Patterico's Pontifications

9/27/2018

Round-up of Today’s Events [UPDATED]

Filed under: General — JVW @ 5:03 pm



[guest post by JVW]

Just trying to encapsulate the slow news day with some opinion from the right regarding what went on today on Capitol Hill. I’m frankly not interested in the left’s take on events as the vast majority of them have approached this whole confirmation imbroglio in bad faith, but if you come across anything reasonable from our ideological opponents you are welcome to post it in the comments.

Over at National Review, Rich Lowry is dismayed at the kid-gloves handling of Professor Ford:

Christine Blasey Ford was compelling and sympathetic. Clearly, she sincerely believes her account. But that doesn’t mean it’s correct. She very well could be mistaken about a long-ago memory, which is why Republicans needed to draw out the gaps in her story, walk through how others contradict her, and highlight the complete lack of corroborating evidence. The designated questioner, Rachel Mitchell, failed to do this effectively at all.

But he was heartened by Judge Kavanaugh’s strong defense of his character:

It was tremendous, a rhetorical tour de force. It was personal, detailed, persuasive, and moving. A lot of commentary is focusing on his anger — but if he’s innocent, he has every right to be furious, indeed should be furious. [. . .] [H]e managed to buttress his credibility and question hers, without seeming nasty or dismissive.

Powerline’s Scott Johnson, like Rich Lowry, didn’t think the GOP came armed for battle with the devious Dems:

The Democrats play to win and have a unity that eludes Republicans. They are unconstrained by norms of decency or by the otherwise applicable rules. The game they are playing is transparent. As Bob Dylan might put it, she’s only a pawn in their game.

I have no idea what the attorney questioning Ford on behalf of Republicans. She made a point or two and may have made others I missed. The point of many questions was not apparent to me. She seemed worse than ineffectual.

Yet he too (#HeToo) was partially assuaged by Judge Kavanaugh’s grace under pressure:

Judge Kavanaugh took the opportunity of his statement to defend his life. It took him 35 years to build his reputation. The Democrats have destroyed it. They have taken away a good share of his life. He responded entirely appropriately while proclaiming his innocence of the charge and making out the wrong done to him by the Democrats. He drew on his 1982 calendar to go a long way to refute the allegation raised against him by Christine Blasey Ford. He addressed facts and cited corroborative testimony.

Writing at Fox News, Andy McCarthy also frets that the GOP questioning of Professor Ford didn’t go very well:

Democratic senators were pointed in their questions and speechifying. Republicans were ostentatiously deferential to Ford, while the hearing format guaranteed that their approach lacked continuity and focused questioning. In fact, at the end of the testimony, [GOP counsel Rachel] Mitchell laughed with Ford, commiserating with her about how bad the hearing format was. All of this strengthened Ford’s standing and made her a more sympathetic figure.

Also at NR, David French reminds us that despite Prof. Ford’s forceful testimony, she introduced no new evidence in the case to buttress her shocking claims:

The evidence is no stronger this afternoon than it was before Dr. Ford testified. When this controversy began, I said that her claims were serious enough that, if true, Kavanaugh should not be confirmed. Further, I said that that she should only have to carry the lowest burden of proof — to establish that her claims were more likely than not. If you step back, look at the totality of the evidence and consider that she has brought no new evidence to the committee, I still don’t believe she has met that minimal burden.

Before the testimony even began, Thomas Wheatly at The Federalist made the point that we can’t let emotion overcome logic:

Empathy’s acolytes tell us that when a person has been harmed or experienced an injustice, the moral imperative–at all costs–is to rectify that injustice and ameliorate the harm. One must not be distracted by any fallout from secondary and tertiary concerns, because the immediate harm, by virtue of its vividness, deserves our our unfettered emotional investment. [. . .]

The Kavanaugh fight cannot and should not be solved by putting ourselves in others’ shoes. Reason, not empathy, is what is needed. And reason says this: There is not enough evidence in the public domain at this time to clearly settle this issue. More information is needed. [. . .]

Lindsey Graham appears to be playing the same role for Judge Kavanaugh that Arlen Specter played for Clarence Thomas 27 years ago, that of the GOP “moderate” who rouses his inner conservative in order to protect a man who he thinks is being unfairly railroaded. At NR, Jack Crowe recaps Senator Graham’s remarks and embeds the video. If you want to see a great example of the partisan divide in our country, run search for “Lindsey Graham” and then click over to News and check out the attaboys from the right juxtaposed to the “my God, the man is off his rocker” reaction from the left.

A lot of the real hot takes these days are of course on Twitter, but I have avoided that particular opinion portal today and I think I will do so for the rest of the week through the weekend. There’s no need to plow through all of the noise that it going to be trapped there.

Here’s my take: Professor Ford’s testimony and Judge Kavanaugh’s testimony in a perfect world ought to be a wash, but in this era of #MeToo certitude I will bet that she will come out slightly the better in public opinion. But I also have believed all along that it doesn’t matter one whit. Despite all of this grandstanding and caterwauling we are exactly at the same place we were the day after Professor Ford’s accusations were first made public: Can the GOP get 50 votes for his confirmation and have Vice-President Pence cast the tiebreaker? I think the Democrats have succeeded in taking Senators Manchin, Donnelly, Heitkamp, McCaskill, Nelson, and Tester off the hook in terms of being able to vote against him without hurting their reelection chances.

It now comes down to the potential jellyfishes on the GOP side:

Susan Collins seems to have bonded with Judge Kavanaugh during their interview earlier, as she immediately afterwards announced that she was satisfied with him as a judge. Does she have the sand to continue with her support?

Bob Corker wasn’t originally someone who was thought to be wavering, but he was adamant that the hearings be reopened and more evidence collected. Has he been satisfied?

Jeff Flake also made a big show of “she must be heard,” so does he now fall on the no-new-evidence-has-been-presented-side or the credible-is-damn-near-the-same-as proven side? Does he hate Trump so much that he wants to poke him in the eye one last time on his way out? The late John McCain had praised Judge Kavanaugh at the time of his nomination, and despite his own tendency to grandstand one can see Sen. McCain taking a very dim view of how these proceedings have unfolded. Does Flake honor his late colleague by remaining a judicial conservative?

I don’t know what to make of Lisa Murkowski. Because she’s from a notoriously corrupt family political machine I never know if she sees this vote as an opportunity to burnish her GOP credentials or an opportunity to win some plaudits from the left and establish her maverick streak. You will recall that the state GOP in Alaska tried to oust her from her seat by nominating someone else, only to have her run and win as a write-in candidate. She therefore might feel that she owes the GOP nothing. My thinking is that her vote might be the shakiest of all.

It’s sad what we have become, and Democrats will rue the day that they determined that this was the way to defeat nominees. I can’t wait until Kamala Harris is called upon to explain why it’s OK to use a corrupt, aging sugar daddy to launch her political career.

– JVW

UPDATE BY PATTERICO: I listened to the beginning of the hearing on my drive in to work today. I guess I sound like I am saying “Me Too” (no pun intended) when I write what I write here, since I was working all day and had no chance to opine, but you can see my immediate take from these contemporaneous tweets:

You don’t hire a sex crimes prosecutor to attack an alleged victim of sex crimes. You hire a sex crimes prosecutor to allow an alleged victim of sex crimes to present her story as clearly and sympathetically as possible. And that’s what happened this morning. When I heard Blasey Ford admit that she had talked to her good friend about the incident, the prosecutor simply thanked Ford for the correction and moved on. I was screaming questions at the radio. Is this is the same friend who already told the world she has no idea what you’re talking about? Did she say anything different to you? Etc.

When I got to work I made a friendly bet with a colleague that Trump would withdraw the nomination. I was convinced Kavanaugh was toast.

Then, during a drive to the coroner’s office for a meeting with a Deputy Medical Examiner, I heard a good chunk of Kavanaugh’s opening statement. It was passionate and full of the sort of fantastic evidence that Republicans were too weak to bring up themselves this morning. Finally Republican Senators seemed energized, and I realized with relief that I was going to lose the bet with my colleague.

He’s not out of the woods, with his fate in the hands of the likes of Susan Collins. But Republicans finished the day a lot stronger than they started it.

UPDATE x2: WTF I love Lindsey Graham now.

UPDATE x3 (JVW): Thanks to Patterico for providing the Graham video. There is another version over at The Federalist (it won’t allow me to embed it here) which has a camera angle in which they pan over at the 1:01 mark to show Feinstein, Durbin, and Leahy with kind of hang-dog looks on their faces. Leahy actually turns away from Graham during the Senator’s philippic. It’s marvelous.

355 Responses to “Round-up of Today’s Events [UPDATED]”

  1. It’s going to be a wretched run-up to November. Let’s hope it’s not equally grim after that.

    JVW (773988)

  2. Mr. Graham was far and away the least cowardly Republican senator today

    Ben Sasse on the other hand my god what a sick little suckboy that on is

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  3. oopers that *one* is i mean

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  4. I’m glad Harris was mentioned. I found her interaction near the end to be particularly ugly. The yes or no thing, the gotcha about watching Ford, the complete lack of compassion or presumption of innocence. Ford gets to go home to her life now, used and discarded by this thing today.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  5. French has been nailing it all week and his latest is no exception.

    Paul Montagu (0e687b)

  6. The focus on how this was a Democratic plot may not matter to the public but it matters to the Senators. I think Murkowski is the only one who may not care so the GOP should follow the Dem playbook and buy her vote.

    DRJ (15874d)

  7. Ford gets to go home to her life now, used and discarded by this thing today.

    Well, at least her soon-to-be seven-figure GoFundMe will pay for as many additional doors as she wants.

    So there’s that.

    Dave (eff089)

  8. After the hearing, moderate Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Lisa Murkowksi, R-Alaska, as well as Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va. and Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., huddled to discuss the nomination, Fox News confirmed.

    They talked for approximately 30 minutes before the GOP Conference meeting scheduled Thursday evening ahead of Friday’s planned Judiciary Committee vote on whether to recommend Kavanaugh’s confirmation to the full Senate.

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  9. Joe Manchin won’t be coming back, so he might as well leave with his loyalty to his party intact. Flake will do whatever his women at home tell him to.

    nk (dbc370)

  10. 9… hold the stereotypes… you’ll awaken the ghost of Porter Rockwell…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  11. The GOP strategery with Mitchell was obvious: Prevent defense. There was no winning against her as they had no smoking gun evidence against her. They did manage to lay a predicate of outside interests somewhat dictating to the “victim” how her case was to be presented – she was no master of her own destiny and it was NOT the eeeeeeeeevil GOP who took that from her.

    The (non)facts elicited paved the way for the scorched earth reaction of BK and of several eeeeeeevil and male (I know, redundant) GOP pols. Those calendars, in the end, saved the nomination.

    The main mission was accomplished: Flake will vote to confirm tomorrow.

    Would you have taken that result at about 1 PM ET?

    Ed from SFV (6d42fa)

  12. Forgot to add…Donnelly is done if he does not vote to confirm BK.

    When BK invoked the prayers of his daughter, every evangelical who turned out for Trump resolved to come out for Braun. The polls are bad for him as an incumbent as it is. A bump in evangelical turnout absolutely dooms him.

    Ed from SFV (6d42fa)

  13. Wyoming usually gets the credit, but it was Utah Territory which was the first to give women the vote. Then had to take it back as a condition of being admitted to statehood.

    nk (dbc370)

  14. “I can’t wait until Kamala Harris is called upon to explain why it’s OK to use a corrupt, aging sugar daddy to launch her political career.”

    SugarMackDaddy, please. Get it right. The only fella I know of who spent $50K on a new Miata when they were first introduced.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  15. “In the end, there’s likely to be as much doubt as certainty going out of this room today,” Flake continued. “And as we make decisions going forward, I hope that people will recognize that. And in the rhetoric that we use and the language that we use going forward, that we’ll recognize that there is doubt. We’ll never move beyond that and just have a little humility on that front.”

    does anyone here speak cowardly clot-muffin?

    seriously what does this mean

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  16. 13… #DeadwoodSuffragetteCity

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  17. Don’t worry, he doesn’t even know. Blumenthal took a break from his call of duty reenactment to reduce all doubt. A fit the beardest Marxist well there was no doubt to remove.

    narciso (d1f714)

  18. The committee will vote tomorrow, which means all GOP Senators are on board, as they should be.

    Paul Montagu (0e687b)

  19. @2. He was auditioning, Mr. Feet.

    The role of Attorney General is opening up in a few months. Very off-Broadway, of course.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  20. i’m not sure about that

    i think

    do you wanna know what I think

    i think Mr. Graham is enjoying the senate a lot more now that McCain is dead

    i think it’s been very liberating for him

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  21. “Democrats will rue the day that they determined that this was the way to defeat nominees.”

    As likely as NeverTrump rueing the day they threw in their lot with the likes of Gloria Allred.

    16tons (3192b6)

  22. As likely as NeverTrump rueing the day they threw in their lot with the likes of Gloria Allred.

    16tons (3192b6) — 9/27/2018 @ 5:55 pm

    Can you give an example?

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  23. I see the GOP going soft on Ford as being a necessary thing, there was absolutely nothing to be gained by doing otherwise and a lot of potential harm in that route. If this were something that were going to be decided on facts then it would matter but the weak gruel of these facts are pretty much irrelevant. Just like with Thomas the left is going to believe an unspeakably evil man got the nod while the right goes “but there is nothing verifiable here” (actually I would say that is even more true in this case than Thomas’).

    Soronel Haetir (86a46e)

  24. that’s a very good point Mr. tons

    nevertrump will be right back acting just like leahy and blumenthal the second a deplorable like gauche lifeydoodle Roy Moore starts sniffing around the taint of establishment power

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  25. The hanging of judge Moore, tastefully done of course.

    narciso (d1f714)

  26. Flake’s in, Murkowski’s out, Collin’s in, Manchin’s out.

    Murkowski’s out for reason’s unrelated to high school antics, Alaska is very hard against Kavanaugh, for tribal right’s reasons.

    So it’s 50-50 Pence votes for Kavanaugh.

    Colonel Klink (1ad597)

  27. I see the GOP going soft on Ford as being a necessary thing

    if they do confirm Mr. K our dainty Miss Ford will be on the receiving end of one of the sharpest and most forceful pimp-slaps ever delivered in modern political times

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  28. @20. Dinner theater can be limiting, Mr. Feet; he gets a big, black SUV and a driver, too.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  29. The Democrats seem to have been reduced to “clearly, he’s too angry and partisan to serve on the Court.” Collins isn’t going to immolate herself for that. Graham’s anger today was largely meant for Jeff Flake’s ears, and I suspect it will keep him in the fold. I suspect Corker doesn’t want to become an even bigger hate object for a majority of Republicans by sinking this nomination. Murkowski has the most breathing room, as she isn’t up for re-election until 2022, but I suspect she won’t be the first to jump. Unless things change, I suspect the vote will go 11-10 in committee, and at least 51 votes to confirm when the final vote is taken.

    M Scott Eiland (b16b32)

  30. Corker’s a yes, per his Twitter feed a little while ago:

    https://twitter.com/SenBobCorker/status/1045475440528412678

    M Scott Eiland (b16b32)

  31. If Kavanaugh had not shown emotion the left would be saying it’s easy to see him as an unfeeling rapist. It’s almost comical hearing the moonbats insisting his behavior is an indication of anything.

    harkin (a4b010)

  32. I want to send Bob Corker a box of chocolates.

    And give the middle-finger salute to the Trumpkins whining about #NeverTrump. This is the guy who was the first to call for adult day care for Mr. President.

    nk (dbc370)

  33. The check from Boeing bounced, so it appears dord did have a thing for Garrett, maybe Whelan was on to something inartfully expressed

    Narciso (4e48f2)

  34. “Unless things change, I suspect the vote will go 11-10 in committee, and at least 51 votes to confirm when the final vote is taken.”

    M Scott Eiland (b16b32) — 9/27/2018 @ 6:11 pm

    Your keyboard to God’s ears… wait… you know what I mean. Kavanaugh has corroboration, Ford does not. And thank God they scuttled the female prosecutor, she was ineffective. Ford came off sounding weak, helpless and damaged as she had been coached to do. She has issues.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  35. Corkers baby was the rhodes road show.
    What is there to investigate?

    Narciso (4e48f2)

  36. 32… everybody should give it a rest, close ranks. It is the people who recognize what’s in play here, what’s at stake here vs. the heart of darkness. If you care for the Rule of Law, you know which side of the line you must place yourself.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  37. it’s all about unity and mutual repect

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  38. And thank God they scuttled the female prosecutor, she was ineffective.

    She served her purpose. After Graham stepped in, there was really no more point in using her. At that stage, it was better for Democrats to ask their gotcha questions and for Republican Senators to call BS.

    Paul Montagu (0e687b)

  39. It would be nice to know who leaked Ford’s name. The Senate will probably find out but they may not tell the rest of us.

    DRJ (15874d)

  40. Probably ricky seidman or that fmr?? Feinstein staffers, but she was in contact with the post before she contacted Feinstein

    Narciso (4e48f2)

  41. Ford’s testimony was mixed. It’s clear she believes what she’s says about BK. But her story has huge holes and her command of even recent facts is sketchy.

    She is a college prof but she has no idea who or how her legal fees are being paid. She didn’t know about the offer the committee made to come to her even though that was in the news. She says her friend doesn’t back up her story for medical reasons and when she was explaining that it just seemed like she drifted off. She doesn’t seem to have any clue who leaked her name to the press. At one point one of the senators, I think KH, was recounting her account of the alleged attack and she was just smiling and sort of looking around the room. She says the lie detector took a while and she cried the through it but the guy doing tells fox it was only two questions. How does he get a baseline if she’s crying the entire time.

    She said she has anxiety issues. I’m wondering if she was medicated.

    Tomorrow I fully expect the D’s will call on the FBI to investigate this “daughter” and her “prayer”. They’ll need to know if this really happened and whether the prayer was to satan or some lesser demon.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  42. The role of Attorney General is opening up in a few months.

    And (to paraphrase Allahpundit) what senator could turn down the opportunity to follow Jeff Sessions’ career path?

    Dave (445e97)

  43. She served her purpose. After Graham stepped in, there was really no more point in using her. At that stage, it was better for Democrats to ask their gotcha questions and for Republican Senators to call BS.

    I wasn’t watching, but I can’t imagine Rachel Mitchell was given free reign to ask whatever questions she chose. They must have, at a minimum, given her an outline of the questions they wanted asked, and allowed her to organize and/or supplement them.

    Dave (445e97)

  44. The prosecutor is still involved:

    Republican senators who convened with Collins, Murkowski and Flake during a meeting of the entire Senate GOP conference — which followed the smaller meeting that Collins hosted in her hideaway office — said the moderates gave no hint of how they would vote.

    One Republican in the room said “there was no indication given in the meeting.”

    Rachel Mitchell, the sex crimes prosecutor whom Republicans hired to handle the questioning of Ford, did not make any recommendation about how to vote.

    Instead she walked GOP lawmakers through the facts of the case and her perspective of the testimony.

    She came across as being kind to Ford and thanked her so the moderates will probably view her as neutral and they will be open to her presentation. I wonder what she said.

    DRJ (15874d)

  45. It’s over for the Dems, assuming those same votes are all for Kavanaugh. Link.

    Paul Montagu (0e687b)

  46. She served her purpose. After Graham stepped in, there was really no more point in using her. At that stage, it was better for Democrats to ask their gotcha questions and for Republican Senators to call BS.

    Yep, plus after LG went nuclear, Ted Cruz’s contribution seemed almost innocuous.

    The people arguing for more aggressive questioning of Professor Ford IMO didn’t get the situation and its dangers. No amount of intense cross-examination (as Professor Dershowitz was calling for) would have done anything but cause more hesitant answers and interventions by counsel. Her story already has a lot of holes in it–punching a couple of more in it at the expense of giving the Democrats exactly what they wanted (“old white male Republicans being mean to the victim”) wouldn’t have been a good trade.

    M Scott Eiland (b16b32)

  47. Whatever happens, the Dems have managed to light up the base…the Republican base. I am not a Trumpster, but I would do anything to get his Justices confirmed and to keep the Dems away from power.

    Patricia (3363ec)

  48. It would be nice to know who leaked Ford’s name. The Senate will probably find out but they may not tell the rest of us.

    If memory serves, everyone thought at the time that it was a staffer of Howard Metzenbaum (D-OH) who had leaked Anita Hill’s claims to the media. During the committee hearings, Metzenbaum used some of his time to express outrage that his staffer was being smeared in this manner and harrumphed that it was simply not possible that one of his people had done the deed. I don’t think he really changed anyone’s mind on who the culprit was, and I think I remember hearing that years and years later it was pretty much established that yes indeed, it was Metzenbaum’s staffer who had in fact leaked the info.

    So that’s my round-about way of saying that I’m sure it was someone on Feinstein’s staff who leaked the memo, unless it was Prof. Ford’s Congresswoman’s staffers who did it.

    JVW (42615e)

  49. Whatever happens, the Dems have managed to light up the base…the Republican base. I am not a Trumpster, but I would do anything to get his Justices confirmed and to keep the Dems away from power.

    The key will be if the level of outrage at the behavior of the Democrats can be kept at fever pitch until Election Day even if Kavanaugh is confirmed. There’s a temptation to relax after a win–but a failed assassin is an assassin who can try again. The RNC needs to slam ads into every place that votes that are gettable by Republicans can see them, reminding them that if they don’t turn out massively in November, Pelosi, Swalwell, Hirono, and Blumenthal will be running Congress and making sure that there will be no more Republican judicial nominees being approved for two years. They might even start blocking cabinet appointments. That needs to be driven home until they’re sick of seeing and hearing it.

    M Scott Eiland (b16b32)

  50. Jimmy Buffett has “Boat drinks.” Dr. Ford has “Beach friends.”

    Donnelly gonna tell Schumer to stick it. Too late, Joe.

    Sen. Grahamnesty received huge applause when he entered the GOP Senate Conference after the hearing. There ain’t gonna be no wall, y’all.

    Ed from SFV (6d42fa)

  51. Whatever happens, the Dems have managed to light up the base…the Republican base.

    I don’t mean to rain on your parade, Patricia, but I’m concerned that this is going to take more than just a “base” election. I think it’s going to come down to how moderates and independents break in these close elections for toss-up seats. Polls show that at least a plurality if not a majority of people now don’t think that Kavanaugh should be confirmed. (Granted, those polls may be BS.) If that is true, then we have to hope that the polls reflect the fact that heavy Democrat districts and states that aren’t even in play are overwhelmingly anti-Kavanaugh, but toss-up districts are more inclined to be put off by the Democrats’ obviously bad-faith way of addressing this.

    That aside, I do want to say now that I think Ted Cruz will beat Robbie O’Rourke by at least 55% – 45%. Democrats will once again have to put off the Blue Texas dreams for a couple more years.

    JVW (42615e)

  52. The words “Stalinist Show Trial” came to mind today. There was zero interest in getting at the truth, and all political posturing to score points. The Democratic Senators already said in advance that they believed her and were not planning on voting for him. So why waste the taxpayers’ money on a show trial.

    Bored Lawyer (4e1885)

  53. Could’ve missed it, but has GWB ever said anything in support of Kavanaugh’s nomination?

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  54. I think he was basenghu coronello.

    Narciso (4e48f2)

  55. Worry not, Colonel.

    Even if you don’t like GWB, it’s hard to say that they guy isn’t loyal to those who served him well.

    JVW (42615e)

  56. Except Cruz.

    DRJ (15874d)

  57. Since I was in the office, busy and away from a TV, just catching up on Ford’s performance. I got home in time for Kavanaugh.

    I don’t understand why anyone would be impressed with Ford’s weak story. And have any of the experienced legal minds here weighed in on how that Az prosecutor failed to punch any of the obvious holes in her story. Bad choice, but Kavanaugh – although far from perfect – was sincere, outraged and let the Democrats know it. My wife was weeping right along with many otherswhen he described his 10 year old’s prayer.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  58. Levin thinks it was the right touch, the gop caucus were skittish like scared rabbits till Cavanaugh called out spartacus and even splurge flake followed through.

    Narciso (4e48f2)

  59. 55… I supported Bush, voted for him twice and was very thankful we had him at the helm – and not Manbearpig – after 9/11. My wife mentioned it and asked if I’d heard anything from Bush re: Judge K … and I hadn’t.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  60. It’s like that minefield I’ve referred to in the past.

    Narciso (4e48f2)

  61. Ed from SFV at #50 saying what Mickey Kaus is thinking.

    urbanleftbehind (c8c554)

  62. 52… good question. The GOP should be thankful that at least Graham… Lindsey freakin’ Graham!!!… filled the breach when the rest of the weak-kneed, inept, afraid of their own shadow Senators showed up and made nice.

    Grassley has a good heart, good instincts, but a younger man with energy and vitality should have had that duty. And no, not Ben “Sassy” Sasse. Cruz? Yes!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  63. I think the Shrub is so besotted with Michelle Obama, that’s all he can think about these days.

    nk (dbc370)

  64. that’s just beyond sad, nk, I think it was Cavanaugh righteous anger that opened the door.

    Narciso (4e48f2)

  65. Dianne Feinstein… who was once a fair-minded, honorable person now goes out of her way to destroy careers and provide long term employment – complete with bennies – to Chinese spies.

    Sad.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  66. Hounding them in the halls and now this… “Somebody working from a House of Representatives office is editing the Wikipedia pages of Republican senators to post what looks like their home addresses.”

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  67. @39. Meh. It would be nice to know who wrote that mystery op-ed last year, too. Oh, wait, –or was that last week… or the week before… so much winning, you lose track of time. 😉

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  68. Harvey the six foot rabbit,

    Narciso (4e48f2)

  69. Corrupt, aging sugar daddy? You mean Trump?

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  70. Grassley has a good heart, good instincts, but a younger man with energy and vitality should have had that duty. And no, not Ben “Sassy” Sasse. Cruz? Yes!

    Uh, in an election year in which he is getting a surprisingly strong challenge from a fake Latino from El Paso? No way Cruz steps into the bad cop role against Professor Ford.

    JVW (42615e)

  71. Corrupt, aging sugar daddy? You mean Trump?

    Trump pays off his strumpets in cash. Willie Brown apparently gets them started in the sewer of San Francisco Democrat politics.

    JVW (42615e)

  72. UPDATE BY PATTERICO: I listened to the beginning of the hearing on my drive in to work today. I guess I sound like I am saying “Me Too” (no pun intended) when I write what I write here, since I was working all day and had no chance to opine, but you can see my immediate take from these contemporaneous tweets:

    You don’t hire a sex crimes prosecutor to attack an alleged victim of sex crimes. You hire a sex crimes prosecutor to allow an alleged victim of sex crimes to present her story as clearly and sympathetically as possible. And that’s what happened this morning. When I heard Blasey Ford admit that she had talked to her good friend about the incident, the prosecutor simply thanked Ford for the correction and moved on. I was screaming questions at the radio. Is this is the same friend who already told the world she has no idea what you’re talking about? Did she say anything different to you? Etc.

    When I got to work I made a friendly bet with a colleague that Trump would withdraw the nomination. I was convinced Kavanaugh was toast.

    Then, during a drive to the coroner’s office for a meeting with a Deputy Medical Examiner, I heard a good chunk of Kavanaugh’s opening statement. It was passionate and full of the sort of fantastic evidence that Republicans were too weak to bring up themselves this morning. Finally Republican Senators seemed energized, and I realized with relief that I was going to lose the bet with my colleague.

    He’s not out of the woods, with his fate in the hands of the likes of Susan Collins. But Republicans finished the day a lot stronger than they started it.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  73. Since no one can know for sure what the truth is, it’s a sad day since both political extremes are cackling and all sanctimonious, but don’t really know what they’re talking about.
    It’s hard to sit on the fence in situations like this, but anything else is partisan hackery in my opinion.

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  74. UPDATE x2: WTF I love Lindsey Graham now.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  75. Graham just threw a hissy fit. What a hypocrite – where was he when the Senate shamelessly prevented Obama from putting a judge on that court?
    Plus he’s a fool – just another Trump brown-noser.

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  76. 73… when you are right you are RIGHT. From what I’ve seen of Ford, it was a coached performance, unconvincing and I laugh when I hear anyone in the media all pumped up about how impressive she was.

    And thank God for Graham… never been a fan, but I’ve had a chance to watch his whole diatribe and he said exactly what needed to be said and he said it in no uncertain terms. The absolute best moment of his Senate career.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  77. 75… Amen!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  78. Speaking of the President, he’s not exactly a pillar of unflagging support for Kavanaugh:

    But even as he described the charges against Judge Kavanaugh as “false accusations,” Mr. Trump seemed, for the first time, to acknowledge the mounting challenges facing his nominee. Asked why he repeatedly sides with men over their female accusers, the president said hearing stories from Dr. Blasey might change his mind.

    “I’m going to see what happens tomorrow,” Mr. Trump said during an hourlong news conference in New York, where he was attending the United Nations General Assembly. “I’m going to be watching, you know, believe it or not. It’s possible they will be convincing.”

    Yeah, I know: fake news taking him out of context, he’s playing four dimensional chess, he’s unfolding a complex strategy that I can’t even begin to comprehend, etc. But this bullshit was the lead story on the front page of my newspaper his morning (really, Daily Breeze, must you subscribe to the horrid NYT news service?) and the casual reader would be left with the impression that Kavanaugh is toast. No wonder Patterico bet the way he did.

    JVW (42615e)

  79. 76… LOL.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  80. I know what the truth is Balsey Liar Ford lied.

    She is also on drugs and seems to have made up this allegation in 2012 because she was seeking sympathy during marriage counseling.

    And that allegation is of course completely not related to the nominee but likely to some drunken hook up she has no recall of.

    Bob the Builder (564d53)

  81. Since no one can know for sure what the truth is, it’s a sad day since both political extremes are cackling and all sanctimonious, but don’t really know what they’re talking about.
    It’s hard to sit on the fence in situations like this, but anything else is partisan hackery in my opinion.

    Them’s really pretty words, Tillman, but if you are a United States Senator at the end of the day you have to vote. So how would you vote, having suffered through the past month?

    JVW (42615e)

  82. Seriously, he was setting the bait and they walked right into the trap.

    Narciso (4e48f2)

  83. @Tillman:where was he when the Senate shamelessly prevented Obama from putting a judge on that court?

    Exercising his constitutional role of advice and consent, and not smearing Merrick Garland with vague and unsubstantiated charges from 36 years ago brought out after the last hearing solely for the purpose of delay.

    And I would think you, Tillman, would be glad that the Senate acts as a brake on Presidential appointments, you seem to wish Obama had not had that check–and hence that Trump shouldn’t either.

    Nemo (a46a69)

  84. #79 Never ceases to amaze me how unaware people are to when Trump is jerking them off.

    His quotes on Balsey Liar Ford are that. Jerking folks off to make them feel better.

    He know this woman is a liar and paid off by Democrats.

    Bob the Builder (564d53)

  85. The reason we never voted for Garland is I have it on good authority from friend who knows someone in DC that might work at the FBI that sometime in HIgh School Garland might have engaged in sleeping with in underage male minor.

    Signed Anonymous Letter to Cory Booker.

    Bob the Builder (564d53)

  86. The import of his statement, listening to Acosta is,sheer torture, they assume something and believe everyone shares that view.

    Narciso (4e48f2)

  87. The #FakeNewsNewYorkTimesv.Sullivan did quote Trump entirely out of context. I heard the whole thing on the radio and he was entirely supportive of Kavanaugh until this throwaway that the NYT picked to publish.

    nk (dbc370)

  88. No we weren’t going to take another pig in a poke like Brennan or Blackman, there are no more whizzed whites or even lewis,powells,in their front bench.

    Narciso (4e48f2)

  89. On July 31, 2018, when the retirement of the Hon. Anthony Kennedy, Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, became effective, the Hon. Brett Kavanaugh, Circuit Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, became the tenth most powerful judge in the United States.

    The top eight most powerful judges from and after that moment, of course, have been Chief Justice John Roberts and the seven Associate Judges of the SCOTUS.

    Next in line — after a huge gap in effective judicial power, but nevertheless in ninth place for the moment (until Justice Kennedy’s seat is again filled), is the Hon. Merrick Garland, United States Circuit Judge and, currently, Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit: Chief Judge Garland is the most senior active judge on that court, and as such, has not only his own vote on every panel or en banc sitting of the D.C. Circuit, but the significant additional administrative power of getting to assign the drafting, to himself and other members of that Court of Appeals, of proposed majority opinions on every panel or en banc decision in which he participates — provided only that he himself has also voted, at such conference, with the proposed majority. So long as he’s speaking for a majority of a three-judge panel or for the entire D.C. Circuit sitting en banc, in other words, Chief Judge Garland, as the most senior active judge, is unquestionably first among equals, primo intra pares. (Every Chief Justice has the similar perquisite on the SCOTUS, which makes the CJ the primisimo intra pares, I suppose; my Latin sucks.)

    Next in seniority, though, is Judge Kavanaugh. And thus, had Chief Judge Garland’s nomination to Justice Scalia’s open seat been confirmed, Judge Kavanaugh would have become Chief Judge Garland’s immediate successor as Chief Judge of the D.C. Circuit. As of today, and indeed ever since Judge Garland became Chief Judge, on all of the en banc panels on which Judge Garland is in the minority after the conference (post-argument) vote, Judge Kavanaugh, if in the majority camp, gets to assign the opinions. And on every three-judge panel in which Judge Kavanaugh is in the majority, with the exception of cases where Judge Garland is also, by virtue of the random draw, on that same panel with Judge Kavanaugh, he (Judge Kavanaugh) makes those assignments.

    Whoever fills Justice Kennedy’s open seat will instantly become the ninth most powerful judge in the country, bumping Chief Judge Garland again back down to tenth place.

    And whoever fills Justice Kennedy’s seat will also instantly become the least powerful Associate Justice on the SCOTUS. Among other things, he or she is put in charge, quite literally, of getting up and walking over to answer the door whenever anyone knocks to interrupt a SCOTUS conference. (As hazing goes, it’s pretty light.)

    Still, it’s an existential fight for the Constitution, and over the promotion of the tenth most powerful judge in the nation to become the ninth.

    *****

    My considered opinion is that the tenth most powerful judge in the United States had a pretty powerful appearance today before the Judiciary Committee of the United States Senate, and I think he will indeed be voted out favorably by that Committee and then confirmed on the Senate floor as a direct result of his performance today.

    It will occasion wailing and gnashing of teeth, but not by me. If you’d asked me at any point after Obama’s election, “Who would you most like to see the next GOP POTUS nominate to the SCOTUS?” I’d have said, “Brett Kavanaugh,” and that continues to be my opinion.

    *****

    I cannot express, in less than 10,000 or 20,000 words, the depth of my contempt for the Democratic members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, so I’ll spare you that.

    After I watched Judge Kavanaugh’s testimony front-to-back, I fast-fowarded it again, without sound, just to watch the changing expressions on the face of his wife, seated behind and to Judge Kavanaugh’s left. She is a native of Abilene, Texas, about 150 miles from my hometown; I’ve marched in her high school’s stadium for playoff games and marching band competitions. What triggered the most obvious and strongest emotions reactions — from him and her both — was his testimony about their daughter suggesting they all “pray for the lady,” and his testimony about his parents, who were also briefly shown, looking for all the world like they were being flayed alive and stretched upon the rack. It affected me powerfully.

    But this decision ought not be about empathy, but evidence, or more specifically its lack.

    If I had been among the Beach People advising Dr. Ford, I would have counseled her against letting Democratic Senate staffers select her lawyers and manage her communications. She put her faith in the worst of villains, but I doubt she’ll ever realize that. Regardless of her intentions, roughly half the country now thinks she’s a martyr, for playing convincingly the role of a pawn in a shallow game of political sequencing by the party out of power and desperate to regain it.

    I believe that Dr. Ford believes what she has talked herself into believing. Like Judge Kavanaugh, I believe that it’s possible that she may have been a victim of sexual assault by someone, somewhere, at some time. But I’m frankly not even convinced of the probability of that, based on her testimony today and all the other available evidence, using a “preponderance of the evidence” standard. Her testimony is entirely uncorroborated; and even her uncorroborated testimony does not include a reliable foundation from which we can conclude that she ever was in the same room with Brett Kavanaugh at the same time. Her testimony as to his identity is direct and clear, but with no foundation, it is not credible, and would not have been admitted in a court of law, not even in a civil court. I don’t say she’s wicked; I say her testimony on the critical fact of identification, and the further critical facts of what happened, is entitled to zero weight, none at all.

    I assure you that the lawyers who have prepped and managed and shaped her include at least a few who know how to lay a proper foundation for a witness identification. The lawyer hired by the GOP members of the committee to ask their questions, however, deliberately chose to let pass all such challenges, whether for lack of proper foundation or otherwise. None of the circumstantial evidence impeaching Dr. Ford’s testimony was developed, neither through her nor any other witness with first-hand knowledge. The direct evidence was never probed either, e.g.:

    Dr. Ford, you wrote in your letter that you feared that you might be accidentally asphyxiated. May we correctly assume from your inclusion of the word “accidentally” that you were never in real fear of intentional violence? You say he tried to remove your clothes; you were wearing clothes over a swimsuit. Did he succeed? Did he ever expose more of you than you’d voluntarily exposed to everyone at the party earlier in that day, when swimming? How many seconds was Brett Kavanaugh’s hand over your mouth? Could you breathe at all around it? Was it clamped continuously so that you never could catch a breath around it. I’m going to start counting aloud now, ‘One-Mississippi, Two-Mississippi’-style, and you stop me after I reach the time corresponding to the hand over your mouth….” None of that is necessarily hostile cross-examination, but it certainly would have given jurors (or Senators) a far better common-sense basis to assess her credibility about the alleged attack.

    She has never had her story fully developed, much less challenged. But so be it.

    That was a very cautious approach — not an irrational one, and surely a deliberate one. For purposes of getting Judge Kavanaugh confirmed, it was probably even the right one. For purposes of testing Dr. Ford’s credibility, though, it was a deliberate forfeit. It might cost the GOP the House come November; but then again, had a skillful cross-examiner directly challenged Dr. Ford, that might have cost the GOP the House and the Senate.

    *****

    To the GOP members of the Senate, I have this to say, consistently with what I’ve been writing and saying since the November 2016 election delivered the White House, the Senate, and the House into GOP hands:

    On the day the Democrats announced that they were going to filibuster Justice Gorsuch, before a word of testimony had been taken at his confirmation hearing, every one of you agreed to finish off the remaining fig leaf left behind for SCOTUS nominees after Harry Reid & Co. nuked the nominations filibuster for every other Senate-confirmed office in the Executive and Judicial Branches of government. Now, on this nomination, we’ve seen the ultimate and unequivocal proof of comprehensive bad faith by the Senate Democrats. If you keep the Senate in November 2018 and reconvene with a GOP majority in January 2019, and especially if the GOP can possibly hang on in the House (which I still think doubtful, but haven’t give up upon), then please, please finish the job. Nuke the rest of the filibuster, and let’s recognize the bare-knuckles reality of simple majority rule in the Senate forever after, whether on legislation or nominations. Comity is dead; respect is dead; self-restraint is dead; we’ve already left behind every Senate tradition, and we now have simple-majority rule as far as they’re concerned. Why handcuff ourselves pretending otherwise, and squandering every serious opportunity to enact a GOP agenda, even an imperfect one, by pretending the Dems might not nuke the legislative filibuster the very next time they have the chance and it suits them?

    Beldar (fa637a)

  90. His quotes on Balsey Liar Ford are that. Jerking folks off to make them feel better.

    He know this woman is a liar and paid off by Democrats.

    So his way of “jerking folks off to make them feel better” is to provide a rationale for someone like Murkowski or Flake to abandon Kavanaugh and vote against his nomination? Man, he really is working on that eleventh-dimension. I’m glad you’re here to explain it to rubes like me.

    JVW (42615e)

  91. I heard the whole thing on the radio and he was entirely supportive of Kavanaugh until this throwaway that the NYT picked to publish.

    Oh no doubt. But Trump of all people ought to know that the media will be happy to burn him on that and he should be more disciplined at staying on message 100% of the time.

    OK, I too find myself laughing at the last clause of my previous paragraph.

    JVW (42615e)

  92. Graham in 2016:

    Let the voters have a say about who they would like to be the next Supreme Court justice.

    https://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/277001-graham-next-president-should-fill-supreme-court-seat
    Graham in 2018, paraphrasing, “Screw the voters, I just lied to get what me and my party wanted. Let’s ram this down America’s throats, ’cause we can.”

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  93. I don’t understand why anyone would be impressed with Ford’s weak story.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0) — 9/27/2018 @ 7:33 pm

    This.

    The forced broken voice, constantly having to go to her notes. No one who “Truly believes what she said” needs notes. At his most believable moments, Kavanaugh made eye contact, the belief in himself shone through.

    She’s a pig. A coached up pig. HF, go nuts. No one, excepting HRC herself, has more rightly earned your derision.

    Matador@gmail.com (39e0cd)

  94. Beldar!

    I was thinking of you as your beloved Longhorns thrashed the Trojans.

    Any chance we can get a finger or two of the fiery scotch you are withholding as regards the Dhimmicrats on Judiciary?? :)

    Ed from SFV (6d42fa)

  95. Don’t send email to that addy, I’m just Matador. and that prolly belongs to some innocent…

    Matador (39e0cd)

  96. Tick-tock, tick-tock. American Bar Association calls on Senate Judiciary Committee to halt Kavanaugh vote until FBI investigation is done; American Jesuit Magazine withdraw endorsement of Kavanaugh.

    And so it goes.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  97. Graham just threw a hissy fit. What a hypocrite – where was he when the Senate shamelessly prevented Obama from putting a judge on that court?
    Plus he’s a fool – just another Trump brown-noser.

    The Republicans refused to vote for Garland–they didn’t slime him with ridiculous character assassination. The fact that Democrats were rocked back on their heels after LG went nuclear is a sign that they knew he was dead right.

    M Scott Eiland (b16b32)

  98. @Tillman:Graham in 2018, paraphrasing, “Screw the voters…”

    “Mr. President, where the nation should be treated to a consideration of constitutional philosophy, all it will get in such circumstances is a partisan bickering and political posturing from both parties and from both ends of Pennsylvania Avenue. As a result, it is my view that if a Supreme Court Justice resigns tomorrow, or within the next several weeks, or resigns at the end of the summer, President Bush should consider following the practice of a majority of his predecessors and not — and not — name a nominee until after the November election is completed.”

    Nemo (a46a69)

  99. Great stuff as always, Beldar, especially you placing in context the power balance between the Supreme Court Justices and the Court of Appeals for DC judges. Very interesting.

    You gave us a lot to chew over, but I am glad you are bullish on Kavanaugh’s prospects for confirmation. I am trying to be as optimistic, but I fear we haven’t yet seen the Dems play their final fiendish card.

    One last idea that I have been kicking around in my head: What if the GOP’s kid-gloves treatment of Prof. Ford was a deal that was cut between Grassley and the moderates? Corker, Collins, Flake, and Murkowski agreed to support Kavanaugh as long as the GOP committee members didn’t hurt the overall optics by going after Ford aggressively. That’s why they acted like house cats.

    JVW (42615e)

  100. “Democrats will rue the day that they determined that this was the way to defeat nominees.””

    I don’t buy that this is just Dem dirty tricks. They didn’t do this with Gorsuch — no claims of sexual misconduct. The woman contacted her rep Eshoo and the WaPo *before* Kav was Trump’s nominee when he was on the short list. If the plan was to scuttle a nominee, smart money is to wait until you know who the nominee is. No, there is something here.

    And since we’re talking about deviousness, what about refusing to even meet with Merrick Garland?

    JRH (388b2c)

  101. 97… ideologues last ditch attempt at an EPIC FAIL…

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  102. “Let’s ram this down America’s throats, ’cause we can.”

    Tillman (61f3c8) — 9/27/2018 @ 8:45 pm

    “I won. Get over it.”

    —- Barack Hussein Obama

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  103. @JRH:what about refusing to even meet with Merrick Garland?

    Obama was free to nominate someone Republicans would approve. He chose not to, which was his prerogative, and the Senate chose not to consider it, which is its prerogative.

    Thank God, now that Trump is President, that the Senate has the power to refuse to consent to his nominations.

    What Senate Republicans did not do was have hearings, wait until they were over, and then bring up 36 -year-old unsubstantiated and vague allegations for the sole purpose of delay. Instead they declared their purpose up front. Obama could have chosen to nominate someone else, his prerogative he didn’t.

    Nemo (a46a69)

  104. Kavanaugh did not follow the playbook that was used up until now. He fought back against a heroine of the left. Full-throated defense. No wimpy “above it all” reticence.

    And so, he won.

    I don’t think the Dems know what hit them yet.

    Oh yeah, Graham was amazing. And I just read that all the Repubs will vote to confirm!

    Patricia (3363ec)

  105. The woman contacted her rep Eshoo and the WaPo *before* Kav was Trump’s nominee when he was on the short list. If the plan was to scuttle a nominee, smart money is to wait until you know who the nominee is. No, there is something here.

    Complete and utter bullshit. Ford first sat down with Eshoo on July 20; Kavanaugh was nominated on July 9.

    When your first comment here is a blatant lie, you are on the fast track to be banned. Be forewarned.

    JVW (42615e)

  106. JVW – Someone put out the Code White order. Standard GOPe issue, if you ask me.

    Some thing also appeared to be at work. Truth rarely makes such an incredible comeback in such a setting.

    Ed from SFV (6d42fa)

  107. I guess I meant the entire Repub voters, JVW, not just the Trump base. I’m a “decline to state” but I would walk through fire to help the Rs win in November.

    Patricia (3363ec)

  108. They didn’t do this with Gorsuch because he was going in for Scalia and that was seen as closer to a 1-1. Putting BK in for Kennedy is not 1-1 at all.

    No reason to go to the mattresses for Gorsuch.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  109. Although I do see that in the link I included, the date of Eschoo’s meeting with Ford was originally misreported. If you made an honest mistake by believing the original reported date (I don’t know what it was) then I gladly retract the threat of being banned. But your assertion is still entirely wrong.

    JVW (42615e)

  110. 108… right on, Patricia!!!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  111. “and the Senate chose not to consider it, which is its prerogative.”

    Sure that’s their prerogative not to consider a sitting president’s nominee, but it’s an unprecedented break with tradition and further politicization of the process.

    JRH (388b2c)

  112. @JRHut it’s an unprecedented break with tradition

    a) It’s not (ask Joe Biden).
    b) It’s not the same as subjecting him to unsubstantiated and vague accusations of sexual assault after the hearings were over.

    You keep glossing that over.

    Nemo (a46a69)

  113. @JRH:

    c) And aren’t you glad, now that Trump is on office and might do God knows what, that the Senate has the right to refuse even to consider his nominees?

    You are glad that the Senate has this check on the President, right?

    Nemo (a46a69)

  114. 1932 was the last year there was an election-year vacancy, confirmation and nomination in an election year.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  115. They didn’t do this with Gorsuch because he was going in for Scalia and that was seen as closer to a 1-1. Putting BK in for Kennedy is not 1-1 at all.

    They also didn’t do this to Gorsuch because — ta da! — #MeToo hadn’t taken hold yet. Harvey Weinstein was then still a beloved Democrat fundraiser, Eric Schneiderman was a crusading anti-Trump attorney general for NY, Al Franken was a respected progressive United States Senator, and John Conyers was a Senior Congressman with a history in the Civil Rights movement.

    The reason that this is such a perfect storm against Kavanaugh is because the very nature of #MeToo is that it allows for unsubstantiated and unverifiable allegations to be made, yet somehow the politics of it demands that those allegations be taken seriously. If this had been the climate during Gorsuch’s nomination, you can bet there would have been someone coming out of the woodwork claiming to have been a victim.

    JVW (42615e)

  116. Obama worked extra hard at making enemies, as was his prerogative.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  117. Trump would not/won’t/never pull Kavanaugh; he’s not going to take any heat on this one; this is the Senate’s play to make; Grassley wants this guy out of committee ASAP, lateral to McConnell to corral the votes and run the man-child across the goal line before the clock runs out. The ends could very well justify the means. But the chances of losing both the House and the Senate will likely increase.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  118. Complete and utter bullshit. Ford first sat down with Eshoo on July 20; Kavanaugh was nominated on July 9.

    When your first comment here is a blatant lie, you are on the fast track to be banned. Be forewarned.

    JVW (42615e) — 9/27/2018 @ 9:08 pm

    #1 It’s not my first comment here. It’s my 9th or 10th, and each one has been respectful

    #2 I’m going by Blasey Ford’s testimony today in which she indicated she called the WaPo and Eshoo’s office on July 6th.

    Listen for yourself

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KD_u4T3LzAQ

    And maybe relax. or don’t. if you want to ban me, knock yourself out.

    JRH (388b2c)

  119. “But this decision ought not be about empathy, but evidence, or more specifically its lack…….

    …..She put her faith in the worst of villains, but I doubt she’ll ever realize that…..

    …..Her testimony is entirely uncorroborated; and even her uncorroborated testimony does not include a reliable foundation from which we can conclude that she ever was in the same room with Brett Kavanaugh at the same time……

    …..Now, on this nomination, we’ve seen the ultimate and unequivocal proof of comprehensive bad faith by the Senate Democrats. If you keep the Senate in November 2018 and reconvene with a GOP majority in January 2019, and especially if the GOP can possibly hang on in the House (which I still think doubtful, but haven’t give up upon), then please, please finish the job. Nuke the rest of the filibuster, and let’s recognize the bare-knuckles reality of simple majority rule in the Senate forever after, whether on legislation or nominations. Comity is dead; respect is dead; self-restraint is dead”

    Bravo Beldar.

    harkin (a4b010)

  120. I had one other thought, as a trial lawyer, that might be worth sharing:

    Only the very most stupid trial lawyers would write a story for his client to sign under oath which exposes her to the following questioning:

    So you learned to avoid the punch, you’ve said under oath, when you were attending the quote, “at least ten,” unquote, parties like this one. And you’ve likewise sworn that at “several” — meaning more than two, of course — of these parties, there were these trains of boys, resulting in gang rapes of girls, one of whom was you. I promise you I’m not going to quibble with or attack the number you’re about to give me, but give us all now, for purposes of this line of questions, your very best estimate of the number of the “at least ten” parties which included gang rapes. Was it closer to three, or ten, or more than ten? [Get a number, any integer, doesn’t matter what.]

    Okay, so did the party where you learned to avoid the punch come before or after the party at which you were gang-raped? Are you telling us you kept returning even after you were gang-raped? Or are you telling us that you kept returning despite knowing that other girls were being gang-raped? Since you weren’t there for the punch, why were you there for?

    Are such questions shockingly blunt? Yup. Might there be a powerful backlash against them from the SJW/”believe all women” crowd? Absolutely! Are they nevertheless relevant, indeed, essential, to the testing of any such accuser’s credibility when she tells a preposterous story? Absolutely.

    That witness would have been a good cross-examiner’s dream, starting with her (and Avenatti’s) inability to see that they were creating their own “when did you stop beating your wife?” analog with the throw-away (but impossible to reconcile) line about the punch, on through her sworn affirmations about the mental states of other human beings and what they knew or didn’t know. Almost nothing except her name would have been admissible testimony in a court of law; again, there wasn’t the barest hint of the most basic foundation that could have permitted her to give even first-hand testimony, starting with “How did you, then a college sophomore and legal adult, end up at a party with 15 and 17 year old high school kids?”

    But during Krucify Kavanaugh Week, these questions will certainly go un-asked.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  121. We’ve also learned a bit about the press during this process. DF and Ford said she was outed by the press and the press is still lying to cover for the D’s.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  122. Wee she, or did she contact the post two months ago.

    narciso (d1f714)

  123. Great to see Beldar.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  124. DF and Ford said she was outed by the press and the press is still lying to cover for the D’s.

    They want us to believe that the press somehow broke into Feinstein’s Washington office or hacked into her computer and found the letter. Hell, they probably were given the contents by her Chinese spy driver.

    JVW (42615e)

  125. Let’s ram this down America’s throats, ’cause we can.

    I’m good with that. This is what Democrats have always done, when they can. There is no reason Republicans should not do the same.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  126. Stranger things have happened.

    How have you been Beldam?

    narciso (d1f714)

  127. Thank you, Beldar. Please stick around. There are new posting rules.
    IMO, regardless of how harshly Ms. Mitchell grilled Ms. Blasey Ford today, the House will be forfeit. The GOP will be lucky to be keep their majority in the Senate.
    What the Democrats are either ignoring or not comprehending is that their actions have repercussions, from Kennedy borking Bork, to Thomas getting high-tech lynched, to Senate Dems filibustering circuit court nominees for the first time in history, to Douchebag Reid nuking the filibuster, and to Kavanaugh getting smeared beyond belief, there should be payback, and Garland was just a bit of that payback. Kavanaugh was already well qualified for the job, and this latest piece of politics of personal destruction is only more reason to confirm. Feinstein’s and the rest of the Dems’ dirty tricks cannot and should not win.

    Paul Montagu (0e687b)

  128. Relax Montague, they are gaslighting you, I know its hard to tell in the pacific northwest.

    narciso (d1f714)

  129. Hello, Beldar.

    nk (dbc370)

  130. The outing as it’s been explained is missing a piece. She went to wapo but I thought she requested anonymity. She explains what seems like a different set of press caused her to go public because they were in her class and in her yard. The wapo didn’t need to be in her yard if she was already talking to them. So her info was leaked, at least to other press outlets, before she decided to go public.

    But she was unclear on this point. If people were in her yard her info was already leaked. She didn’t decide to go public then. She didn’t decide to go public at all based on what she herself explained even though she then described what she decided to do as going public. You can’t go public when she’s already public.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  131. UPDATE x3 (JVW): Thanks to Patterico for providing the Graham video. There is another version over at The Federalist (it won’t allow me to embed it here) which has a camera angle in which they pan over at the 1:01 mark to show Feinstein, Durbin, and Leahy with kind of hang-dog looks on their faces. Leahy actually turns away from Graham during the Senator’s philippic. It’s marvelous.

    JVW (42615e)

  132. @76. Master Thespian was indeed, quite emotional; Kavanaugh inexplicably as well. As noted on another thread, television is a ‘cool’ medium, not prone to projecting ‘heat’ very well. He was poorly advised on that; Immature, weepy ranting from a man seeking a high office is a very bad look, particularly in contrast w/image of a serious, subdued and sober Ford. Judge Thomas as well, from years earlier. Thomas was angry- even indignant, but was firm, resolved– and mature. Imagine if any female witness or female senator displayed such temper tantrums before the cameras.

    But the rest of Lindsey’s GOP senate colleagues were embarrassingly silent all morning when it came to doing their jobs- questioning Dr. Ford; but they sub-contracted that responsibility out. Benching Mitchell, calling an audible and vocally attacking their Democratic colleagues in the afternoon w/Kavanaugh in the hot seat was all they could do as the word got back that the optics, post-Ford, wasn’t scoring well w/t audience. But nothing seen in today’s game was particular becoming.

    And Putin smiled.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  133. BELDAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Dave (445e97)

  134. Alea jacta est. We’ll see what it rolls to, tomorrow.

    nk (dbc370)

  135. At least the R’s outsourced the work to some who ended up in the room. The D’s are trying to buy time and add legitimacy by kicking this to an entirely different branch.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  136. Immature, weepy ranting from a man seeking a high office is a very bad look,

    I am not really disposed to liking Kavanaugh. When I could tell he was weeping, I felt he was genuine. It struck me that he was being victimized, and was a proud man who had to consider that something he worked for was being taken away with scant evidence, by some pretty devious people. It really worked extremely well for him from a PR perspective. Yes, the partisans who would never support him anyway will make fun of him for being a sissy and crying. Same people who preach about gender fluidity will bash a man on the other side for not being manly. But there is nothing unmanly about crying in certain types of moments, such as when you add injustice and your own kids together.

    His tone when talking about his drinking… that was immature.

    At any rate, the democrats on that committee look much worse than the republicans did. I really don’t know how they pulled that off.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  137. Another line of questioning/argument that I really wish somebody had pursued with Ford was:

    Through your attorneys, you have insisted that the FBI investigate your charges, is that correct Ms. Ford?

    Are you aware that Judge Kavanaugh has already been the subject of six background investigations by the FBI, none of which produced any evidence of the conduct you allege?

    Are you aware that in the course of an FBI background investigation, the FBI does not attempt to establish the truth or reliability of the information it collects, or make any determinations of fact?

    Since you have provided no specific date, or even year, for the attack, and no specific location, and since the other four individuals you have specifically identified by name as present have already denied, under penalty of felony, any knowledge of the events you allege, where do you imagine such an FBI investigation would begin, what new evidence could it uncover, and how, specifically, could it help establish the truth of your allegations?

    Now the ABA is pushing this ridiculous FBI investigation idea too.

    Doesn’t the ABA membership consist of a vast number of attorneys? How do they decide, as an organization, whether to take a controversial (and in this case absurb) political position like this?

    Dave (445e97)

  138. Listening on the a.m. frequency
    The Judge made me cry

    mg (9e54f8)

  139. Good Luck Mr. Judge Kavanaugh

    mg (9e54f8)

  140. Grassley should be on his knees lighting candles saying the rosary.

    mg (9e54f8)

  141. And Putin smiled.

    Why? How?

    Paul Montagu (0e687b)

  142. Read an interesting point just now. The GOP doesn’t have enough support for Kav to break the SCOTUS filibuster, so it’s lucky for them that Schumer forced the nuclear option for Gorsuch, and they only need 51 votes. The democrats made a tremendous strategic mistake if you think about it.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  143. @136. Possibly; we’ll see. But it didn’t come across well on television in contrast to the subdued and sober Ford just a few minutes earlier; even had to turn the volume down on the TV when he began shouting at the start. Many chums who palled around w/him back in the day are noting the man is not fully forthcoming about who he was in his youth. There’s nothing disqualifying for the gig about being a hard partying guy as a kid, doing stupid stuff, growing up and out of it into a mature adult and saying that at the start would likely have defused much of this weeks ago. But being misleading about it in the present speaks some to his character, today; ‘to thine own self be true.’ Also, on the ‘drinking talk’ you mentioned, couldn’t help but notice how he was responding to questions by snapping back at senators about it and asking about their own their drinking habits. Reminded me of how someone w/an alcohol problem snaps back to friends/family when confronted in an intervention. In a way, the character ‘Bart O’Kavanaugh’ seems like a lot more human than the ‘character’ we know as Brett Kavanaugh.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  144. Hello, and thanks to those who’ve said it to me, and to those old friends whose comments I’ve read while lurking.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  145. Kavanaugh’s strengths as a judge — honest, patient, even-tempered, thoughtful, considerate, courteous — were his weaknesses when attacked by a pack of rabid sows, and don’t think for a minute that the sows were not counting on that.

    nk (dbc370)

  146. @141. Paul, this sort of ‘bread and circuses’ spectacle only makes it all the more difficult to project American values overseas. Saw the reaction first hand back in ’68 during the turmoil stateside when living overseas. The rest of the world watches what we do here; no accident Trump got laughed at while speaking to the U.N.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  147. Paul, this sort of ‘bread and circuses’ spectacle only makes it all the more difficult to project American values overseas.

    It was indeed ‘bread and circuses’ today, but this wouldn’t have happened but for the Democrats. As I see it, Putin wins when the American political system is undermined by subterfuge on the part of Feinstein, who lobbed a political hand grenade after the hearings were over. Putin loses when Kavanaugh gets confirmed.

    Paul Montagu (0e687b)

  148. @ Dave, who asked (#137):

    Doesn’t the ABA membership consist of a vast number of attorneys? How do they decide, as an organization, whether to take a controversial (and in this case absurd) political position like this?

    I haven’t been a member of the ABA since I was last a BigLaw lawyer in the 1990s, when the firms at which I was an employee or partner purchased memberships for every lawyer. Once upon a time, the ABA could fairly be said to “speak for the legal profession,” and it was genuinely a big deal. Indeed, the late Justice Lewis F. Powell, Jr.’s single best pre-SCOTUS credential was that he’d been the president of the ABA for a year, in 1964-1965. He’s the last president of the ABA I can name, though, and it was well before my time as an ABA member; Justice Powell was the direct predecessor of Justice Anthony Kennedy, whose seat Judge Kavanaugh will fill if confirmed, so I’d say the ABA has been mostly irrelevant for at least a couple of generations now. As an organization judged on its own merits, or as a conduit of opinion from across the profession — and it only claims to have some 400k members, out of 1.2M+ lawyers in the US — the ABA has slightly less credibility for most purposes than the average high school student council. It’s run by and for, and filled with, Tracy Flick-types looking for resume credentials in my experience, with rare exceptions. Otherwise, it may provide some useful CLE services, and it certainly hosts many conventions and conferences in exotic places that lawyers can attend while writing off the resulting business expenses. Its investigations into and ratings of judicial candidates is surely its single most public function, but it’s become wildly and directly politicized, such that it’s now somewhere between, say, CNN and MSNBC in its objectivity, diligence, and reliability. That its endorsement of Judge Kavanaugh was so thorough-going, though, indeed reflects on just how spectacularly he’s checked every box of their qualifications checklist.

    The real focus of organized action in the legal profession, such as it is, remains in the state bar associations, who control attorney licensure & discipline. No organization speaks effectively for lawyers on a national basis anymore.

    Beldar (fa637a)

  149. @147. Nah, the specifics are just white noise, ‘the play is the thing;’ the spectacle is another example for his play book- and Russian history textbooks.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  150. Being in a room with those lawyers/senators today would keep me in a steam room for hours to get the stench off me. And then I’d burn my clothes.

    mg (e60689)

  151. …the spectacle is another example for his play book- and Russian history textbooks.

    But you know what, Kavanaugh gets confirmed, spectacle over, leaving Putin to mess around with the mid-terms, if he can.

    Paul Montagu (0e687b)

  152. Go USA

    mg (9e54f8)

  153. @151. More like, spectacle catalogued disharmony within is working; on to midterms.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  154. I didn’t know that Lindsey Graham was in the Air Force/Reserve/National Guard until 2015, and that he occasionally served in the sandbox (2007) and in Afghanistan (2009) during senate recesses.

    Of course, he was a military lawyer, not a combatant, but his long service (over 33 years according to Wikipedia) is a great credit to him.

    He definitely dropped a full payload on the Dems today…

    Dave (445e97)

  155. Lindsay graham I will huff and puff and blow… Oh wait mccains dead. jeff flake susan collins and lisa murkowski will decide it not blowhard lindsay graham.

    lany (382d9b)

  156. Good piece by Allahpundit, highlighting Cornyn’s very apt observation that this is the Senate’s worst moment since McCarthyism:

    Cornyn: This is the Senate’s worst moment since the McCarthy hearings

    The reference to the McCarthy hearings is directly on point. No one was at risk of getting thrown in prison in those hearings either, but a number of people were at risk of losing their jobs and having their reputations ruined over what turned out to be unsubstantiated allegations. That’s the same risk Kavanaugh faces, even in the job he has. The social panic at that time was Communist infiltration, and like sexual assault, it was a real and serious issue. Rather than present substantial evidence in those cases, though, McCarthy and others whipped up a panic to the point where the mere allegation of Communist sympathies were enough to ruin careers and lives.

    We have revived the specter of McCarthyism thanks to the demolition of due process and reliance on the proper burden of proof. The Senate Judiciary Committee all but signaled open season on Brett Kavanaugh, encouraging a slew of uncorroborated and unsubstantiated allegations to become public, all while insisting that we must “believe” the allegation rather than examine the evidence, or even wait to see if any evidence exists.

    It’s a disgrace, all the more so because we clearly haven’t learned from history. Cornyn hits the nail on the head here, and delivered a speech which should be remembered for its wisdom, clarity, and purpose.

    The video of Cornyn’s full five minutes is embedded in Allahpundit’s post.

    Dave (445e97)

  157. AP’s piece also quotes Matt Vespa:

    <a href="BREAKING: We Have The Votes

    “A senate insider” confirms that Kavanaugh has the votes for confirmation on the committee, and on the senate floor. He says all Republicans, plus Manchin, will vote yes, and that some other red-state Dems may as well.

    With all the twists, turns, drama, intrigue and betrayal we’ve already witnessed, only a fool would count this particular chicken before it hatches, but it’s still great news…

    Dave (445e97)

  158. 0ops

    Dave (445e97)

  159. UPDATE x2: WTF I love Lindsey Graham now.

    Apparently you’ve got good company:

    “Many Senate Republicans applauded Graham when he entered the GOP conference meeting convened just after the hearing on Thursday night.”

    Graham’s daisy-cutter truth bomb deserves a place alongside Bluto’s speech at the end of Animal House…(language warning)

    Dave (445e97)

  160. 159 will independent white woman voters in the suburbs applaud?

    lany (382d9b)

  161. I’m a white female Independent and I not only applaud Graham’s speech, I plan to vote GOP this November. I was going to stay home but not now.

    DRJ (15874d)

  162. Brett and his creepy developmentally-stunted rape hoaxer

    they’re not big enough characters to occupy the center ring for this long

    they really need to vote him in Saturday so we can start exploring new things come Monday morning

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  163. I did not get to watch the whole thing yesterday and I was expecting the quiet vs angry contrast in soundbites to come off bad for Kavanaugh. However the ones that keep getting played make her sound rehearsed and him seen more real. (Clearly her full testimony was more effective than the soundbite.)
    Also I noted that my husband choked up at the daughter part.

    Susanita (8bc977)

  164. Patience, patience! Kavanaugh’s confirmation will be the first order of business for the Judiciary Committee this morning.

    nk (dbc370)

  165. Meantime, grab some chocolate at your local grocery store before the run by the #MeToos strips the shelves bare.

    nk (dbc370)

  166. good call

    i stocked up on ketchup before they could pour all of it on their crotches but i didn’t think about chocolate

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  167. Neither of us voted for Trump and my political interest was super low, but this sh*tshow convinced me that I need to vote. Democrats should not be leading this country.

    Susanita (8bc977)

  168. the Roy Moore rape hoax demonstrated that plenty of Republicans will jump into this same evidence-free gutter the dems are wallowing in with Kavanaugh

    they’re just more motivated to do it for snobbish aesthetic reasons than for political ones

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  169. “No amount of intense cross-examination (as Professor Dershowitz was calling for) would have done anything but cause more hesitant answers and interventions by counsel.”

    – M Scott Eiland

    Maybe – or it could have led to a mask slipping off, the way Kavanaugh’s did.

    Leviticus (7d1f87)

  170. Yeah, I guess….you are up by Andersonville, but that’s really testing the new rules, happyfeet.

    urbanleftbehind (c8c554)

  171. I believe independent white suburban women voted overwhelmingly for Mr. President Donald J. Trump? And I think they are smart enough to grasp that if any California ditz can destroy their fathers’, husbands’, brothers’, and sons’ lives by saying they groped them in high school, they might no longer be independent suburban women?

    nk (dbc370)

  172. “So how would you vote, having suffered through the past month?”

    – JVW

    Against confirmation. Any elected official – and particularly any judge – who feels such an overweening sense of entitlement to power as Kavanaugh demonstrated yesterday is, in my opinion, completely unsuited to hold that power.

    What’s been done has been done, and Kavanaugh knows it. He’s not emotional because these allegations have been made, he’s emotional because he lusts for the power of the Court and senses that it’s about to be elude him.

    Leviticus (7d1f87)

  173. Maybe – or it could have led to a mask slipping off, the way Kavanaugh’s did.

    Leviticus (7d1f87) — 9/28/2018 @ 6:17 am

    What mask of Kavanaugh’s?

    NJRob (1d7532)

  174. yes yes i can walk to Andersonville it’s kind of dirty but it has some interesting things going on too

    their farmer’s market isn’t too bad if i remember to get cash

    and i love the curry at Lady Gregory’s and the patio at Hopleaf and i the elotes at Little Bad Wolf and they have a produce store there that’s a fun break from Mariano’s and I get my framing done there at a place called foursided which is also one of my go-to gift shops

    but nightlife-wise they don’t dazzle with quality experiences there really

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  175. ack *farmers’ market* i mean

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  176. It’s a dirty job, but somebody has to do it, Leviticus.

    nk (dbc370)

  177. Supreme Court Justice.

    nk (dbc370)

  178. They should at least have the decency to do it reluctantly, to the point of being pressed into service. Slavering after the trappings in circumstances like these is an exceedingly ugly look.

    Leviticus (7d1f87)

  179. “What mask of Kavanaugh’s?”

    – NJRob

    The one that he wore through all of the hearings before yesterday. The “I’m just a even-keeled, neutral, independent arbiter with no horse in the race” mask.

    Leviticus (7d1f87)

  180. Flake to vote yes. #scoreboard

    https://twitter.com/tamarakeithNPR/status/1045667116383440897

    M Scott Eiland (b16b32)

  181. The sine qua non of judicial temperament should be not giving a flying f*ck about what anyone – the electorate, the Senate, the President, anyone – thinks of you, your history, or your positions. You are a judge. Act like one.

    Leviticus (7d1f87)

  182. The one that he wore through all of the hearings before yesterday. The “I’m just a even-keeled, neutral, independent arbiter with no horse in the race” mask.

    Funny how being confronted by one’s tormentors can bring out emotion in people.

    The concern trolling about “oh how can he be fair?” was laughable when Democrats deployed it 27 years ago about Clarence Thomas after the Anita Hill gambit failed. It’s even more laughable now. The appropriate response to the concern trolling is: “Pound sand.”

    M Scott Eiland (b16b32)

  183. More like, spectacle catalogued disharmony within is working; on to midterms.

    And who caused this disharmony? Who sat on her allegations for weeks on end? By your measure, isn’t it more logical to say that Senate Democrats were doing Putin’s work?

    Paul Montagu (0e687b)

  184. Or it could be that Kavanaugh was even-keeled about getting this new job, because he could take not getting something he wanted but didn’t need. But he couldn’t take being unfairly insulted, humiliated, and having his reputation attacked.

    DRJ (46c88f)

  185. So in another words a Cruz who fought. This is the Ted that would have won.

    urbanleftbehind (c8c554)

  186. He spent a lifetime building a reputation that was destroyed in a month. That would make a grown man mad. It should make him mad.

    DRJ (46c88f)

  187. it should make ALL the sleazy ivy league uglybutts on the Supreme Court mad

    but they’re just not deep thinkers like that

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  188. I’m with Leviticus at 9/28/2018 @ 6:25 am

    Also,

    1) We should err on the side of caution. Traitor Trump has done enough damage trying to dismantle and decimate our government. Putting a huge blemish on our heretofore respectable SCOTUS would be add to the nightmare. Deny this corrupt simpleton at least that.
    2) So we’re going to ram through this nominee with a Congress that only has 17% approval? You really think that’s a wise move?

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  189. the Roy Moore rape hoax demonstrated that plenty of Republicans will jump into this same evidence-free gutter the dems are wallowing in with Kavanaugh

    The DDID article on Roy Moore was credible, and confirmed. There is no doubt that a 30-something man actively pursued multiple minor-aged girls. Roy Moore deserved to lose because he’s a creepy with a dim understanding of the Constitution, especially for a judge. It remains that none of the accusations against Kavanaugh were corroborated.

    Paul Montagu (0e687b)

  190. *would add to the nightmare.

    Tillman (61f3c8)

  191. “The concern trolling about “oh how can he be fair?” was laughable when Democrats deployed it 27 years ago about Clarence Thomas after the Anita Hill gambit failed. It’s even more laughable now. The appropriate response to the concern trolling is: “Pound sand.””

    – M Scott Eiland

    Believe me when I say that I have no concern as to whether or not Judge Kavanaugh can be “fair.”

    Leviticus (7d1f87)

  192. Flake to vote yes. #scoreboard

    Thank you, Mr. Eiland.

    nk (dbc370)

  193. Roy Moore’s loss is why everyone was so so worried what dirty cowardly scrunt Jeff Flake and the other virtue-signaling bimbos would do

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  194. I hope Kavanaugh and Company are vindictive and seek to destroy the Left.

    Every ruling should aim at destroying their followers and their institutions.

    Why: Because it is 100% inline with saving our Constitution.

    Bob the Builder (564d53)

  195. Tillman, you make a good point that Kavanaugh will reduce the reputation of our government and the Court.

    But there’s a larger issue that will harm the reputation of our government even more: the long term use of this tactic to gain power. And there’s no question that such a thing happened. Feinstein hid this issue away, controlled it, cultivated it, and then sprung it at the end demanding the whole thing be shut down for an FBI investigation. The plan was to hold the seat open indefinitely, or at least until power changes hands.

    These were powerful, serious, life destroying charges, handled in a terrible way for both parties. That’s simply unacceptable, and we cannot let this strategy work or we’ll see it over and over. If this becomes a common part of the process, it will only harm our culture further.

    At the end of the day, Ford was not able to bring any evidence beyond her own recollection. There is clear misconduct and fraud happening with some of these accusations, and how Ford discussed how hers were managed, that should harm her credibility even if we still think she was somehow victimized. We can’t just discard innocent people when they are accused of things.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  196. Fairness and impartiality have been largely irrelevant in the Supreme Court for about a century, now. They do not decide individual cases between plaintiffs and defendants; they make law, set policy, and revise history.

    nk (dbc370)

  197. Tillman, you make a good point that Kavanaugh will reduce the reputation of our government and the Court.

    this idea that we can and even should judge people based on the shallow aesthetics of “things wot I heard on CNN Jake Tapper fake news” rather than on the quality of the work they produce is one of the more persistent themes of the nevertrump moment

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  198. “We can’t just discard innocent people when they are accused of things.”

    – Dustin

    Easy to agree on that, I suppose, but the trick is figuring out who is innocent. A presumption of innocence in political proceedings – particularly regarding confirmation to a life-tenured position – is nearly as offensive to me as a presumption of guilt would be in criminal proceedings. The two should not be conflated. “A reasonable doubt” is a weak peg on which to hang a SCOTUS hat.

    Leviticus (7d1f87)

  199. The common denominator, in either criminal proceedings or political proceedings, is state power and minimizing the benefit of the doubt for state actors (or those who strive to be state actors). That cuts one way in criminal proceedings, and the opposite way in political proceedings, as far as I’m concerned.

    Leviticus (7d1f87)

  200. #193 … Roy was not a DC ConservGimp so he did not merit their support.

    I think what stunned ConservaGImp Inc was the Left tried to take out one of their own and in process radicalized a good percentage of them. Hope they stay radicalized and militant in defending the Right instead of trying to suck up to the left.

    What struck me was Graham talking about how the folks “over there” were his friends …. somehow they are not anymore. Might be an act but that is EXACTLY EXACTLY how the Right needs to be. Burn the bridge, seek to destroy and let the chips fall where they may. Game Theory dictates that be the strategy. Don’t sit around repairing the bridge while the other side is busy picking you off with snipers and undoing bi-partisanship. Tit for tat.

    The Democrats have forgone civility long ago for all out war. It is aided by a Millenial Generation that is beyond stupid with no idea of history. And aided by Baby Boomers who never grew up now running all the Obama Soros “Activist” Groups. But in fairness that is 30% of the Nation.

    Concentrate on imprisoning those leftist who have a crime. Any crime so long as a real one. Concentrate on sicking the IRS on those who donate big dollars to the nut jobs. Concentrate on defunding the NGOs and Non-Profits who do their work. Concentrate on suing the Universities for discrimination and taking away grant money. Regulate the media and seek to destroy networks like MSNBC and CNN legally.

    Now one might be upset over this reality but guess what ConservaGimp — the Left has already done this to the Right. Return the favor. Look at who gets Govt dollars. Look who get prosecuted for “political” crimes? Look who get hired at Universities? Look who has voice in Hollywierd? It is already a Leftist Cold War out there and ConservaGimp Inc has been sitting it out since at least Reagan.

    But in Cold Civil War … it is what it is. And PRINCIPLES dictate we defend the Constitution and the Principles that are under siege. ConservaGimps need not worry. Go to your cocktail parties. Keep your sincecure for now. For they will be picked off while they straddle the fence worrying about collateral damage in a time of war.

    Well, that is my view. Avoid Venezuela/USSR/Cuba/Nicaragua at all costs even if means Pinochet time.

    Bob the Builder (564d53)

  201. Except this is also a criminal proceeding because everything has been done under penalties of perjury/felony. Like it or not, we have to make a decision between the two stories. We always want more information; we always want to be very sure. But this is the evidence and it is time to decide.

    You may hope for a better choice but we have a system and this is Trump’s choice. Kavanaugh has been an even-tempered judge for decades, you can’t possibly doubt his temperament based on one week of hell. But turning Kavanaugh down will negatively impact who and how future choices are made.

    DRJ (15874d)

  202. Look at who gets Govt dollars.

    dirty Mitt Romney’s shiny bouncy butterfinger boi Paul Ryan has never lifted a finger to defund even a blatant oinky trough-pig like NPR

    Paul Ryan doesn’t give a good goddamn about who gets Govt dollars

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  203. Leviticus, that’s the thing with politics. It’s easy for you or I to articulate a concept that sounds good, and apply it to a particular case or person as though that settles things.

    “A reasonable doubt” is a weak peg on which to hang a SCOTUS hat.

    If we take that route, both sides have professional power hustlers who will learn how easy it is to abuse our sympathies. There are two ways to see it. The individual here, Kavanaugh, the angry drunk douchebag, the politically driven judge, and the larger issue that at least some of these accusations seem to be fraudulent, and the best of the accusations is both troubling and hard to dismiss, while mishandled in an unacceptable way.

    You make a distinction between criminal justice and elevating people to the Supreme Court, and I’ve had more trouble doing this. In criminal justice a lot of evidence will get tossed or considered not credible for a lot of reasons. That’s a powerful factor in collecting evidence or managing eyewitness testimony properly. It could be a powerful factor for Diane Feinstein. I bet she and her people are 100% convinced of Kavanaugh’s guilt, and troubled that the way they played their hand blew up in their faces.

    I hope next time, and there will be a next time, the Senator on either side hearing these accusations handles them more honestly. In fact, the interesting thing to consider is that there are probably many accusations like this. We don’t know that Kagan or Gorsuch didn’t get them too. They ask hard questions behind closed doors. It’s worth considering that the difference between Kavanaugh is not that he’s accused of bad things, but by a) how outrageous his process was, and b) by how outraged he was.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  204. The “job interview” metaphor is getting tiresome. Guess what–the majority of the hiring committee has considered the accusations and found them wanting. The minority of the committee can pound sand.

    M Scott Eiland (b16b32)

  205. a “job interview” is dirty Mitt Romney and cowardly John McCain had for the presidency Mr. Eiland

    they didn’t get the job (not up to snuff)

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  206. Guilt or innocence is binary. If the totality of the circumstances do not convince you beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty, then he is innocent. It’s all or nothing. Reasonable doubt is the sign saying “end of the road’, not a mile marker saying how much you’ve traveled.

    nk (dbc370)

  207. While I’m sure it may differ from area to area, Republicans in my area are now crawl-through-broken-glass-to-vote mad. There won’t be any of that lazy, oh, it’s only the midterms slacking off any more.

    Ingot9455 (afdf95)

  208. Guilt or innocence is binary. If the totality of the circumstances do not convince you beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused is guilty, then he is innocent. It’s all or nothing. Reasonable doubt is the sign saying “end of the road’, not a mile marker saying how much you’ve traveled.

    And even if the standard was “preponderance of the evidence,” the accusation wasn’t close to that, either. Apparently, when Ms. Mitchell met with Republican senators after the hearing, she told them that this level of evidence couldn’t even support a search warrant (for which the standard is “probable cause.”

    M Scott Eiland (b16b32)

  209. For Americas sake I pray Judge Kavanaugh holds a grudge.

    mg (9e54f8)

  210. oops a “job interview” is *what* dirty Mitt Romney and cowardly John McCain had for the presidency Mr. Eiland

    interesting how when Mr. Kavanaugh did his “job interview” with Diane moo goo gai pan Feinstein she never brought up the crazy weirdo lady’s rape hoax claims

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  211. Anyone who is a democrat needs to be taught a lesson in payback when you get someone down, bury them.

    mg (9e54f8)

  212. this idea that we can and even should judge people based on the shallow aesthetics of “things wot I heard on CNN Jake Tapper fake news” rather than on the quality of the work they produce is one of the more persistent themes of the nevertrump moment

    happyfeet (28a91b) — 9/28/2018 @ 7:08 am

    Get this, happyfeet, our system involves a debate among our people about how power works. It’s called politics. And yes, what people perceive matters a great deal.

    We have another election coming up. Voters can, and they should, make judgments. You’ve zeroed in on the key problem: our judgments, our perceptions of reality, are filtered through powerful media, and they lie a lot. Trump wouldn’t be anywhere near power if they didn’t manipulate dumb people so well in 2016 out of electing someone who could govern honorably and credibly. That’s why we’re in this mess today.

    It’s been a few minutes since I mentioned this, but Trump actually bragged about doing the stuff that Kavanaugh was so outraged to be accused of. Some thought that would somehow break political correctness, but it’s actually made it worse.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  213. Republicans in my area are now crawl-through-broken-glass-to-vote mad.

    i got texts on this yesterday from odd quarters, people what usually have better things to do with their day than watch those creepy pale worm-boys on CSPAN

    why do they all look like David Cronenberg characters

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  214. Guilt or innocence is binary in criminal court only. It is a spectrum everywhere else.

    Leviticus (7d1f87)

  215. Can’t wait for buzzy g-bird to retire.

    mg (9e54f8)

  216. Your quite the spectrum, alright.

    mg (9e54f8)

  217. Then say you think Ford was credible enough that you can’t support Kavanaugh, but questioning his temperament seems inappropriate to me. Judges have to be impartial and Kavanaugh has done that. He never questioned whether something happened to Ford and he showed her compassion. He even told his daughter to feel compassion for her. He simply said he was not her attacker.

    DRJ (15874d)

  218. but Trump actually bragged about doing the stuff that Kavanaugh was so outraged to be accused of

    i don’t think you have an accurate interpretation of what Mr. Trump said

    it was actually trenchant and insightful social commentary what Mr. Trump made… commentary about how dirty them girls in hollywood are, how they like use their sex parts to get what they want

    he wasn’t endorsing this

    just laying it out there

    I think it resonated cause even for people who maybe haven’t been in and around them hollywooders it has the unmistakable ring of truth (like this… ding!)

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  219. Not every victim responds like Ford, with weak/mild resignation. Most victims are mad and if Kavanaugh is telling the truth, he is a victim just as much as Ford.

    DRJ (15874d)

  220. this Kavanaugh thing has the potential to make a super-hilarious-but-also-poignant movie btw

    it’s just so rich in pathos and zeitgeist and triumph and americana

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  221. plus you have that creepy weird rape hoax chick burbling about her hypothalmus

    wtf was that about

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  222. The fifth accuser, a male who said Kavanaugh had raped a woman on a boat, recanted when presented with this tweet of his from July:

    “Dear Pentagon, Please save my country from the parasite that occupies the White house? Our you waiting until Russians parachute in like in Red Dawn ? Please help! !!!!!!!!!!”

    A little strange I guess but not much worse than some of the comments here regarding Congressional approval and masks.

    harkin (a4b010)

  223. oh my goodness

    Mitt Romney’s favorite senator is actually voting AGAINST Mr. Kavanaugh

    this says a lot about Mr. Romney’s judgement huh (poor judgment)

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  224. The irony for the concern trolls is that without these attacks he might have moved to the middle like so many other conservative judges. Maybe even toward a Kennedy type role. But this process went a long way toward locking him into the Thomas mold.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  225. When does due process enter into this, the next nominee will be accused of murder or drug trafficking

    Narciso (7f2eb0)

  226. he wasn’t endorsing this

    I respectfully disagree! I think Trump was overjoyed to brag about his power to do something he knew other men would go to prison for. It was not anger or disappointment in this situation. Indeed, Trump was showing us that being a TV Star goes along with a lot of moral dilemmas and that many stars do the wrong thing, but Trump was showing us by his poor example of entitlement.

    Thank you for bringing this up. I think #metoo and Kavanaugh are issues closely related to our outrageous it was to put Trump in office.

    Let’s take a closer look at the conversation, and see if you are correct that Trump was offering “trenchant” social commentary and criticism of sexual exploitation:

    Donald Trump: You know and—

    Unidentified voice: She used to be great. She’s still very beautiful.

    Trump: I moved on her actually. You know she was down on Palm Beach. I moved on her and I failed. I’ll admit it. I did try and f— her. She was married.

    Unidentified voice: That’s huge news there.

    Trump: No, no. Nancy. No this was— And I moved on her very heavily. In fact, I took her out furniture shopping. She wanted to get some furniture. I said, ‘I’ll show you where they have some nice furniture.’ I took her out furniture– I moved on her like a b—-, but I couldn’t get there. And she was married. Then all of a sudden I see her, she’s now got the big phony tits and everything. She’s totally changed her look.

    Bush: Sheesh, your girl’s hot as s—. In the purple.

    Trump: Whoa!

    Bush: Yes. Yes, the Donald has scored!

    Trump: Whoa!

    Bush: Whoa, my man!

    Unidentified voice: Wait, wait you’ve got to look at me when you get out and be like … will you give me the thumbs up? You’ve got to put the thumbs up.

    [crosstalk]

    Trump: Look at you. You are a p—-.

    [crosstalk]

    Unidentified voice: You’ve got to get the thumbs up. You can’t be too happy, man.

    Trump: Alright, you and I will walk down.

    [crosstalk]

    Trump: Maybe it’s a different one.

    Bush: It better not be the publicist. No, it’s her. It’s her.

    Trump: Yeah, that’s her, with the gold. I’ve got to use some Tic Tacs, just in case I start kissing her. You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful — I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. I just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.

    Unidentified voice: Whatever you want.

    Trump: Grab them by the p—-. You can do anything.

    [crosstalk and chuckling]

    Unidentified voice: Yeah those legs, all I can see is the legs.

    Trump: Oh, it looks good.

    Unidentified voice: Come on, shorty.

    Trump: Oh, nice legs, huh?

    Bush: Oof, get out of the way, honey. Oh, that’s good legs. Go ahead.

    Trump: It’s always good if you don’t fall out of the bus. Like Ford. Gerald Ford, remember?

    Bush: Down below. Pull the handle.

    Trump: Hello. How are you? Hi.

    Arianne Zucker: Hi Mr. Trump. How are you? Pleasure to meet you.

    Trump: Nice seeing you. Terrific, terrific. You know Billy Bush?

    Bush: Hello, nice to see you. How are you doing, Arianne?

    Zucker: I’m doing very well, thank you. [To Trump] Are you ready to be a soap star?

    Trump: We’re ready, let’s go. Make me a soap star.

    Bush: How about a little hug for the Donald? He just got off the bus.

    Zucker: Would you like a little hug, darling?

    Trump: Okay, absolutely. Melania said this was okay.

    Bush: How about a little hug for the Bushy? I just got off the bus. There we go. Excellent. Well, you’ve got a nice co-star here.

    Zucker: Yes. Absolutely.

    Trump: Good. After you. Come on, Billy. Don’t be shy.

    Bush: As soon as a beautiful woman shows up, he just, he takes off on me. This always happens.

    Trump: Get over here Billy.

    Zucker: I’m sorry, come here.

    Bush: Let the little guy in here, come on.

    Zucker: Yeah, let the little guy in. How you feel now? Better?

    Bush: It’s hard to walk next to a guy like this.

    Zucker: I should actually be in the middle.

    Bush: Yeah, you get in the middle. There we go.

    Trump: Good, that’s better.

    Zucker: This is much better. This is—

    Trump: That’s better.

    Bush: Now, if you had to choose, honestly, between one of us: me or the Donald? Who would it be?

    Trump: I don’t know, that’s tough competition.

    Zucker: That’s some pressure right there.

    Bush: Seriously, you had to take one of us as a date.

    Zucker: I have to take the 5th on that one.

    Bush: Really?

    Zucker: Yup. I’ll take both.

    Trump: Which way?

    Zucker: Make a right. Here we go. [inaudible]

    Bush: Here he goes. I’m going to leave you here. Give me my microphone.

    Trump: Okay okay. Oh, you’re finished?

    Bush: You’re my man. Yeah.

    Trump: Oh good.

    Bush: I’m going to go do our show.

    Zucker: Oh, you want to reset? Okay.

    It sounds to me like Trump is bragging about how much he enjoys taking advantage of his power to get sexual favors, and he’s continuing the practice, and indeed he appears to be planning to do it right then and there, and then he does hug Arianne by putting her in that position of pressure. Granted, that’s just a hug. You are correct that Trump has contempt for women who go along with his advances. This is sad when you consider Melania’s commentary about her marriage. But Trump has a much more intense hatred of women who decline to do so.

    There’s so much wrong with Donald Trump. He’s a sociopath about how his actions affect others. And I don’t mean Arianne Zucker. I mean conservatism, Judge Kavanaugh, the direction of our culture.

    Yesterday I had this gut reaction to Sid Blumenthal that he was so unworthy to sit on that podium and preach about integrity. I have the same reaction to Trump when he boasts or pretends to be a leader. And yes, I say it too much, but it’s central to these events with Kavanaugh. I find it remarkable how powerfully both sides will agree with me, but only when I’m holding the exact same principle, the same standard, the same idea, and the facts happen to favor the ‘right’ side for them. That’s where we’re broken. Carrying water for Trump because you’re on his side is the problem.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  227. Canada awaits, don’t let the door bump your but.

    mg (9e54f8)

  228. Too cold.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  229. Quebec is the place you ought to be not here in the land of the free.

    mg (9e54f8)

  230. National Soros Radio has this takeaway:

    Washington’s Latest New Normal: High Court Nominees Stop Playing Nice

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  231. Also I need Tex-Mex.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  232. Not surprising Doug Jones arrested the wrong man the first time, letting the killer get away for another seven years.

    Narciso (7f2eb0)

  233. They have plenty of goose down.

    mg (9e54f8)

  234. They don’t have HEB in Quebec so #ResistWeMuch

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  235. The ones from Ontario, blend in well Quebecois well they dont

    Narciso (7f2eb0)

  236. With the U.S. Mexico trade deal, Jalapeños might not get to Canada. I see your point.

    mg (9e54f8)

  237. #226 That’s a pretty long post without anything about gang rape, trains, getting a buddy to help you jump a girl and hold her down, or whipping out your junk at parties.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  238. You are lucky Dustin has a sense of humor, mg.

    DRJ (15874d)

  239. The one that he wore through all of the hearings before yesterday. The “I’m just a even-keeled, neutral, independent arbiter with no horse in the race” mask.

    Leviticus (7d1f87) — 9/28/2018 @ 6:34 am

    Why do you call that a mask? Because he defended himself passionately from baseless charges that are aimed to destroy him, his family, his life? How would you react if someone accused you of the same if you were innocent?

    NJRob (1d7532)

  240. I asked would you take miss fords case, knowing the paucity of evidence.

    Narciso (7f2eb0)

  241. I am proud to be an American, DRJ. Simple as that.

    mg (9e54f8)

  242. And this everything Trump touches is debased and evil nonsense is getting old. I was reading Alice in Wonderland on a plane recently and the twenty something girl next to me felt obligated to point out that she thought Carrol was a pedophile and was I on board with that.

    It doesn’t matter who appointed BK. He can be judged on his own.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  243. Does being an American mean insulting other Americans when you disagree with them? I missed that in Patriotism 101.

    DRJ (15874d)

  244. Sheldon Whitehouse is an evil man. Hope someone digs into his background.

    NJRob (1d7532)

  245. “And I moved on her very heavily. In fact, I took her out furniture shopping. She wanted to get some furniture. I said, ‘I’ll show you where they have some nice furniture. ’ I took her out furniture– I moved on her like a b—-, but I couldn’t get there.”

    That is one freaking heavy move. I’ve moved furniture.

    harkin (a4b010)

  246. I am proud to be an American, DRJ. Simple as that.

    mg (9e54f8) — 9/28/2018 @ 8:14 am

    I love our country. But I live in Austin and I see something that I didn’t see in many of the other places I’ve lived. This is a country where we can be intensely skeptical of our President, or decisions we don’t like, and that lack of allegiance to the powerful (and their BS) is also American (it’s also Texan).

    It was obnoxious to quote pages of Trump hassling women. I know better. My bad. But don’t get me wrong: I think America deserves better than the partisan sickness that’s gotten a lot worse starting at Bush v Gore. It’s not that I think I’m better than that, it’s that I think we’re better than that.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  247. It’s obvious Kavanaugh was less than forthright about his youthful indiscretions. That speaks more to the caliber of his character in 2018 than 1982. But if he was interviewing for the job as your daughter’s gym teacher, you’d want to run this to ground. A week to do let the FBI do what they excel at doing best would put this fire out.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  248. You don’t hire a sex crimes prosecutor to attack an alleged victim of sex crimes. You hire a sex crimes prosecutor to allow an alleged victim of sex crimes to present her story as clearly and sympathetically as possible. And that’s what happened this morning.

    The question is, what was the goal of the Republican committee Senators? If the goal was to destroy Ford (as would be the case of a defense attorney in a criminal prosecution), then they failed miserably.

    But if the goal is to get Kavanaugh confirmed, then I am not sure. There are about five squishy Senators whom they have to get on board. People like Collins, Flake, Corker. If they had come against Ford like gangbusters, they would have lost them.

    As it stands, Ford came off as a confused and manipulated person. Maybe she really believes what she says, but it is hard to rely on anything she says as representing the truth. 35 years and intensive therapy can make one believe anything.

    Initial reports suggest that the squishys will indeed vote to confirm Kavanuagh. We will see what happens — anything can change. But if he is confirmed, then the strategy was a success.

    Even though it leaves people like us supremely frustrated that the Dems got away with a smear job. I don’t like it, but I will give up my emotional satisfaction at slamming her to get Kavanaugh confirmed. That, at least, seems to be the thinking being employed here. We will see if it works.

    Bored Lawyer (998177)

  249. Lindsay Graham would be a good man to take the helm from Grassley.

    Colonel Haiku (e208fd)

  250. So speak firmly and with truth:

    https://pjmedia.com/instapundit/308781/

    Narciso (7f2eb0)

  251. @241. LOL if only we could ask Yankee Doodle chums Hamilton and Adams.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  252. “But I live in Austin and I see something that I didn’t see in many of the other places I’ve lived.”

    I’ve been to Austin several times on bidness, nice place and ^^that^^ is no surprise… more than it’s share of eccentrics.

    Colonel Haiku (e208fd)

  253. Haiku, thank you for the suggestions. I think if I were in Quebec I would definitely have to try one of those out, just for the surreal experience. I can’t go. I’ve never had a passport. Only time I’ve ever left the USA has been on military orders. I’m trapped with the parties of Trump and Feinstein running things.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  254. #242 I think a quick review of political cartoons, not to mention public political conversation in general, from forever might support a yes to that question.

    I thought it was interesting in Grant’s autobiography he talks about different parts of towns and different pubs it wasn’t safe to go into if you were from the wrong political party.

    frosty48 (6226c1)

  255. Well callender a former employee of Jefferson, came up with the Sally hemmings lie:

    https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2018/09/the-blumenthal-projection.php

    Narciso (7f2eb0)

  256. Col.-Good call on Graham

    mg (9e54f8)

  257. Mild resignation is a way of compartmentalizing the bad things. In other words the things that were back in the past were awful, there were periods of powerlessness and fear back then but it is what it is, can’t change it, but can move on. I cannot and am not and will not be defined by those things.
    But the perpetrators? There will always, always be anger, feelings of rage and revenge. “I’m grown up and can fight back now and I can tell the world everything you did in graphic detail” “I want to kill you with my hands but instead I’ll will kill you with the truth”

    Yesterday was as close to a face to face confrontation as could be had and even though I heard a well coached “100%” from the victim about Kavanaugh being her abuser, the way she handled it seemed to me like she was not at all certain Kavanaugh was really the abuser. The things get mild resignation and are boxed away until there is a trigger that brings out the anger. No bigger trigger than the Ahole is on the other side of the curtain and I can bury the mother******.

    Ford tried to deny Kavanaugh the nomination which would have destroyed his life in the process, but it was backwards. You destroy his life and in the process derail his nomination. Tell me with some raw anger how much it hurt and how dirty and helpless and weak you felt afterwards

    I also thought his self defense rang very true. In my opinion Kavanaugh didn’t do it, and she knows it

    steveg (a9dcab)

  258. I’ve been to Austin several times on bidness, nice place and ^^that^^ is no surprise… more than it’s share of eccentrics.

    Colonel Haiku (e208fd) — 9/28/2018 @ 8:27 am

    True. But it’s not all lefties here. Austin has some strong-minded conservatives, lots of libertarians, and lots of lefties who will ask you why you assumed their gender (I get asked that at least once a month, and they are serious).

    I’ve lived in places that are all left, and places that are all right, but Austin’s mix of views is a lot more interesting. Anyway, I do want the country to work for the lefties too. I think that’s a big difference between my perspective and many others these days.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  259. But if he was interviewing for the job as your daughter’s gym teacher, you’d want to run this to ground.

    Except he is not interviewing for that job. He is interviewing for Supreme Court justice. And for the last 12 years, he has been a judge on the DC Circuit, which is the nearest thing you can get to that job. His performance there is the best predictor of his performance on SCOTUS, not what he may or may not have done in high school 35 years ago.

    Bored Lawyer (998177)

  260. “What a railroad job,” Democratic Senator Mazie Hirono said.

    wtf does this even mean

    is english her first language

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  261. When I lived in Austin back in 1979-1981 it was a conservative place with great music. Austin has changed.

    mg (9e54f8)

  262. I agree with both your comments, Bored Lawyer 247 and 258.

    DRJ (15874d)

  263. The college impacts Austin and makes it seem more weird and left. The suburbs are very conservative.

    DRJ (15874d)

  264. I think she was talking about the honolulu train debacle they cant find money to finish.

    mg (9e54f8)

  265. A guy who left Amy Klobucher to go live with Mazie Hirono is nobody to give people advice on where to live, mg. BTW, Amy is now wasting time at the Judiciary Committee hearing live.

    nk (dbc370)

  266. Kavanaugh was the otherwise mild mannered one with the raw anger at the attack on him to deny him a nomination that attack would ruin his life and they did not care. He was angry, hurt and appalled people would heartlessly stoop so so low. Kavanaugh’s reputation and life were being raped, *bleeped*over by some smirking amoral Senators and the mild mannered guy fought back the only way he knows how

    steveg (a9dcab)

  267. Leviticus, one more thing: If you want dignity in the courts and our judges, then condemn the Democrats for hiding charges until the last minute and sandbagging Kavanaugh and the GOP. Dignity comes from due process. If you don’t like what you saw yesterday, don’t blame the victims. Blame the Democrats who engineered it.

    DRJ (15874d)

  268. these parkland gutter-monkeys are every bit as classless and revolting as you can find anywhere in america

    Guttenberg took to Twitter on Thursday after the hearing, denouncing the judge for portraying himself as a “victim.”

    “Justice Kavanaugh your life and family are not ruined,” Guttenberg wrote. “Try having a child murdered by a weapon that you refer to as ‘common use.’

    ugh such foul people

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  269. is english her first language

    No. She was born in Japan. She is an immigrant and a naturalized citizen.

    nk (dbc370)

  270. Dignity comes from due process. If you don’t like what you saw yesterday, don’t blame the victims. Blame the Democrats who engineered it.

    YES. The democrats love bringing us to a crisis point, where they can demand the GOP give up something important to their agenda, because of how the democrats brought us to the crisis. They do this all the time. They did it with funding our troops in Iraq, versus spending on other government programs. I guess I could list a hundred examples.

    If this was an adversarial process, the democrats had ample opportunity to ask questions and have an investigation, and almost all of their questions were ‘will you stop this and ask for another investigation’, while ignoring that they hid the issue. They had their opportunity and did not provide enough evidence to make their case.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  271. 252… they actually have Tex-Mex up there… who knew? There’s an excellent restaurant (Greek, Mediterranean, seafood) in Montreal… Milo’s… if you order lobster, they make it a point to pluck the live lobster out of the tank, put it on a platter, bring it to the table and have it do what amounts to standing on its head for a lobster, tail upright.

    Colonel Haiku (e208fd)

  272. They then take it back to the kitchen, drop it in the pot of boiling water and the screaming commences

    Colonel Haiku (e208fd)

  273. “Justice Kavanaugh your life and family are not ruined,” Guttenberg wrote. “Try having a child murdered by a weapon that you refer to as ‘common use.’

    If they keep doxxing Republicans and suggesting they should face more of the attacks we saw last year, maybe that will actually happen. I can easily see someone attacking Kavanaugh after the democrats take the White House.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  274. Real Tex-Mex in Canada? I don’t believe it. It’s like saying West Texas has live lobsters.

    DRJ (15874d)

  275. @201. It’s a job interview. That legal documents are part of the process doesn’t make it criminal proceeding. Applying for a passport is not a ‘criminal proceeding.’

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  276. She was born in Japan.

    ha i knew it

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  277. Even though it leaves people like us supremely frustrated that the Dems got away with a smear job.

    I don’t think they did. They were shown to be willing to turn over any card, no matter its truthiness, that would advance their cause or harm Republicans. The takeaway I got from Ford’s testimony is that here was a badly injured woman who is being used as a pawn by powerful people who don’t give a rat’s ass about her, only in what effect her pain might have on others. It does not reflect well on Feinstein or the hardliners.

    That Ford has allowed this event to define her life — even 35 years later — doesn’t reflect well on psychiatry of therapy. “Issues” are to be overcome. Here they have festered. A pitiful and perhaps wasted life.

    Kevin M (d6cbf1)

  278. I’ve never been a fan of Lindsay Graham, but I have to say that he did a great job dressing down the Democrats.

    As a trial lawyer, I agree with Beldar–Avenetti’s client would be toast on any witness stand, cross-examined by someone fresh out of law school; the only question in my mind is whether he has now subjected her to some kind of charge for lying, although I guess an affidavit, in some jurisdictions, may not be considered testimony for criminal purposes, unless it was submitted in a case, or to the committee itself.

    I don’t understand why Avenetti isn’t facing ethics charges for his behavior–he clearly posted a photo of his client with her name, and then asked the public to respect her privacy–what the heck?

    Rochf (877dba)

  279. I can easily see someone attacking Kavanaugh after the democrats take the White House.

    And there are members of the committee who would call it “justice.”

    Kevin M (d6cbf1)

  280. Minor things I did not like about Kavanaugh’s performance:

    * Blaming this on a wider ranging conspiracy including the “revenge of the Clintons.” Huh?

    * Asking Senators if they had blacked out.

    I don’t deeply blame him for either, given the nonsense he has gone through. But the second point (the response asking Sen. Klobuchar if she had ever blacked out) seemed kind of juvenile and inappropriate, while the first could be read to imply he won’t be the Justice for all the people. It’s like when Obama talked about bitter clingers, or Mitt Romney said it wasn’t his job to worry about the 47%, or Ted Cruz talked about “New York values.” You have to be there for all the people. As a judge, you’re a judge for all the people. I thought the overly partisan tone was not judicial.

    Still, hard to blame him too much.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  281. @201. It’s a job interview. That legal documents are part of the process doesn’t make it criminal proceeding. Applying for a passport is not a ‘criminal proceeding.’

    DCSCA (797bc0) — 9/28/2018 @ 8:48 am

    It was more like a grand inquisition. Kamala trying to extract gotchas, about things that weren’t proven, essentially assuming guilt. It was appalling. And while the stakes were different from a criminal proceeding, they were obviously high stakes. Not just for Kavanaugh, but for the democratic agenda. It wasn’t a job interview. It was exploitation of two people, in order to control a seat on the Court.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  282. Kavanaugh apologized for asking Klobuchar that question the next time he spoke.

    DRJ (15874d)

  283. Maybe – or it could have led to a mask slipping off, the way Kavanaugh’s did.

    I didn’t see a mask slipping off. I saw an outraged guy.

    Then again, while Ford seemed like something of an odd duck, she seemed to believe what she was saying. She didn’t seem like a wild partisan hack making stuff up.

    I think Kavanaugh should be confirmed because it’s s stalemate and she has no evidence. But I don’t know that I can get on a partisan high horse and insist she’s a giant liar. I think it’s a conundrum. But I’d confirm him.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  284. @282. The squawking and theatre is over process. But it doesn’t get us closer to the truth. And that’s not the objective here.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  285. *278. psychiatry oR therapy

    Kevin M (d6cbf1)

  286. His apology beginning at 2:45. He said this is a tough process and he was sorry he did that.

    DRJ (15874d)

  287. Process matters. It’s what makes our system work.

    DRJ (15874d)

  288. You know how alcoholics trying to quit shouldn’t live with people who still drink? Well, maybe, people trying to overcome psychiatric problems shouldn’t live in California?

    nk (dbc370)

  289. We (nk, hf, I) shouldnt cast aspersions on Mazie – isnt Tammy Duckworth a not-far-from 1-off?

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  290. nk- after living with massholes for 22 years I can say whatever I feel like. Don’t like it put me on delete. Mahalo

    mg (e60689)

  291. But I don’t know that I can get on a partisan high horse and insist she’s a giant liar.

    It seems more likely that, in many years of therapy, she has looked at the event so many different ways that she cannot tell truth from guesswork.

    Kevin M (d6cbf1)

  292. i think it was just fine for Mr. K to let the senators know how vile they are, amy klobuchar included

    these senators cheapened the concept of “rape” and degraded america and democracy and service

    they’re truly disgusting people, and good for Mr. K for hinting at their rank and dirty hypocrisy

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  293. He’s a bad drunk. And given how he was snapping back at senators when asked about his drinking, as often occurs during interventions, he may be a functioning alcoholic. But he is no choirboy or ‘boy scout given his less than forthcoming testimony about his youthful indiscretions, which speaks more to him character in 2018 than 1982. That may not disqualify him from the gig, but karma has a way of catching up with people one day.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  294. You know how alcoholics trying to quit shouldn’t live with people who still drink?

    No, I don’t. Unless you want to put *sometimes* into that sentence, it’s just not true. One might want to find new living arrangements if it’s a roommate who is drinking, but almost never true if it’s a spouse.

    Kevin M (d6cbf1)

  295. DCSCA, do you still call yourself a Republican?

    Kevin M (d6cbf1)

  296. Guilt or innocence is binary in criminal court only. It is a spectrum everywhere else.

    I found this assertion surprising.

    Guilt or innocence is binary; to wit, Kavanaugh either did what Ford accused him of, or he didn’t.

    Of course, our degree of confidence or certainty about his guilt or innocence can fall anywhere on a spectrum, but that’s not the same thing.

    The precedent of allowing charges so tenuous and totally unsubstantiated to dictate the outcome of this process seems far more dangerous to America than letting a qualified and respected judge who got handsy with a woman 35 years ago after having too much to drink to take a seat on the Supreme Court.

    Ford literally has nothing except her own word. In fact, she has less than nothing, since her account is categorically denied by two others with no personal axes to grind (PJ Smyth and Leland Ingham) who she herself claims should have been able to confirm it.

    Even if we stand normal civic values on their head, and invert them to say Kavanaugh is guilty as long as there is a reasonable doubt about his innocence, I don’t see that Ford cleared that threshold.

    Indeed prosecutor Mitchell essentially agreed when she said that Ford’s testimony would be insufficient to justify even a search warrant, which requires only reasonable suspicion.

    Dave (445e97)

  297. Yes, DCSCA, the karma in this case is that while C. Thomas gets a scorched-earth soul mate, Sotomayor gets a group discount on whatever equipment or medicinal applications are needed to keep deteriorating organs in working order.

    urbanleftbehind (5eecdb)

  298. Demand justice is fronted by an aide to Feinstein, and klobuchar, he was well within his right, the fact there was no evidence should seal the deal.

    Narciso (7f2eb0)

  299. @298. Meh. And Bart O’Kavanaugh will drink to that.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  300. What is your basis for saying Kavanaugh is a drunk? This is all I saw:

    1. He admits having drinks when he was younger.
    2. He denies ever blacking out.
    3. He refused to discuss his youthful drinking in detail.
    4. He was angry at how he has been treated by the Democrats in the confirmation process.

    DRJ (15874d)

  301. He’s a bad drunk. And given how he was snapping back at senators when asked about his drinking, as often occurs during interventions, he may be a functioning alcoholic. But he is no choirboy or ‘boy scout given his less than forthcoming testimony about his youthful indiscretions, which speaks more to him character in 2018 than 1982. That may not disqualify him from the gig, but karma has a way of catching up with people one day.

    DCSCA (797bc0) — 9/28/2018 @ 9:03 am

    You don’t think karma caught up with him yesterday? He made it to the very top, and his reputation was destroyed. Sure, he still has it pretty good, but he’s paid for the drinking to some extent.

    I don’t know if he’s an alcoholic. It’s very easy to judge people on TV like that. I wouldn’t be surprised if he were, but I think his rage was at first a forced strategy, a considered ‘how to show them I’m a victim’, and then as he got more comfortable, something authentic and emotional came across, and a lot of reasonable people found that Kavanaugh actually was a victim in this process.

    And of course I’m seeing a lot of liberals mock him for shedding tears, because he’s not man enough or whatever. It gets old seeing the left suggest conservative men are gay or weak for having emotions.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  302. the man was valedictator of his whole school

    this was not somebody what had too many beer

    this is a studious person – he probably knows lots of synonyms for words like clandestine and assiduous

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  303. Like Mike carper, Brown of Ohio, his wife had a restraining order against him.

    Narciso (7f2eb0)

  304. @301. Said he was a bad drunk. So was Johnny Carson. His own ‘calendars’ document his excessive partying and his pals, chums, yearbooks and upchucking escapades add to it. And in case you missed it, he must have testified under oath 20 times he likes to drink beer. Beer, beer, beer. Lots of beer. And still does. The clips are comedy gold. He’s a man-child; but then, so is the fella who nominated him.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  305. I had not seen the apology, DRJ, but am pleased to see it. It’s exactly what I thought: a good man being a little rash after having his buttons pushed in a way few ever do.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  306. DCSCA, you don’t have the evidence to make the claim about his drinking as boldly as you have. It’s clear Kavanaugh is a drinker and always has been. But not provably to the extent you have claimed.

    Patterico (115b1f)

  307. @302. Dustin, see the second part of my #144.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  308. the man was valedictator of his whole school

    this was not somebody what had too many beer

    His accomplishments help a lot with his rep, but I know a lot of really smart, really hard working, very accomplished lawyers who are alcoholics. It’s a thing.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  309. @307. He testified to it.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  310. Also, on the ‘drinking talk’ you mentioned, couldn’t help but notice how he was responding to questions by snapping back at senators about it and asking about their own their drinking habits. Reminded me of how someone w/an alcohol problem snaps back to friends/family when confronted in an intervention.

    I thought that was unprofessional at first, but as the Senators asked him things he already answered, just to get the clip, I kinda liked that they then had to face the same question. It was defensive, but he was… defending himself so that makes sense.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  311. The WaPo reports that Dubya has been working quietly behind the scenes to support Kavanaugh:

    Trump’s options [to secure the votes needed] are somewhat limited, White House and Capitol Hill aides say. The key votes — Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine), Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) — are not easily swayed by the president, these people say. At least some of these members have received calls from former president George W. Bush in recent days, aides say.

    That (persuading people privately rather than getting in front of a TV camera and making it about himself) sounds like the President Bush I know and respect.

    Dave (445e97)

  312. @309. Yep. It’s a thing.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  313. Let out the WaPo link.

    Dave (445e97)

  314. @311. If you’ve participated in interventions, it’s a familiar refrain. It rang a bell.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  315. We all have experiences but that doesn’t make them universal. That you’ve known someone who was sexually harassed doesn’t make you an expert on identifying other victims, and knowing alcoholics doesn’t make you an expert on spotting other alcoholics. Do you honestly think you are the only person who knows alcoholics or victims of sexual harassment?

    DRJ (15874d)

  316. You know who would get whom drunk so she passed out in joint sessions of Congress during the State Of The Union? Antony Kennedy Ruth Bader Ginzburg. On California wine, no less.

    nk (dbc370)

  317. “Leviticus, one more thing: If you want dignity in the courts and our judges, then condemn the Democrats for hiding charges until the last minute and sandbagging Kavanaugh and the GOP. Dignity comes from due process. If you don’t like what you saw yesterday, don’t blame the victims. Blame the Democrats who engineered it.”

    – DRJ

    I have no problem condemning the Democrats for anything, including the way they shamelessly treated this woman like a political football. Her greatest sin, in my eyes, is collaborating with them in that effort. I’m surprised I still have to say it, but I hold the Democrats and the Republicans equally culpable for the oxygen-depriving stranglehold they continue to maintain on our politics. What we witnessed yesterday was just one more example of the effects of long-term oxygen-deprivation on this country’s collective political brain.

    I just do not understand where this “tie goes to the runner” mentality comes from when we’re talking about a Supreme Court nomination. Dignity is a function of character, not due process, and there are martyrs to attest to that. So, while I certainly saw nothing resembling “due process” on display in yesterday’s farcical and shameful proceedings, I do not blame the lack of due process for Kavanaugh’s lack of dignity – I blame a lack of character.

    Is stoicism too much to ask of a Supreme Court justice?

    Leviticus (efada1)

  318. If someone files a false assault report what is the penalty for that?

    Narciso (7f2eb0)

  319. Is stoicism too much to ask of a Supreme Court justice?

    “When you’re slapped, you’ll take it and like it.” — Video, Sam Spade to Joel Cairo

    nk (dbc370)

  320. @316. Don’t really follow that. The topic came up several times in his testimony and under questioning for the position. He discussed it and bantered somewhat flippantly with the senators about it as well. It came up back in the day w/John Tower’s hearings for Sec. of Defense.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  321. @320. Meh. It’s only a lifetime gig.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  322. @Dustin The letter that Senator Feinstein got was NOT addressed to Senator Feinstein – it was a copy of a letter sent to Congresswoman Anna Eshoo. It’s not clear actually that forwarding it to Senator Feinstein had Blasey Ford’s consent, at least before the fact)

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/national/wp/2018/09/27/kavanaugh-hearing-transcript

    Later, we discussed the possibility of sending a letter to Ranking Member Feinstein, who is one of my state senators, describing what occurred. My understanding is that Representative Eshoo’s office delivered a copy of my letter to Senator Feinstein’s office on July 30th.

    She NEVER addressed a letter tp Senator Feinstein. She “discussed” but didn’t necessarily “agree” to send a letter to Senator Feinstein, and shed doesn’t even know for sure, or cannot testify to, or it would be embarassing to her to testify to exactly what happened.

    This was very carefully prepared testimony.

    Dustin @518 in the oprevious thread:

    And then just saying everything about the timing was Ford’s decision. What a load of…

    Well it was, except that Ford was being manipulated by other people, including her lawyers.

    She held this stuff for the most cynical purposes.

    Again, what was the point of telling Feinstein if Feinstein was supposed to keep it confidential from the other committee members???

    From Christine Blasey Fords’s prepared statement:

    The letter included my name, but also a request that it be kept confidential. My hope was that providing the information confidentially would be sufficient to allow the Senate to consider Mr. Kavanaugh’s serious misconduct…

    And how was that supposed to happen if Senator Feinstein couldn’t tell the other Senators?? I guess Blasey Ford didn’t know about that.

    Or she thought that only her name was to be kept confidential from the other Senators, but Senator Feinstein was told (Verbally? By whom?) to keep the entire thing confidential.

    I think Christine Blasey Ford, Ph.D, and Senator Dianne Feinstein were both being played, except that Christine Blasey Ford was a pawn, but Dianne Feinstein is a queen.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  323. Ok, let me be more direct. Kavanaugh did not say he is a drunk. What qualifies you to decide he is one?

    DRJ (15874d)

  324. 305. The upchucking is not related to the amount of alcohol consumed, but the kind and I thing, in the end, Kavanaugh explained it that way. he said he had a weak stomach. So he was capable of drinking rotgut.

    https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=rotgut

    The term originated in the old west when many alcoholic beverages were designed purely to be easily afforded by anyone and their dog and to get the drinker hammered, often times, these cheap alcohols would make the drinker sick (due to the extremely low-quality of the ingredients).

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  325. Sammy, you mention ‘her lawyers’. Who are these lawyers and who paid for them? Where did that bit of magic happen? Oh yeah… Feinstein.

    You’re speaking to a larger conspiracy that that. I don’t know where you’re going there but feel free to explain. I think Feinstein’s office is where most of the problem was with the investigation, sandbagging, and deception.

    I don’t think Ford is nearly as naive as her testimony suggests, though. I think she was probably much more savvy about what’s up.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  326. “Is stoicism too much to ask of a Supreme Court justice?”

    Is civility and respect for the Rule of Law too much to ask of Senators?

    Colonel Haiku (e208fd)

  327. She knew about her Go Fund Me.

    DRJ (15874d)

  328. They were recruited through demand justice, as I pointed out, Katz made excuses for Franken just this year.

    Narciso (7f2eb0)

  329. He said ask Judge is he was the man described in the 1997 book. Kavanaugh said the book was fictioonalized. Nobody mentioned the 2005 book

    https://www.amazon.com/God-Man-Georgetown-Prep-Schooling/dp/082452313X

    However, what I find more disturbing are the cases of faculty members who have left because of inappropriate contact with students and recent graduates. One was a Jesuit and it is very public and out in the open with the press, etc. Another was with a female faculty member who left mysteriously in mid-September, the consensus among students and parents was that it was sexual contact with a 16 year old student, but the school was completely silent on the matter. This was at the height of the Church Abuse Crisis in Boston.

    When was that?

    From a review:

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  330. @316. Postscript:

    Kavanaugh mentions liking beer an astounding amount while denying a drunken sexual assault

    Brett Kavanaugh gave a spirited defense of his conduct and character at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, during which he was accused of drunken sexual assault, but mentioned drinking beer nearly 30 times.

    President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee said a number of times that he had never drank to the point of memory loss. He was defending against Palo Alto University professor Christine Blasey Ford’s allegation that he attempted to rape her at a high school party in 1982 while under the influence of alcohol.

    But bizarrely, a refrain of Kavanaugh’s defense became repeated iterations of some version of “I like beer.”

    In total, Kavanaugh mentioned “beer” 29 times. Kavanaugh conceded that most of his social functions in high school involved beer drinking that, despite his claims to the contrary, violated state law at the time.’ – source- https://www.businessinsider.com/kavanaugh-repeatedly-embraces-beer-drinking-in-sex-assault-defense-2018-9
    ___

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UGwHb3g4uAo

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  331. “……in Grant’s autobiography he talks about different parts of towns and different pubs it wasn’t safe to go into if you were from the wrong political party.”

    Great read. It sits on my shelf next to Sherman’s, which may be even better and is certainly better prose.

    harkin (a4b010)

  332. Amy Klobuchar made a point of arguing that medical records are considered excellent testimony

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/national/wp/2018/09/27/kavanaugh-hearing-transcript

    KLOBUCHAR: Thank you. I would assume that’s true.

    Dr. Ford, under federal law — and I don’t expect you to know this, but statements made to medical professionals are considered to be more reliable. There’s a federal rule of evidence about this. You told your counselor about this back in 2012, is that right?

    This was said as if the therasopists notes backed her up, but they didn’t!

    But they haven’t been turned over to the committee.

    But we know it said 4 boys attacked her and that she was in her late teens.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  333. “Ok, let me be more direct. Kavanaugh did not say he is a drunk. What qualifies you to decide he is one?”

    – DRJ

    Circumstantial evidence, right? What qualifies us to say that Christine Blasey Ford has mis-identified Kavanaugh as the man who assaulted her when she says she is 100% sure it was him?

    Leviticus (efada1)

  334. Ford even said:

    therapists don’t typically write down content as much as they write down process. They usually are tracking your symptoms and not your story and the facts.

    Sammy Finkelman (02a146)

  335. @324. See #331. And refer to the characterizations by his pals, chums and classmates.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  336. She knew about her Go Fund Me.

    DRJ (15874d) — 9/28/2018 @ 10:14 am

    It’s at half a million now!

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  337. What qualifies us to say that Christine Blasey Ford has mis-identified Kavanaugh as the man who assaulted her when she says she is 100% sure it was him?

    there’s not a shred of evidence that Ford was ever sexually assaulted her whole life

    by ANYBODY

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  338. @324. Postscript. In fact, said he was a ‘bad drunk’– just like Johnny Carson. Not a ‘happy drunk.’ Not a ‘cheerful drunk.’ A ‘bad drunk.’

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  339. Ok, DCSCA and now Leviticus, what is the circumstantial evidence that Kavanaugh is a drunk? Please list the facts that show this.

    DRJ (15874d)

  340. Bill Kristol would vote “no”… that is so depressing 😄

    Colonel Haiku (e208fd)

  341. I finally watched Ford’s video testimony. The first ten seconds. Until she orders coffee. If we are to judge Kavanaugh and Ford by appearance and demeanor alone, Kavanaugh wins hands down. A shutout.

    nk (dbc370)

  342. See 331, and refer to associated materials, his testimony, his calendars, his pals, chums, classmates, yearbooks, etc. It’s his history and his life experience; it is what it is.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  343. You don’t get to make a charge and then tell me to look for the evidence myself. It’s your charge. You support it.

    DRJ (15874d)

  344. If the Dems had anything remotely resembling credible evidence that Kavanaugh has been a drunk the past 25 years, they would have proffered it. Bigly.

    Ed from SFV (6d42fa)

  345. @344. Don’t follow. Nobody is ‘charging’ him w/anything. Asserting he is a ‘bad drunk’ just like Johnny Carson isn’t criminal.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  346. “You don’t get to make a charge and then tell me to look for the evidence myself. It’s your charge. You support it.”

    – DRJ

    I haven’t made any charge. My point was about Ford’s testimony.

    Ford’s testimony is direct evidence. The lack of corroborating testimony is circumstantial evidence. Which do we assess?

    Leviticus (efada1)

  347. Charges don’t have to be criminal charges. It is also an accusation. Calling someone a drunk is an accusation. Support it.

    DRJ (15874d)

  348. Leviticus,

    Often people make the mistake of seeing direct evidence as superior to circumstantial. In fact it’s often not the case, particularly when we consider eyewitness identification, one of the most perilous forms of direct evidence.

    Dustin (ba94b2)

  349. Leviticus, DCSCA said Kavanaugh is a drunk and I asked him to support that claim. I thought you were making that claim, too. This is not about whether Ford, unless you think a claim that someone was inebriated at 17 proves he is a drunk at 53.

    DRJ (15874d)

  350. … not about whether Ford was telling the truth ….

    DRJ (15874d)

  351. @348. Still don’t follow. Refer to the testimony, associated materials, yearbooks, ‘calendars’ and comments by the pals, chums and classmates who characterized him during numerous episodes of excessive drinking. It is what it is.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  352. @350. Inaccurate. Said he was a ‘bad drunk’ just like Johnny Carson.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  353. You don’t understand how to list the evidence that supports your claim that Kavanaugh is a drunk now? What other words can I use to ask for this?

    DRJ (15874d)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.8477 secs.