Comments regarding the Kavanaugh nomination

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

https://mobile.twitter.com/emptywheel/status/1046538140553539584?ref_src=twsrc%5...

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

My position on this probably matches up more with Jeff Flake's position than any other senator on this

I agree actually. Flake, despite his laundry list of faults in the way he's handled things, does seem to honestly want to know whether Kavanaugh is guilty or not and will vote for him if convincing evidence cannot be found that Kavanaugh is guilty.

I want to believe this, and there's no reason Flake shouldn't think this.

[Mister Mets]

CNN is saying that FBI is not expected to interview either Dr. Ford or Kavanaugh. Also, that the White House might not even make the report public.

This is absolutely sickening. Congressional Republicans are disgusting (I'm not supposed to say that because it's "offensive"). What are they hiding?

How low can the Republican Party go? They're pretty much the world's limbo champions at this point.

How much of it is it Republican interference, and how much of it is the FBI's decision on how to allocate finite resources/ time?

[Wells]

CNN is saying that FBI is not expected to interview either Dr. Ford or Kavanaugh. Also, that the White House might not even make the report public.

This is absolutely sickening. Congressional Republicans are disgusting (I'm not supposed to say that because it's "offensive"). What are they hiding?

How low can the Republican Party go? They're pretty much the world's limbo champions at this point.

How much of it is it Republican interference, and how much of it is the FBI's decision on how to allocate finite resources/ time?

then give them more resources/time 

[Slander and/or Libel]

CNN is saying that FBI is not expected to interview either Dr. Ford or Kavanaugh. Also, that the White House might not even make the report public.

This is absolutely sickening. Congressional Republicans are disgusting (I'm not supposed to say that because it's "offensive"). What are they hiding?

How low can the Republican Party go? They're pretty much the world's limbo champions at this point.

How much of it is it Republican interference, and how much of it is the FBI's decision on how to allocate finite resources/ time?

then give them more resources/time 

Yeah, they artificially limited the scope and time and now are hiding behind the FBI like it was their decision. Seems like if they wanted a real investigation it’d make sense not to say who to interview and how long to take up front.

[Dwarven Dragon]

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/brett-kavanaugh-classmates_us_5bb157bce4b027da00d46d72

Chad Ludington, who went to Yale with Kavanaugh, told the New York Times he often saw Kavanaugh “staggering from alcohol consumption.”

[RI]

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/brett-kavanaugh-classmates_us_5bb157bce4b027da00d46d72

Chad Ludington, who went to Yale with Kavanaugh, told the New York Times he often saw Kavanaugh “staggering from alcohol consumption.”

This doesn't contradict anything Kavanaugh said.

[ηєω ƒяσηтιєя]

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/brett-kavanaugh-classmates_us_5bb157bce4b027da00d46d72

Chad Ludington, who went to Yale with Kavanaugh, told the New York Times he often saw Kavanaugh “staggering from alcohol consumption.”

This doesn't contradict anything Kavanaugh said.

Yes, it does.

[RI]

Mitchell's views on Ford's testimony.

[elcorazon]

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/09/how-we-know-kavanaugh-is-lying

[Calthrina950]

Mitchell's views on Ford's testimony.

I had heard about her analysis a day or two ago. It's amazing how Mitchell was able to dissect Ford's claims and to present them in this memorandum. I agree with her conclusion that this case would not hold up in court, but I also believe that the allegations, as well as those of Deborah Ramirez and Julie Swetnick, are sufficiently concerning enough to merit blocking Kavanaugh's confirmation.

[Mister Mets]

Mitchell's views on Ford's testimony.

Interesting. There's some stuff I didn't know (some contradictions, that Ford's polygraph was taken around the time of her grandmother's funeral.)

I'm curious to see if there's any pushing back on the substance of it.

CNN is saying that FBI is not expected to interview either Dr. Ford or Kavanaugh. Also, that the White House might not even make the report public.

This is absolutely sickening. Congressional Republicans are disgusting (I'm not supposed to say that because it's "offensive"). What are they hiding?

How low can the Republican Party go? They're pretty much the world's limbo champions at this point.

How much of it is it Republican interference, and how much of it is the FBI's decision on how to allocate finite resources/ time?

then give them more resources/time  

There is a justified concern from Republicans that Democrats are motivated by a desire to delay rather than learn anything of substance.

Had it not been for mistakes from Democrats, this could have been part of the initial investigation.

As for whether Ford or Kavanaugh get interviewed, the FBI has the results of multiple on the record and off the record depositions. Would the FBI need anything new from them at this point (this would be subject to change if they get any new evidence from elsewhere)?

Mitchell's views on Ford's testimony.

I had heard about her analysis a day or two ago. It's amazing how Mitchell was able to dissect Ford's claims and to present them in this memorandum. I agree with her conclusion that this case would not hold up in court, but I also believe that the allegations, as well as those of Deborah Ramirez and Julie Swetnick, are sufficiently concerning enough to merit blocking Kavanaugh's confirmation.

Ramirez spent a while not being sure it was Kavanaugh, and didn't even see him do the thing she thinks he did.

For Swetnick's claims to have any impact, you need to believe that Kavanaugh, Judge and others habitually engaged in gang rape.

[For Trump, everything. For immigrants, the law]

I'm really not sure why Democrats were so happy on Friday. It was already clear that the scope of the investigation would be incredibly narrow, and so many restrictions have been placed on the FBI as to what they can actually investigate that it's clear that they're just trying to make it look like Kavanaugh has been cleared when he really hasn't, and be able to spin the Democrats as the ones who don't respect the process. Flake did play some pretty good politics here. Now he gets to act the moderate hero, and many Democrats will eat it all up.

[Calthrina950]

Mitchell's views on Ford's testimony.

Interesting. There's some stuff I didn't know (some contradictions, that Ford's polygraph was taken around the time of her grandmother's funeral.)

I'm curious to see if there's any pushing back on the substance of it.

CNN is saying that FBI is not expected to interview either Dr. Ford or Kavanaugh. Also, that the White House might not even make the report public.

This is absolutely sickening. Congressional Republicans are disgusting (I'm not supposed to say that because it's "offensive"). What are they hiding?

How low can the Republican Party go? They're pretty much the world's limbo champions at this point.

How much of it is it Republican interference, and how much of it is the FBI's decision on how to allocate finite resources/ time?

then give them more resources/time  

There is a justified concern from Republicans that Democrats are motivated by a desire to delay rather than learn anything of substance.

Had it not been for mistakes from Democrats, this could have been part of the initial investigation.

As for whether Ford or Kavanaugh get interviewed, the FBI has the results of multiple on the record and off the record depositions. Would the FBI need anything new from them at this point (this would be subject to change if they get any new evidence from elsewhere)?

Mitchell's views on Ford's testimony.

I had heard about her analysis a day or two ago. It's amazing how Mitchell was able to dissect Ford's claims and to present them in this memorandum. I agree with her conclusion that this case would not hold up in court, but I also believe that the allegations, as well as those of Deborah Ramirez and Julie Swetnick, are sufficiently concerning enough to merit blocking Kavanaugh's confirmation.

Ramirez spent a while not being sure it was Kavanaugh, and didn't even see him do the thing she thinks he did.

For Swetnick's claims to have any impact, you need to believe that Kavanaugh, Judge and others habitually engaged in gang rape.

I'm not saying that the allegations are valid (and Mitchell, as I noted, did highlight several inconsistencies or flaws in Ford's testimony). But what I am saying is that we should not be rushing Kavanaugh to confirmation until these allegations have been fully vetted. If the allegations are proven to have no merit, then there is no other bar to Kavanaugh taking his seat on the bench.

[7,052,770]

There is a justified concern from Republicans that Democrats are motivated by a desire to delay rather than learn anything of substance.

False. The "concerns" are unjustified because the Democrats simply want to get to the truth.

As repeatedly posted here, this would be a terrible plot if it were just a Democratic hoax, since even if they won there's plenty of time to get another judge out there. It just wouldn't be worth all the hoopla, even from a twisted, amoral perspective. No, the Democrats are being sincere here, and the only reason Republicans don't realize it is because they're so habitually insincere and assume everyone is like them.

[Calthrina950]

There is a justified concern from Republicans that Democrats are motivated by a desire to delay rather than learn anything of substance.

False. The "concerns" are unjustified because the Democrats simply want to get to the truth.

As repeatedly posted here, this would be a terrible plot if it were just a Democratic hoax, since even if they won there's plenty of time to get another judge out there. It just wouldn't be worth all the hoopla, even from a twisted, amoral perspective. No, the Democrats are being sincere here, and the only reason Republicans don't realize it is because they're so habitually insincere and assume everyone is like them.

There is some truth to this, as there are many Democratic Senators (i.e. Coons), who I feel do seem to want a genuine investigation of these charges. And there certainly should be. But at the same time, the Ford allegations have been used by the Democrats (and by the Republicans in their own way), as a political tool. They certainly arose at a critical juncture, and the Democrats would be foolish if they did not take advantage of them. Partisan concerns should not be forgotten.

[Frodo]

I'm really not sure why Democrats were so happy on Friday. It was already clear that the scope of the investigation would be incredibly narrow, and so many restrictions have been placed on the FBI as to what they can actually investigate that it's clear that they're just trying to make it look like Kavanaugh has been cleared when he really hasn't, and be able to spin the Democrats as the ones who don't respect the process. Flake did play some pretty good politics here. Now he gets to act the moderate hero, and many Democrats will eat it all up.

Democrats Denounce Limits on F.B.I.’s Kavanaugh Inquiry as a ‘Farce’

[136or142]

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/brett-kavanaugh-classmates_us_5bb157bce4b027da00d46d72

Chad Ludington, who went to Yale with Kavanaugh, told the New York Times he often saw Kavanaugh “staggering from alcohol consumption.”

This doesn't contradict anything Kavanaugh said.

It certainly does contradict what Kavanaugh said, it just doesn't necessarily mean he was a 'black out' drunk.

I worked as an accountant for a while in the early 1990s and also earned an accounting diploma.  This was at a time when businesses were computerizing their accounting records (ACCPAC and Simply Acounting were the most popular) but was before what I gather has become the situation now where all financial recording is done electronically,

So, at this time there were two separate external auditing procedures (I'm sure there still are, but that they aren't so interrelated anymore.)  

1.Auditing of internal controls.  An example for larger firms anyway is separation of duties.  So, an auditing firm would check to see that the firm they were auditing would have a policy that those who signed the checks (cheques in Canada) also didn't record the financial entries.  The auditing firm would also see if this policy was actually followed in practice.

2,Auditing of the actual financial statements. This involved (at the time anyway) matching paper records such as checks, invoices, accounts payable and accounts receivable to the appropriate financial statements and accounting (journal) entries.

Because matching paper records to accounting entries was a time consuming process, it was too expensive to check every accounting entry, so sampling of accounting entries was used.  The percentage of accounting entries to be checked was determined by the confidence in the internal controls.  There were actually statistical formulas to determine the amount of sampling required.

So, I presume in an FBI background check like this, it's a similar process: both the process of checking the actual details of the case as told by Dr Ford, and the 'internal control' of checking out Kavanaugh's behavior at the time.

So, the relevance here isn't just whether Kavanaugh's testimony is consistent with Dr Ford's testimony but also to determine whether Kavanaugh's testimony is consistent with what people said about his behavior at the time.

What we know is that in all the areas that we're relevant to his relevant behavior at this time, he seems to have lied in his testimony, whether it was the frequency of his drinking at the time, the amount of his drinking when he drank, his behavior when he was drunk, his definition of the slang terms, his Yearbook description of 'Renate.'  I think it is absolutely valid for the FBI to determine if he lied about these things and, to the degree possibly, if he lied, why he lied.

Obviously personally I think he lied because he's guilty as Hell and he knows it.

[Meclazine for Israel]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRJecfRxbr8

"Look at my calendars."

I lol'd.

[Doomer]

How much of a weirdo conspiracy theorist does it make me to wonder if maybe Trump and the GOP are actually hoping/working toward Kavanaugh being defeated in his nomination, so that it'll motivate Republicans to vote more in the midterms?  Like they'll all blame Democrats and pretend to be ticked off so much so to get out the vote?  Because on the other hand, Kavanaugh being confirmed will motivate Dems to the polls; but a Kavanaugh defeat might not really, but it would motivate the GOP to the polls.

This is what I've come to in the age of Trump: constantly believing what we see and hear from the White House is actually just a front for something worse or a distraction from the truth.

[Democrat 2028]

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/409158-flake-if-i-were-running-for-re-election-not-a-chance-id-call-for-kavanaugh

[Torrain]

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/409158-flake-if-i-were-running-for-re-election-not-a-chance-id-call-for-kavanaugh

Well, at least he’s honest about it.

In the circumstances, he’s the best of a bad bunch.

[Brittain33]

The problem with limiting the investigation and planning to squeak Kavanaugh through is that all the stuff they exclude will come out anyway and get an audience at next year’s House hearings on Kavanaugh’s perjury and assaults, and even though Republicans will get a SC seat they will never hear the end of this, and Kavanaugh will be under a permanent cloud. This will be used to justify Supreme Court Reform by whichever Democrat is smart enough to take up the banner and abolish the filibuster to add two seats to the Court. Republicans play a very dangerous game thinking they can make their own reality here when Kavanaugh’s past is so dirty and compromised.

[Torie]

The problem with limiting the investigation and planning to squeak Kavanaugh through is that all the stuff they exclude will come out anyway and get an audience at next year’s House hearings on Kavanaugh’s perjury and assaults, and even though Republicans will get a SC seat they will never hear the end of this, and Kavanaugh will be under a permanent cloud. This will be used to justify Supreme Court Reform by whichever Democrat is smart enough to take up the banner and abolish the filibuster to add two seats to the Court. Republicans play a very dangerous game thinking they can make their own reality here when Kavanaugh’s past is so dirty and compromised.

That little scenario requires the Dems to pick up two seats net in the Senate.

In any event, I have some trouble believing K will be confirmed if the FBI investigation does not include what Flake and Coons agreed to, with the assent of Collins, etc, to wit a thorough investigation of all three of the allegations made by Ford, Ramirez and Swetnick (and that includes interviewing K and Ford -  lots of open questions there, just take a look at Mitchell's memo for example, and then all of this hard drinking stuff by K (how much is K drinking these days by the way?)). The rumors that go back and forth that it is being trimmed back, if true, seems a really nutter move by the Pubs, with horrible optics.

[Brittain33]

The problem with limiting the investigation and planning to squeak Kavanaugh through is that all the stuff they exclude will come out anyway and get an audience at next year’s House hearings on Kavanaugh’s perjury and assaults, and even though Republicans will get a SC seat they will never hear the end of this, and Kavanaugh will be under a permanent cloud. This will be used to justify Supreme Court Reform by whichever Democrat is smart enough to take up the banner and abolish the filibuster to add two seats to the Court. Republicans play a very dangerous game thinking they can make their own reality here when Kavanaugh’s past is so dirty and compromised.

That little scenario requires the Dems to pick up two seats net in the Senate.

...and a Democratic President, which should make it obvious I was looking at Act 2 taking place in 2021, after another set of Senate elections. Act 1 just requires the House to go Democratic in 2018.

My pessimistic view is that even if the Republicans succeed in making the investigation a whitewash, Collins will be happy to go along with it based on her enthusiasm for Kavanaugh and if she does, Flake will fold, notwithstanding his comments this weekend and if Murkowski and Manchin stay as "no." He's just not a Profiles in Courage guy.