel]

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/09/29/joe-donnelly-moves-no-maybe-kavanaugh-vote/

Great news! The FBI investigation was the right thing to do, as it would bring red state Dems back to the table.

Yeah, the lede for this article is really inaccurate. Donnelly said he supports the FBI investigation because he wants to know what happened. He didn't indicate his vote had changed or anything like it.

Also, stop reading hotair. It's just agitprop for credulous conservatives and easily provoked liberals. It has zero independent investigatory or analytical content.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/hot-air/

[cp]

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/09/29/joe-donnelly-moves-no-maybe-kavanaugh-vote/

Great news! The FBI investigation was the right thing to do, as it would bring red state Dems back to the table.

Yeah, the lede for this article is really inaccurate. Donnelly said he supports the FBI investigation because he wants to know what happened. He didn't indicate his vote had changed or anything like it.

Also, stop reading hotair. It's just agitprop for credulous conservatives and easily provoked liberals. It has zero independent investigatory or analytical content.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/hot-air/

Oh, cool! I didn't realize there was a resource with such a comprehensive index of this kind of bias.

Didn't realize hotair was quite as bad as that, either! Yikes.

[OSR stands with Israel]

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/09/29/joe-donnelly-moves-no-maybe-kavanaugh-vote/

Great news! The FBI investigation was the right thing to do, as it would bring red state Dems back to the table.

Yeah, the lede for this article is really inaccurate. Donnelly said he supports the FBI investigation because he wants to know what happened. He didn't indicate his vote had changed or anything like it.

Also, stop reading hotair. It's just agitprop for credulous conservatives and easily provoked liberals. It has zero independent investigatory or analytical content.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/hot-air/

Oh, cool! I didn't realize there was a resource with such a comprehensive index of this kind of bias.

Didn't realize hotair was quite as bad as that, either! Yikes.

Well its also given a rating of High When it comes to Factual Reporting

[cp]

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/09/29/joe-donnelly-moves-no-maybe-kavanaugh-vote/

Great news! The FBI investigation was the right thing to do, as it would bring red state Dems back to the table.

Yeah, the lede for this article is really inaccurate. Donnelly said he supports the FBI investigation because he wants to know what happened. He didn't indicate his vote had changed or anything like it.

Also, stop reading hotair. It's just agitprop for credulous conservatives and easily provoked liberals. It has zero independent investigatory or analytical content.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/hot-air/

Oh, cool! I didn't realize there was a resource with such a comprehensive index of this kind of bias.

Didn't realize hotair was quite as bad as that, either! Yikes.

Well its also given a rating of High When it comes to Factual Reporting

Reporting factually not sufficient for good journalism or intelligent commentary (though it is necessary). As the case of Donnelly's stance on the FBI investigation demonstrates, articles that contain no factual inaccuracies can nevertheless be misleadingly headlined or framed.

This line from that website sums it up well:

"They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes."

[Torie]

That still does not quite explain the bit about just how Keyser failed to recall that she knew who Kavanaugh was at all, and doesn't recall ever meeting him.

I thought about this at first... but as I mulled it over- there are actually many things that could explain it...

Dr. Ford knew some of these guys because she met them through the friend of theirs she hung out with for a bit... so Keyser could have been a tag alone to whoever's house they went to that night.  So it could be a case that this was her only real interaction with some of the guys- and thus not surprising she doesn't remember a guy she met once at a random get together.

Also- Kavanaugh & Judge may have been upstairs most of the time the girls were at the house (which sounded like they were only there the length of time it takes to drink a beer)... since they 2 boys seemed to be upstairs when Dr. Ford walked up to go to the bathroom. 

And my guess is that Keyser is the one that drove Dr. Ford home... since she presumably drove them to the party.  If this is the case- she would have certainly only been at the house a short period of time.  I wonder if Keyser is older than Dr. Ford (was she old enough to drive at the time).  If Keyser drove her home... this would somewhat explain why neither of them remember (since given Dr. Ford a ride to her house would have probably been fairly routine - if they were good friends and Keyser had her licence and Dr. Ford did not. (since routine events from 30+ years ago a likely not very memorable).

These are interesting speculations, but I find it hard to believe that both Ford and Keyser would forget that Keyser provided transportation, and one would think that Ford would appear distraught, and Keyser would ask about that, or that at least would cause the incident to be fixed in her memory.

[Beet]

According to the Intercept Kavanaugh also lied about not having any connections to Yale. His grandfather apparently went there. At this point I am starting to think, even if he is innocent of what Dr. Ford claimed, his pathological dishonesty makes him unqualified for any judgeship.

Supreme Court justices are supposed to write opinions (or at least approve clerks') to justify their votes. At this point, I don't even see how anyone can have confidence that he actually believes in any opinion attached to his name.

[Very Legal & Very Cool]

Ford's allegations are not credible. Kavanaugh's denials are not credible because he has lied over and over again. Lied about stealing Leahy's emails. Lied about devil's Triangle and boofing. Maybe Kavanaugh didn't sexually assault anyone, ever. It doesn't matter because he's a ing liar who should be subject to the same amount of questioning he posited toward Bill Clinton while working under Ken Starr.

[KingSweden]

https://hotair.com/archives/2018/09/29/joe-donnelly-moves-no-maybe-kavanaugh-vote/

Great news! The FBI investigation was the right thing to do, as it would bring red state Dems back to the table.

Yeah, the lede for this article is really inaccurate. Donnelly said he supports the FBI investigation because he wants to know what happened. He didn't indicate his vote had changed or anything like it.

Also, stop reading hotair. It's just agitprop for credulous conservatives and easily provoked liberals. It has zero independent investigatory or analytical content.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/hot-air/

Oh, cool! I didn't realize there was a resource with such a comprehensive index of this kind of bias.

Didn't realize hotair was quite as bad as that, either! Yikes.

Allahpundit can be amusing but the rest of the writers there are basically Conservative HuffPo

[หมูเด้ง]

According to the Intercept Kavanaugh also lied about not having any connections to Yale. His grandfather apparently went there. At this point I am starting to think, even if he is innocent of what Dr. Ford claimed, his pathological dishonesty makes him unqualified for any judgeship.

Supreme Court justices are supposed to write opinions (or at least approve clerks') to justify their votes. At this point, I don't even see how anyone can have confidence that he actually believes in any opinion attached to his name.

He should then been impeached regardless for what he has done in our presence if he joins SCOTUS.

[Landslide Lyndon]

IMHO, the best thing that could happen to Democrats from a purely partisan perspective is a narrow Kavanaugh confirmation. He will instantly become a liberal boogeyman and a rallying cry for women (especially if he votes to restrict reproductive rights). And his presence will become a legitimate excuse for them to pack the court once they control the trifecta. 

[OSR stands with Israel]

IMHO, the best thing that could happen to Democrats from a purely partisan perspective is a narrow Kavanaugh confirmation. He will instantly become a liberal boogeyman and a rallying cry for women (especially if he votes to restrict reproductive rights). And his presence will become a legitimate excuse for them to pack the court once they control the trifecta. 

You need legislation to increase size of court and abolishing legislative filibuster needs 67 votes

So not gonna happen