Well, Now Brett Kavanaugh Can Face His Accuser

[the_mother_thing]

Are you sure about that last sentence?

100%. In fact, it’s indelible in my hippocampus.

 

[Alexiszoe]

Putting aside the allegations - the biggest concern that worries me is that as a Supreme Court Judge, he is supposed to be neutral and impartial. However the behavior expressed gives me pause. Ben Wittes, who's been a supporter of Kavanaugh, summed it up succinctly:

"I do not begrudge him the emotion, even the anger. He has been through a kind of hell that would leave any person gasping for air.

But I cannot condone the partisanship—which was raw, undisguised, naked, and conspiratorial—from someone who asks for public faith as a dispassionate and impartial judicial actor. His performance was wholly inconsistent with the conduct we should expect from a member of the judiciary."

Consider the judicial function as described by Kavanaugh himself at his first hearing. That Brett Kavanaugh described a “good judge [as] an umpire—a neutral and impartial arbiter who favors no litigant or policy.” That Brett Kavanaugh reminded us that “the Supreme Court must never be viewed as a partisan institution. The justices on the Supreme Court do not sit on opposite sides of an aisle. They do not caucus in separate rooms.”

A very different Brett Kavanaugh showed up to Thursday’s hearing. This one accused the Democratic members of the committee of a “grotesque and coordinated character assassination,” saying that they had “replaced advice and consent with search and destroy.” After rightly criticizing “the behavior of several of the Democratic members of this committee at [his] hearing a few weeks ago [as] an embarrassment,” this Brett Kavanaugh veered off into full-throated conspiracy in a fashion that made entirely clear that he knew which room he caucused in...

Kavanaugh: "This whole two-week effort has been a calculated and orchestrated political hit, fueled with apparent pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election, fear that has been unfairly stoked about my judicial record, revenge on behalf of the Clintons, and millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups.”

As Charlie Sykes, a thoughtful conservative commentator sympathetic to Kavanaugh, put it on The Weekly Standard’s podcast Friday, “Even if you support Brett Kavanaugh … that was breathtaking as an abandonment of any pretense of having a judicial temperament.” Sykes went on: “It’s possible, I think, to have been angry, emotional, and passionate without crossing the lines that he crossed—assuming that there are any lines anymore.”

Can anyone seriously entertain the notion that a reasonable pro-choice woman would feel like her position could get a fair shake before a Justice Kavanaugh?

Can anyone seriously entertain the notion that a reasonable Democrat, or a reasonable liberal of any kind, would, after that performance, consider him a fair arbiter in, say, a case about partisan gerrymandering, voter identification, or anything else with a strong partisan valence?

Full article here: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/why-i-wouldnt-confirm-brett-kavanaugh/571936/

 

[Maria D]

Yes, I’m fair-minded. That’s why I don’t just “believe all women” simply because we have vaginas.

What/who is an ‘RB Supervisor’? Regardless, unlike others, I don’t need to first verify or run my positions by/through anyone or some ‘movement’ for validation or to make sure it’s okay to independently form opinions and think for myself. I am not a card-carrying member of any bandwagon.

1) I also don't believe all women simply because they have vaginas.
2) The link you gave was indeed for "alleged" lies of Ford.
3) The link I gave was for actual proven lies of Kavanaugh.
4) Your Russian Bot supervisor. If you aren't a Russian troll, I am amazed. Why else would anyone go on and on to discredit Ford while supporting Kavanaugh? Even the Republican senators who are supporting Kavanaugh aren't doing that. They don't waste time trying to discredit Ford, they simply dismiss her.
5) Just as I don't believe that women should be believed just because they have vaginas, I don't believe a lying belligerent entitled lush should be a SJC just because he has a penis.

 

[lovedogs]

1) I also don't believe all women simply because they have vaginas.
2) The link you gave was indeed for "alleged" lies of Ford.
3) The link I gave was for actual proven lies of Kavanaugh.
4) Your Russian Bot supervisor. If you aren't a Russian troll, I am amazed. Why else would anyone go on and on to discredit Ford while supporting Kavanaugh? Even the Republican senators who are supporting Kavanaugh aren't doing that. They don't waste time trying to discredit Ford, they simply dismiss her.
5) Just as I don't believe that women should be believed just because they have vaginas, I don't believe a lying belligerent entitled lush should be a SJC just because he has a penis.

FWIW, those "lies" aren't lies at all. The psychologist one is a f*cking joke. "Research psychologist" IS EXACTLY the correct term to use for her position. She never claimed she was a licensed clinical psychologist. The other two are just pathetic and desperate. Both dumb talking points that have been discredited.

 

[the_mother_thing]

1) I also don't believe all women simply because they have vaginas.
2) The link you gave was indeed for "alleged" lies of Ford.
3) The link I gave was for actual proven lies of Kavanaugh.
4) Your Russian Bot supervisor. If you aren't a Russian troll, I am amazed. Why else would anyone go on and on to discredit Ford while supporting Kavanaugh? Even the Republican senators who are supporting Kavanaugh aren't doing that. They don't waste time trying to discredit Ford, they simply dismiss her.
5) Just as I don't believe that women should be believed just because they have vaginas, I don't believe a lying belligerent entitled lush should be a SJC just because he has a penis.

A Russian Bot? That might be the funniest thing I’ve heard all day. I’ve not had a 23 & Me or Ancestry.com DNA test done, so I cannot confirm that I don’t potentially have some part of my heritage that stems from Russian origins (I know of some European heritage). But I can confirm, I am not programmed nor programmable.

The second funniest thing is that something on HuffPo actually contains facts/proof. The irony of that link is they are suggesting that Kav might have drank too much once and just might not remember the events of that single, one night which Ford alleges; however, Ford herself can’t remember any of the details needed to corroborate her entire story. Her memory has more holes than Swiss cheese, to include things she did just two months ago. So you’ll excuse me if I give HuffPo a hard pass on making factual, evidence-based arguments.

On the rest, you think/feel/believe what you want, and I’ll do the same. That’s the beauty of living in this country. Thank God for the freedom to forumulate our own opinions on things, though I am eagerly awaiting the outcome of this highly demanded, supplemental FBI investigation, just to see if my instincts are right again.

 

[Maria D]

The second funniest thing is that something on HuffPo actually contains facts/proof.

So you think that Kavanaugh told the whole truth and nothing but the truth under oath because HuffPo published a summary of his lies? Are all the people who came out and pointed out his lies (many of them former supporters) also lying? Would they be telling the truth if Fox reported it? Was the drinking age in Maryland actually 18 when Kavanaugh was in high school because HuffPo published that it was 21?

 

[JPie]

 

[the_mother_thing]

So you think that Kavanaugh told the whole truth and nothing but the truth under oath because HuffPo published a summary of his lies? Are all the people who came out and pointed out his lies (many of them former supporters) also lying? Would they be telling the truth if Fox reported it? Was the drinking age in Maryland actually 18 when Kavanaugh was in high school because HuffPo published that it was 21?

Yes, the drinking age in MD in 1982 was 18, and during that same year, it was raised to 21 with grandfathering provisions. I posted a link to this information last week, I believe.

On the rest, again, you choose what you want to believe, and I’ll do the same. We’ll find out soon enough, thanks to McConnell taking the necessary steps to ensure a vote later this week.

 

[Maria D]

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/10/brett-kavanaugh-college-roommate-jamie-roche.html

 

[Maria D]

Yes, the drinking age in MD in 1982 was 18, and during that same year, it was raised to 21 with grandfathering provisions. I posted a link to this information last week, I believe.

In 1982 Kavanaugh was 17. At no time in high school was Kavanaugh the legal drinking age.

 

[lovedogs]

In 1982 Kavanaugh was 17. At no time in high school was Kavanaugh the legal drinking age.

Stop citing facts, @Maria D ! Facts confuse people! More convenient to blindly listen to right wing fringe "news" sources.

 

[Matata]

Facts confuse people!

Someone will be along shortly to state that your facts aren't they're facts and we are free to choose what facts to believe and your truth is not they're truth and truth is fluid if it exists at all and thank goodness we live in a country where we can make our own choices.

 

[the_mother_thing]

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/10/brett-kavanaugh-college-roommate-jamie-roche.html

The only relevant part of Roche’s statement to Ramirez’ claim (and why he probably wasn’t questioned by the FBI) is at the very end (typical in these types of stories): “I do not know if Brett attacked Christine Blasey Ford in high school or if he sexually humiliated Debbie in front of a group of people she thought were her friends.”

In 1982 Kavanaugh was 17. At no time in high school was Kavanaugh the legal drinking age.

I recall no question from any senator in the course of his hearing/s pointedly asking him if he drank underage. And even if they did, so freaking what? He didn’t claim to have never drank underage that I recall in his testimony. I’m not sure if I even know someone who didn’t - at some point in their life - drink a drop of alcohol underage. If having a drink underage would render someone incapable of being a productive citizen, then I suppose we need to start ratcheting up that plan for socialism because we’d have an entire country darn near full of unqualified adults.

 

[the_mother_thing]

Someone will be along shortly to state that your facts aren't they're facts and we are free to choose what facts to believe and your truth is not they're truth and truth is fluid if it exists at all and thank goodness we live in a country where we can make our own choices.

Point me to ONE person posting in this thread who actually, legitimately, legally “has the facts” of this case. Unless Ford, Kav, Judge, Ramirez, Keyser, or Swetnick have a gemstone/diamond addiction like the rest of us to coincidentally be a PS member AND post about this case in particular on this forum, then no one here “has the facts”; it’s all opinion, hypothesis, theories, etc., including all “news” sources quoted (yes, mine as well).

The only thing any of us can do is take them at their word - written and spoken - on the record/under penalty of felony and make a choice about who is more credible. The rest is all noise ...

 

[Maria D]

Oh keep going and you will get to the actual relevant part:

"I do not know if Brett attacked Christine Blasey Ford in high school or if he sexually humiliated Debbie in front of a group of people she thought were her friends. But I can say that he lied under oath. He claimed that he occasionally drank too much but never enough to forget details of the night before, never enough to “black out.” He did, regularly. He said that “boofing” was farting and the “Devil’s Triangle” was a drinking game. “Boofing” and “Devil’s Triangle” are sexual references. I know this because I heard Brett and his friends using these terms on multiple occasions.

I do not argue that Brett or anyone else should be persecuted for teenage drinking antics that are common to many, many Americans. My parents once visited Yale unexpectedly to find that I was unresponsive in my dorm room after a long session at Mory’s where friends and I sang and drank from trophy cups way past our limits. I was not a choirboy, but—unlike Brett—I’m not going on national television and testifying under oath that I was. This is not about drinking too much or even encouraging others to drink. It is not about using coarse language or even about the gray area between testing sexual boundaries with a date and sexual abuse. This is about denial. This is about not facing consequences. This is about lying.

In this case, the lies are not trivial: His lies about sexual terms and his drinking are directly relevant to the accusations of Christine Blasey Ford and Debbie Ramirez, which both involved sexual behavior and heavy drinking. The truth would make him look bad and would bolster the credibility of both of these women. In this climate, had he simply said “I don’t remember” or even “If I did these things in my youth I am sorry,” he might have sailed through the confirmation process. But he lied, under oath, like it was nothing. I can’t imagine that anyone in the Senate wants to confirm an individual to a lifetime appointment on the United States Supreme Court who has demonstrated a willingness to be untruthful under oath about easily verified information."

 

[the_mother_thing]

Stop citing facts, @Maria D ! Facts confuse people! More convenient to blindly listen to right wing fringe "news" sources.

Because HuffPo is just sooooo fair, unbiased and factual.

 

[Dancing Fire]

No Kavanaugh is not a right wing nut case. He has every right to defend himself and show indignation to that panel of dems. To impeach him someone had better come up with a provable crime.

But there is...b/c he drink a 6 pack in HS.

 

[JPie]

Someone will be along shortly to state that your facts aren't they're facts and we are free to choose what facts to believe and your truth is not they're truth and truth is fluid if it exists at all and thank goodness we live in a country where we can make our own choices.

Well, that’s your opinion.

 

[the_mother_thing]

But there is...b/c he drink a 6 pack in HS.

I bet 95% or more of congress members would be out of a job as well if that’s the new standard.

So on second thought ...

 

[the_mother_thing]

And now Ford’s legal team is unhappy with the FBI investigation.

"An FBI supplemental background investigation that did not include an interview of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford-- nor the witnesses who corroborate her testimony-- cannot be called an investigation," the statement read. "We are profoundly disappointed that after the tremendous sacrifice she made in coming forward, those directing the FBI investigation were not interested in seeking the truth."

Seems they are suggesting that what their client testified to - under oath - last week in a ~4 hour hearing that was set up at Ford’s request was not the truth.

Was there some extra super duper recollection of the truth that she was holding out sharing until only when she had the FBI’s ear?

 

[Dancing Fire]

At this point I think we just need to sit back and Let Donald Trump and Lindsey Graham keep talking. The republicans will just do THEMSELVES in.

The so call "me too movement" should keep on harassing the Reps. representatives in public, b/c that will bring more votes for the D party in Nov. Keep up the good work!

 

[Dancing Fire]

They want to live in a world that has opportunities for education and progress for everyone, not just the rich,

Socialism is progress?

 

[OboeGal]

I wish people would delineate between socialism and a welfare state. The US is nowhere near socialism. I doubt most people screaming "Socialism! Socialism!" have any clue what it actually is, and what it would take to get from where the US is economically, to anything even vaguely resembling socialism.

If a welfare state is what you're talking about, there's every likelihood you're referring to the Nordic Model - the economic welfare system implemented by the Nordic states, or 'compassionate capitalism', which operates on a free market system but with government owned welfare safety nets.

The US, of course, already has certain government owned infrastructure, and nobody seems to resent public schools and government owned roads. We also pay our politicians, tho goodness knows why most of the time. But either way - they're paid out of government coffers.

The most interesting correlation, tho, is between social democracy (a la Bernie Sanders and the Nordic welfare system) and ranked happiness of individual countries. On the latest annual list of 'Happiest countries in the world', Finland comes in as number 1, Norway at number 2, and Denmark at number 3. Sweden performed abysmally, staggering in at ...number 9. The US was number 18, and there were 150 countries on the list out of a possible 195.

So I guess they're onto something.

Thank you SO much! There is unending misinformation, misunderstanding, and outright lies told here in the US about the economic systems of the western and northern European countries. As my husband is from the Netherlands (although now a US citizen), I have witnessed firsthand how well compassionate capitalism works. He chose to leave all of his family and friends behind there to come here and do the same scientific defense research that he had done there because he hoped that he could be of service to our military men and women; in doing so, he ended up taking a stunning loss in both standard of living and quality of life, even as a top scientist in his field with an accomplished history and a great deal of hard work under his belt.

 

[Dancing Fire]

If he were my brother I'd be his older sister and I'd be embarrassed as hell to have to the world know that my parents screwed up so bad on his upbringing. His own friends and former classmates describe him as a belligerent entitled punk. What kind of asshat throws their drink at someone in a bar?

you got hold of today's FBI report before the senators?

 

[Dancing Fire]

Where you at the party Ford alleged this to have happened? Or was it one of Swetnick’s alleged gang bang parties? Or did you go to Yale with him and saw him do what Ramirez alleges?

After reading this thread it sounds like at least 8 PSers attended the party.

 

[Dancing Fire]

You sure sound like a Trump supporting white male!!!

My left winger friends said I have turned white. I have been living in the U.S. for too long.

 

[Dancing Fire]

I am equally disgusted by the tweet from Prof. Fair at Georgetown because that kind of rhetoric does not belong in the public square. The thought that she teaches at a university is horrific.

90% of the university Prof. are left wingers. Sad, really sad.

 

[Dancing Fire]

In 1982 Kavanaugh was 17. At no time in high school was Kavanaugh the legal drinking age.

Was Ford at the legal drinking age?

 

[Tekate]

I suppose, don't remember if Clarence brought his son, or Gorsuch brought his kid(s)? does he have any?

Of course there are families of all races, religions and class who support and love their families, I'd say most people do.

It's too bad Kav didn't bring his daughters to the Ford meeting. They would have learned about their Dad's partisan views.. yes we are all allowed our views but they may have seen another Dad they don't know yet. I admire Ms Trump in keeping her son out of the limelight. But kids do have access to the web.

Strange times indeed.

Kav didn’t have his daughters at the Ford hearing, btw. So what if he chose to surround himself with loved ones vs lawyers. I don’t know... maybe it’s kind of a big deal for a person to get nominated to the SC; their family is proud of & supports them; because there still ARE families who support each other for life’s good and bad moments.

 

[Tekate]

So you think a person who is making a bad choice for their health, or future is something I should think that is their prerogative to be dumb? No, I believe education in all aspects of life is a good thing. Obviously low information voters voted for Trump, but that does not mean it was GOOD for them. To me this is akin to knowing that certain airbags pop out and should be replaced and people don't replace them, how stupid is that? it's free. If you are seeing people have a right to be uneducated and dumb, okay I suppose but I care, and I hate to see people hoodwinked like Trump has done. It's very honest of Obama to say he smoked pot and did some coke.. Most people in my circle of high school friends did, but I don't think Obama had any woman come out during his tenure as pres or senator who said he attacked them, dry humped them, tried to tear their clothes off etc. He went to Columbia and Harvard and Occidental... I cannot throw stones at anyone who drank in high schools, and cannot throw stones at people who experimented with drugs - I did both, but I will be highly suspect of anyone who attacks or goes thru life entitled.

Oh yes Kavanaugh IS a right wing nut job and it showed in his loud and juvenile soliloquy against the Clinton's and the mainstream press and his speaking on Fox, this shows me that he is toooooo partisan. He can say what he wants, but if he weren't white and rich and entitled I could easily see him at a trump rally wearing pussy ears mocking democrats. But since he's had the finest in life he is refined about his mocking. If he get's on he get's on, but he's not fit, nor is Clarence Thomas and Gorsuch is illegal. Time will tell how the democrats will act when in power.

How about we let people decide what their own best interests are instead of someone else deciding for them?

Obama was also a dope smoking cocaine snorter per his own words. And I could not care less.

No Kavanaugh is not a right wing nut case. He has every right to defend himself and show indignation to that panel of dems. To impeach him someone had better come up with a provable crime.