Supreme Court

[glunn]

 

A wave in 2018 to take back at least half of Congress is primarily valuable as a means to 2020.  This momentum needs to continue.

 

Luckily, Trump frequently reminds us all of what a massive prick he is.  The Dems don't even have to drum up outrage when he's busy providing plenty of fodder.

I think that the Dems should have a platform for making the country better. There are a lot of voters who don't feel outrage about political matters, but who might turn out if there was a platform that made sense.

[glunn]

 

I initially thought the sexual misconduct allegations were a bad look.  They seemed (I'm struggling for the word here)...convenient?  Easily at risk of skepticism?  I don't know the right phrasing.  I don't want anyone to take that as the act itself was convenient for the victim or anything, but the timing seemed really hard to take at face value.

 

But the victim coming forward, presenting more of the facts behind the case, and removing the anonymity gives it much more credibility.  And I'm glad for that, without it the accusation probably has no real change to his chances of being appointed and it prevents the accusation from being a glaring mark against metoo type accustions.

 

BTW, I'm trying really hard to balance my initial skepticism about the how/when the accusation happened and respect for the victim.  I'm probably failing at it though.

With just one victim it will be "he said / she said".

 

If the allegations are true, there was likely more than one victim. If another credible victim comes forward then that could be "game over." 

 

[gunnarthor]

 

With just one victim it will be "he said / she said".

 

If the allegations are true, there was likely more than one victim. If another credible victim comes forward then that could be "game over." 

Apparently, the woman has documented this for years. Several of her friends knew the story ten or more years ago and she let the Washington Post look at psychological records where she disclosed this event to her doctor. Those might be enough by themselves to stop it.

 

That said, his habit of having an bunch of female law clerks and his push early in the nomination process to frame himself as a friend of women sorta bugged me at the time. I wouldn't be surprised if he did something to one of his clerks back in the day. Not sure anyone would come forward.

[slash129]

 

I wouldn't be surprised if he did something to one of his clerks back in the day.

 

I'm not going to make any excuses for Kavanaugh's past behavior, but these are the types of statements that get lost in translation when recommunicated and then we never get the truth.  

[stringer bell]

I do see it as “he said, she said” at this point. If Kavanaugh stays steadfast in his denial and no other complaint comes out, I doubt anything changes.

 

There are four or possibly five possible “no” votes on Kavanaugh among the Republicans. Does Ford’s testimony change any of those votes? If I were betting today I’d say no.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I initially thought the sexual misconduct allegations were a bad look.  They seemed (I'm struggling for the word here)...convenient?  Easily at risk of skepticism?  I don't know the right phrasing.  I don't want anyone to take that as the act itself was convenient for the victim or anything, but the timing seemed really hard to take at face value.

 

But the victim coming forward, presenting more of the facts behind the case, and removing the anonymity gives it much more credibility.  And I'm glad for that, without it the accusation probably has no real change to his chances of being appointed and it prevents the accusation from being a glaring mark against metoo type accustions.

 

BTW, I'm trying really hard to balance my initial skepticism about the how/when the accusation happened and respect for the victim.  I'm probably failing at it though.

Agreed. When I first heard this, my response was "ehhhhhh, this is all really convenient".

 

Then the details began to emerge that she has been talking about the situation for years and that she contacted Feinstein (ugh) some time back and that she initially wanted to remain anonymous (so this might not be a last-ditch move to distract from the nomination).

 

The more information that comes out, the more I'm listening. I don't know if this is a deal-breaker for Kavanaugh (yet) but there appears to be some pushback gathering against Grassley trying to railroad the nomination through the Senate, as there should be.

[PseudoSABR]

 

I do see it as “he said, she said” at this point. If Kavanaugh stays steadfast in his denial and no other complaint comes out, I doubt anything changes.

There are four or possibly five possible “no” votes on Kavanaugh among the Republicans. Does Ford’s testimony change any of those votes? If I were betting today I’d say no.

She's passed a polygraph, and Kavanaugh's buddy (who was in the room) wrote a book corroborating that he and "Bart O'Kavanaugh" were heavy drinkers.  If she seems at all credible, I don't know how Kavanaugh survives.  How does Kavanaugh respond to a demand that he take a polygraph test?  Does Kavanaugh admit to the heavy drinking? To the possibility that he may have blacked out?

 

I'm not sure we even make it to Monday, I think Trump may pull Kavanaugh before then. 

[jimmer]

And Trump, trying to do more obstruction of justice..

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-says-fbi-should-not-probe-allegations-against-kavanaugh/ar-BBNvXXm?li=BBnb7Kz

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/president-trump-just-seriously-escalated-his-efforts-to-interfere-with-mueller%E2%80%99s-probe/ar-BBNtBy9

 

[D. Hocking]

This cover is a bit amazing.  They did not even call witnesses who were going to support Hill's testimony.  I would like to think it would be handled a bit differently today, but being that they are rushing to do the testimony on Monday and do not think it is necessary to involve the third person, things have not changed that much.  Look at Hatch saying she seems mixed up and Kavenaugh seems like a good guy before hearing any testimony.

 

I think there are many people who want Kavenaugh to completely push the court far right are willing to quickly believe this is a mixed up woman after a half a day of testimony and no investigation.  Look at Collin's rather tepid response compared to when Al Franken took a crass photo.

 

[TheLeviathan]

 

 

The more information that comes out, the more I'm listening. I don't know if this is a deal-breaker for Kavanaugh (yet) but there appears to be some pushback gathering against Grassley trying to railroad the nomination through the Senate, as there should be.

 

There might be enough Republicans getting fed up with their own party (and seeing the writing on the wall for November) that we may start to see some sabotage.  Flake is certainly doing his best to push it that way.

 

Maybe he can rally a few others.  My money is still that Kavanaugh gets approved, but we'll see.  If they could somehow drag this past the Nov. elections, it could be a game changer.  

[Squirrel]

Since D.Hocking brings up Clarence Thomas ...

 

I guess there's not always fire where there's smoke, but there was plenty of fire in Thomas' case and I have a difficult time believing this behavior on Kavanaugh's part is isolated. We go back to Thomas and Anita Hill. It wasn't isolated. There were women lined up to tell their stories about Thomas and his behavior and the judiciary committee at that time quashed it. Who knows why ... maybe they were worried about skeletons in their own closets, or maybe this was just how it was done then and women weren't to be 'believed' or it was just accepted male behavior, or maybe they didn't want to make a deal of it because potential future retribution, or, being politicians, maybe they were more concerned about their own careers and making so many women's stories public was a deal breaker for them (thank you, Joe Biden /s). So, Anita Hill became the lone voice at the time and it was a 'he said, she said' situation as far as the public knew, and we all know how that went. But the politicians at that time, they KNEW. They ALL knew that Clarence Thomas was horrible person he was accused of and still passed through.

 

I have a difficult time with this one, even if it's a lone voice, because of the years she's dealt with this in therapy. While she didn't file a police report, there is ample evidence, imo, to believe her story, that this is a trauma she has been dealing with for some time. I hope if there are others they come forward. I hope the Senate really gives this behavior some serious thought because this is not someone that should be deciding any laws in regards to the female population, or anyone for that matter. I hope. But in this instance, hope won't get me anywhere and he will pass through, too.

[TheLeviathan]

The victim coming forward and providing so much context and evidence has turned this into more than a "he said/she said" IMO.  

 

I think it was a weak "he said/she said" about a week ago, but we're into much different territory the last few days.  I'm not sure more women need to accuse him given how credible this woman appears to be.  Her willingness to come forward really changed the equation.

[slash129]

And Trump, trying to do more obstruction of justice..

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-says-fbi-should-not-probe-allegations-against-kavanaugh/ar-BBNvXXm?li=BBnb7Kz

 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/president-trump-just-seriously-escalated-his-efforts-to-interfere-with-mueller%E2%80%99s-probe/ar-BBNtBy9

Referencing MSN(left) or Fox(right) articles is worthless if you seek the truth.

[jimmer]

 

Referencing MSN(left) or Fox(right) articles is worthless if you seek the truth.

Those are just the links I provided for easy access.  They aren't exclusively on MSN.

 

And MSN just posted those articles on their site, they didn't write them.  One was written by Reuters.

 

And I believe everything those articles said.  Because that's the kind of scumbag Trump is. Plus, they quoted the press secretary in one of them, confirming the story.

[PseudoSABR]

Dr. Ford is demanding an FBI investigation before appearing to testify.  I think that's a sound strategy.  The GOP may very well throw up their hands and claim they tried to hear her and force through the nomination, but I don't think that's politically viable. 

[PseudoSABR]

 

Referencing MSN(left) or Fox(right) articles is worthless if you seek the truth.

MSN does not equal MSNBC.  MSN is mostly just a news aggregator which is interfaced with Internet Explorer.  

[slash129]

Those are just the links I provided for easy access. They aren't exclusively on MSN.

 

And MSN just posted those articles on their site, they didn't write them. One was written by Reuters.

 

And I believe everything those articles said. Because that's the kind of scumbag Trump is. Plus, they quoted the press secretary in one of them, confirming the story.

My bad on mixing up MSN w/ MSNBC

[jimmer]

 

My bad on mixing up MSN w/ MSNBC

no worries

[Squirrel]

My bad on mixing up MSN w/ MSNBC

Easy enough to do.

 

It’s difficult to find truly neutral news sources, but you can find balance with those that are only marginally right or left vs those that are intentionally right or left.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

Easy enough to do.

It’s difficult to find truly neutral news sources, but you can find balance with those that are only marginally right or left vs those that are intentionally right or left.

Which is why I fact check every article that seems off or slightly tainted against what Reuters has to say about it.

[stringer bell]

The news digest I read shows stories from all sides. Today’s Kavanaugh topic was wall to wall smears of the accuser from conservative sites. Add in the quotes from Senators indicating they will only interview (cross examine) the accuser with no corroborating witnesses or experts in the field. The GOP is going to ram Kavanaugh through no matter what and they have the support of conservative media.

 

I still question Feinstein’s motives in waiting to send the letter to the FBI, but this whole thing has been a rigged game from the beginning.

[Brock Beauchamp]

 

I still question Feinstein’s motives

This is pretty much a permanent state for me. I so wish Ford's information hadn't been passed to her of all people. I get that she's the head of the Democratic side of the Judiciary Committee but that's part of the problem.

 

Democrats, get that woman OUT of positions of power. It hurts you so much more than it helps. She's the kind of establishment politicker that the country should reject from both sides of the aisle (in my eyes, she's McConnell Lite; not quite as vile but mostly because she's not as good at it as Mitch, not because she doesn't try as hard).

[Craig Arko]

This is pretty much a permanent state for me. I so wish Ford's information hadn't been passed to her of all people. I get that she's the head of the Democratic side of the Judiciary Committee but that's part of the problem.

 

Democrats, get that woman OUT of positions of power. It hurts you so much more than it helps. She's the kind of establishment politicker that the country should reject from both sides of the aisle (in my eyes, she's McConnell Lite; not quite as vile but mostly because she's not as good at it as Mitch, not because she doesn't try as hard).

Of course, it would also be nice if the Republicans would place a woman on the Judiciary Committee for the first time, ever.

[PseudoSABR]

I don't doubt that Feinstein's motives were in part political.  But Dr. Ford's reluctance to come forward made it easy for Feinstein to hold it until the 11th hour, and finally force Dr. Ford's hand. 

 

The timing issue is only an issue because the GOP is trying to ramrod Kavanaugh in as quickly as possible.  The only need for expediency is political one.    I still think it's absurd that something like 90% of his writings from his time at the Whitehouse under W. haven't been released (even to the Senators).

[Squirrel]

I'm prefacing this with this warning: this is an OPINION piece, and an opinion piece by someone who is a LIBERAL political consultant. So, there is definite angle on it. However, some of what he lays out there, of just who Kavanaugh is, is a bit, well ... you decide.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/i-knew-brett-kavanaugh-during-his-years-republican-operative-don-ncna907391

[Mike Sixel]

Nothing about how she is being treated is a surprise. Sometimes I wonder just how much progress we are really making. What a sad world ....

[Squirrel]

 

Nothing about how she is being treated is a surprise. Sometimes I wonder just how much progress we are really making. What a sad world ....

The more things change the more they stay the same. I say this to just about every and any issue. Laws are one thing, attitudes are another. And everything goes out the window when power and control are at stake. There is no equality in our society. None.

[PseudoSABR]

Anita Hill: How to Get the Kavanaugh Hearings Right

[PseudoSABR]

https://twitter.com/jaybookmanajc/status/1042386834284789760

 

No wonder they don't want an investigation.

[Brock Beauchamp]

At this point, the pragmatist in me is hoping that Kavanaugh gets railroaded through Congress and the vote is successful next week after Ford declines to testify due to the lack of an investigation into the accusation.

 

Because, let's face it, Trump is going to get "his guy" either way. The chance of Democrats taking the Senate is tiny.

 

But if they railroad Kavanaugh through and then Ford (and others) get their story out through the media, the GOP could be looking at a real ****storm just weeks before the election. I think the chance of Democrats taking the Senate actually increases if Kavanaugh is successfully put on the court (and I don't know if it really matters either way whether Kavanaugh is put on the court or Trump finds another young conservative to take his place).