Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 09-15-2019, 03:07 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,868
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
Because you weren't being more specific, you were just saying "I don't want your asshole opinion, HD".
If that's how it came across, I deeply apologize.

Now hopefully we can get back to being critical of sexual abusers and their enablers.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 09-15-2019 at 03:07 PM.
  #52  
Old 09-15-2019, 03:59 PM
Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 36,312
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK84 View Post
I was wondering when you’d show up on the bandwagon!

Do you have a substantive reply to make? I don’t see why any of this requires personal insults.
__________________
*I'm experimenting with E, em, and es and emself as pronouns that do not indicate any specific gender nor exclude any specific gender.
  #53  
Old 09-15-2019, 04:08 PM
Jonathan Chance is online now
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 22,985

The Moderator Speaks


You will all calm down or I’ll isdues warnings for personal shots and lock the thing down.

I hope that’s clear.
  #54  
Old 09-15-2019, 04:09 PM
Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 36,312
Nm
__________________
*I'm experimenting with E, em, and es and emself as pronouns that do not indicate any specific gender nor exclude any specific gender.

Last edited by Acsenray; 09-15-2019 at 04:09 PM.
  #55  
Old 09-15-2019, 04:10 PM
Thudlow Boink's Avatar
Thudlow Boink is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Lincoln, IL
Posts: 27,770
Quote:
Originally Posted by Donald J. Trump, Twitter-head of the United States
Now the Radical Left Democrats and their Partner, the LameStream Media, are after Brett Kavanaugh again, talking loudly of their favorite word, impeachment. He is an innocent man who has been treated HORRIBLY. Such lies about him. They want to scare him into turning Liberal!
"Scare him into turning Liberal"? How the F does that work?
  #56  
Old 09-15-2019, 04:12 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,868
The most infuriating part here is that so many Republicans in office seem to act as if no one could possibly be honestly concerned about fighting sexual assault and rape in our society. That anything beyond political concerns are just not believable to them.
  #57  
Old 09-15-2019, 04:30 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,773
Anyway. That there are more accusations that were not investigated is, I doubt, a surprise to anyone, the most Rightward partisan inclusive. HD, is the revelation that more accusations existed that were not fully investigated a surprise to you? And it does not seem like anyone of any position is going to have their positions changed by this alone.

Not sure what hypothetical something would be enough to get anyone to shift their perspective.

From each side. Would Blasey Ford on tape stating that she really wasn't very sure about any of these memories be enough on the one side? Would Kavanaugh on tape bragging about getting away lying about his behavior in college be enough on the other?


Is calling for Kavanaugh's impeachment now a wise political move?
  #58  
Old 09-15-2019, 04:36 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,615
The fact that there were unfollowed leads is not news to anyone who has followed the story. There were people complaining during the actual confirmation hearings that the FBI declined to interview them. The witness mentioned in the OPs article isn't talking to the press. So this thread/"new" accusation is just, as mentioned earlier, an excuse to gripe "we wuz robbed".
  #59  
Old 09-15-2019, 04:42 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 14,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by DSeid View Post
... HD, is the revelation that more accusations existed that were not fully investigated a surprise to you? ... Is calling for Kavanaugh's impeachment now a wise political move?
No, and no (at least not for the dems, but that's never really stopped them in the past).
  #60  
Old 09-15-2019, 04:47 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,868
Quote:
Originally Posted by CarnalK View Post
The fact that there were unfollowed leads is not news to anyone who has followed the story. There were people complaining during the actual confirmation hearings that the FBI declined to interview them. The witness mentioned in the OPs article isn't talking to the press. So this thread/"new" accusation is just, as mentioned earlier, an excuse to gripe "we wuz robbed".
It's actual news, even if it's not terribly surprising news. It's appropriate to discuss and be angry about further indications that the Kavanaugh investigation was a sham, even if they aren't that surprising.
  #61  
Old 09-15-2019, 04:54 PM
CarnalK's Avatar
CarnalK is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 18,615
It's not further indication, it's not really news. It's just someone decided to highlight one of the unexplored leads from when it was news.
  #62  
Old 09-15-2019, 05:10 PM
Savannah is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Greater Victoria, BC
Posts: 4,706
Removed.
__________________
MWF 45
Location: Victoria, BC Canada

Last edited by Savannah; 09-15-2019 at 05:11 PM. Reason: I was insulting and not adding to the conversation.
  #63  
Old 09-15-2019, 06:06 PM
sps49sd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 592
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
The most infuriating part here is that so many Republicans in office seem to act as if no one could possibly be honestly concerned about fighting sexual assault and rape in our society. That anything beyond political concerns are just not believable to them.
But that is exactly what Feinstein did.

We wish it were otherwise, but apparently there are too many (>0) politicians who look at things only in how their personal agenda can leverage this.
  #64  
Old 09-15-2019, 06:14 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,868
Quote:
Originally Posted by sps49sd View Post
But that is exactly what Feinstein did.

We wish it were otherwise, but apparently there are too many (>0) politicians who look at things only in how their personal agenda can leverage this.
I'm not going to defend Feinstein -- I think she mostly sucks, and she's mostly sucked for a long, long time. But she pushed for a full investigation, even if she probably tried to time it for politics. The Republicans prevented a full investigation of the allegations of sexual abuse. DiFi sucks, but pushing for a full investigation of sexual assault is infinitely morally superior to trying to prevent one, whatever the timing.
  #65  
Old 09-15-2019, 06:33 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 7,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lance Turbo View Post
They had no problem overlooking corroborated evidence that Bret Kavanaugh sexually assaulted women last week. They'll have no problem overlooking corroborated evidence that Bret Kavanaugh sexually assaulted women next week.

They had no problem overlooking obvious lies told by Bret Kavanaugh in his confirmation hearing last week. They'll have no problem overlooking obvious lies told by Bret Kavanaugh in his confirmation hearing next week.
That's all true.

But it certainly re-opens some topics worth re-visiting:
  • The Trump/Barr Department of Justice, and its FBI, handled the "investigation" into Kavanaugh in a way that's worth close examination, and
  • The Republicans who voted for a man who arguably lied to Congress should be held accountable for those votes in their re-election bids, and
  • Most specifically, Susan Collins appears to be receiving some close scrutiny from her potential voters. One representative tweet among thousands:
Quote:
Katelyn Burns - ‏Verified account
@transscribe
I’m reminded today of the tear-streaked faces of the clusters of women who were huddled around phones in the Hart Atrium watching Susan Collins’ floor speech announcing her vote for Kavanaugh’s confirmation.

We all knew.
5:12 AM - 15 Sep 2019
Reply 176 Retweet 1.8K Like 11K
https://twitter.com/transscribe/stat...07904217980928

The calls for impeaching Kavanaugh may gather force, given that the Dempcratic presidential candidates appear to be leaning heavily into the cause:

Quote:
Democratic presidential candidates including Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Sen. Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), former U.S. Representative Beto O’Rourke, and former Housing and Urban Development Secretary Julián Castro have called for Kavanaugh to be impeached.

... Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said Brett Kavanaugh “should never have been nominated,” and that he supports “any appropriate constitutional mechanism to hold him accountable.”
https://www.motherjones.com/politics...castro-warren/

This does have the potential to last for a few news cycles--none of which will be favorable for Trump and his minions.
  #66  
Old 09-15-2019, 07:23 PM
nelliebly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Washington
Posts: 1,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I'm not sure if it's even that. I suspect many of these folks just really value angering Democrats and liberals far more than they value fighting sexual assault and rape. Whether or not Kavanaugh actually sexually abused someone is far, far less important to many of them than his politics.
Of course some Trump/Kavanaugh supporters value angering liberals, but with all due respect, I think you're being a tad quixotic if you believe those people value fighting sexual assault and rape at all. To do that, they'd have to acknowledge it happens and that it most often happens to women who know their assailants. That in turn would force them to question their own assumptions about women. Not gonna happen.
  #67  
Old 09-15-2019, 07:29 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 14,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by nelliebly View Post
... they'd have to acknowledge it happens and that it most often happens to women who know their assailants. That in turn would force them to question their own assumptions about women. ...
Why do you think acknowledging either of those things "would force them to question their own assumptions about women"? What assumptions about women do you think "those people" have?

Last edited by HurricaneDitka; 09-15-2019 at 07:30 PM.
  #68  
Old 09-15-2019, 07:38 PM
snfaulkner's Avatar
snfaulkner is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: 123 Fake Street
Posts: 8,227
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Why do you think acknowledging either of those things "would force them to question their own assumptions about women"? What assumptions about women do you think "those people" have?
That "they" "don't give" "a" "shit" about them as long as they get what they want. As if they were subhuman.
__________________
It may be because I'm a drooling simpleton with the attention span of a demented gnat, but would you mind explaining everything in words of one syllable. 140 chars max.
  #69  
Old 09-15-2019, 07:43 PM
wolfpup's Avatar
wolfpup is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 11,181
A couple of comments on two matters that I think should be obvious: (a) no, the new accusations don't surprise me in the least, because Christine Ford was a highly credible witness whose account painted a picture consistent with all the other evidence about Kavanaugh's character and behavior, which should have been clear to anyone with any political affiliation without partisan blinders on, and (b) no, nothing is going to be done about it, not so much for partisan reasons as for the fact that the standards of evidence now required to remove Kavanaugh are no longer achievable for events that happened so long ago.

However, there was ample evidence during the confirmation hearings that the man was clearly unfit for the office of Supreme Court Justice, being a partisan hack, a drunken lout, and a probable rapist. The real question I have is not for conservatives, but for the kind of Republican ideologues who unconditionally support Kavanaugh. What I wonder is simply how they can reconcile with their conscience their support of this degenerate reprobate when a highly regarded moderate like Merrick Garland, eminently qualified and widely respected on both sides of the aisle, wasn't even allowed the dignity of a confirmation hearing. This is no longer partisanship, this is a fiasco in which the national interest that government is supposed to serve carries no weight whatsoever. This is a dysfunctional political system totally gone to hell.
  #70  
Old 09-15-2019, 07:46 PM
SamuelA is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,861
Hypothetically, let's suppose the RBG had a deep dark secret. Witnesses come forward, and state that she was a member of the Nazi Party/the KKK/the Communists. At first it's just one witness, who can't remember when exactly RBG attended meetings or how many or which city. But later, 25 witnesses are dug up and even her handwriting on a meeting sign in sheet is found. (but it might not be her handwriting, but it looks like it)

Does this really change anything? Would you call for RBG's immediate removal from the Supreme Court? Maybe there's even a mechanism - perhaps the statue of limitations for the crimes the club she was allegedly in have passed, but maybe she was asked a direct question during her confirmation hearing and she turns out to have lied.

Would you call for her impeachment, knowing that Trump is immediately going to replace RBG with the most conservative, bigoted, young, well connected attorney he can find?
  #71  
Old 09-15-2019, 07:55 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,868
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
Hypothetically, let's suppose the RBG had a deep dark secret. Witnesses come forward, and state that she was a member of the Nazi Party/the KKK/the Communists. At first it's just one witness, who can't remember when exactly RBG attended meetings or how many or which city. But later, 25 witnesses are dug up and even her handwriting on a meeting sign in sheet is found. (but it might not be her handwriting, but it looks like it)

Does this really change anything? Would you call for RBG's immediate removal from the Supreme Court? Maybe there's even a mechanism - perhaps the statue of limitations for the crimes the club she was allegedly in have passed, but maybe she was asked a direct question during her confirmation hearing and she turns out to have lied.

Would you call for her impeachment, knowing that Trump is immediately going to replace RBG with the most conservative, bigoted, young, well connected attorney he can find?
This is about as ridiculous a hypothetical as I can imagine, but let's see...

It'd depend on how she reacted. Does she very obviously lie and obfuscate? Or does she talk about how terribly she feels about her poor judgment as a young woman, talk about how much she's learned, grown, and changed, and deeply (and sincerely) apologize?
  #72  
Old 09-15-2019, 08:19 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 41,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
It'd depend on how she reacted. Does she very obviously lie and obfuscate?
When her journal said "Sig heil"? It was an in-joke, a misspelling of "sick hail," because there was some pretty serious precipitation that year. The "mein fuhrer" that followed? Gosh, they thought German companies were mining too many diamonds back then.
  #73  
Old 09-15-2019, 08:30 PM
SamuelA is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
It'd depend on how she reacted. Does she very obviously lie and obfuscate? Or does she talk about how terribly she feels about her poor judgment as a young woman, talk about how much she's learned, grown, and changed, and deeply (and sincerely) apologize?
Umm, if Kavanaugh had openly admitted to attempting to rape Ford, and said he was sorry...conservatives aren't the forgiving type.

And in this hypothetical, the club RBG is alleged to have been a part of committed a serious crime, but one that the statute of limitations has expired on. Perhaps they planted a bomb but it didn't go off.

But it isn't clear if RBG was at the meeting the bomb planting was planned at, but other witnesses said she would drunkenly talk about "blowing up" black people/capitalists/U.S. veterans. (it doesn't matter which club for the sake of the hypothetical, merely that it was one that is an enemy of civilization)

Last edited by SamuelA; 09-15-2019 at 08:31 PM.
  #74  
Old 09-15-2019, 08:32 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,868
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
Umm, if Kavanaugh had openly admitted to attempting to rape Ford, and said he was sorry...conservatives aren't the forgiving type.
Are you trying to excuse/rationalize lying about committing attempted rape and sexual assault? If so, we can stop here, since I'm not interested in engaging with that.
  #75  
Old 09-15-2019, 08:34 PM
SamuelA is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Are you trying to excuse/rationalize lying about committing attempted rape and sexual assault? If so, we can stop here, since I'm not interested in engaging with that.
I'm just pointing out that we live in reality, and men who deny get to keep playing basketball/become supreme court justice. The ones who fess up don't.
  #76  
Old 09-15-2019, 08:41 PM
tim314 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,607
I know it's a long shot, but it doesn't strike me as completely implausible that the Democrats could eventually investigate Kavanaugh and, if more allegations come to light and more witnesses come forward, impeach him.

Does anyone know, is there any precedent for a judge being impeached for crimes committed long before he was on the bench?
  #77  
Old 09-15-2019, 08:46 PM
DSeid's Avatar
DSeid is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 22,773
The crime would be the lying during his confirmation hearing.

Not gonna happen.
  #78  
Old 09-15-2019, 08:47 PM
SamuelA is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by tim314 View Post
I know it's a long shot, but it doesn't strike me as completely implausible that the Democrats could eventually investigate Kavanaugh and, if more allegations come to light and more witnesses come forward, impeach him.

Does anyone know, is there any precedent for a judge being impeached for crimes committed long before he was on the bench?
It's possible but it's an extreme long shot. In general it most likely requires that Kavanaugh told a direct lie, that can be disproven, in his testimony to Congress during the confirmation process. I've seen some analysis of what he said - the man's a lawyer. Despite him appearing to lose his cool when denying the allegations, he was very careful not to make any statements that would trap him later. Here's an article exploring this (in the context of Trump, but it mentions another judge, Thomas Porteous, who was successfully removed for lying to Congress during confirmation.

If you want to read what Kavanaugh said regarding this, the transcript is here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ng-transcript/

For example, he says " I was not at the party described by Dr. Ford."

I’m here today to tell the truth. I’ve never sexually assaulted anyone. Not in high school, not in college, not ever.

Technically he attempted to assault Ford...

Last edited by SamuelA; 09-15-2019 at 08:52 PM.
  #79  
Old 09-15-2019, 08:58 PM
SamuelA is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,861
I'm reading the transcript. Honestly, Kavanaugh makes an extremely good case. Even if all these allegations are true, they were 36 years ago, and he's coached a woman's basketball team, had women as his clerks, 65 women from his high school have written a letter in support that says he didn't do anything to him.

The evidence is rather damning in his favor - maybe the man got blackout drunk when he was 18 and was sexually aggressive. Maybe he did a few juvenile things later in college. But not a peep of scandal for 30+ years? Everyone testifying he's a good man? Dude.
  #80  
Old 09-15-2019, 09:52 PM
tim314 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 4,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
I'm reading the transcript. Honestly, Kavanaugh makes an extremely good case. Even if all these allegations are true, they were 36 years ago, and he's coached a woman's basketball team, had women as his clerks, 65 women from his high school have written a letter in support that says he didn't do anything to him.

The evidence is rather damning in his favor - maybe the man got blackout drunk when he was 18 and was sexually aggressive. Maybe he did a few juvenile things later in college. But not a peep of scandal for 30+ years? Everyone testifying he's a good man? Dude.
Are you saying you don't find it plausible that he may have sexually assaulted people several times while drunk, but then his behavior changed once he got his drinking under control?

Or, are you saying that even if the allegations are true, it doesn't matter because the offenses were so long ago? Personally, I'd be fine with a standard of "one attempted rape bars you from the Supreme Court for life" (especially with no effort to make amends for it -- like confessing to the crime, or apologizing to his victim -- in the subsequent 30 years).
  #81  
Old 09-15-2019, 10:14 PM
SamuelA is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by tim314 View Post
Are you saying you don't find it plausible that he may have sexually assaulted people several times while drunk, but then his behavior changed once he got his drinking under control?

Or, are you saying that even if the allegations are true, it doesn't matter because the offenses were so long ago? Personally, I'd be fine with a standard of "one attempted rape bars you from the Supreme Court for life" (especially with no effort to make amends for it -- like confessing to the crime, or apologizing to his victim -- in the subsequent 30 years).
I find it plausible that he might have done it - 34 years ago.

Personally, I am not fine with deciding to discard a candidate with 30 years of service over something he might have done 36 years ago. I feel like we should make decisions as a society and as a country on reliable evidence, not clearly politically motivated rumors. Reading the transcript, an awful lot of the evidence doesn't add up. No one can ever prove Kavanaugh didn't do it, but no reliable evidence that he did was presented.

We should make all our decisions on reliable evidence, not vague suspicions.
  #82  
Old 09-15-2019, 10:20 PM
nelliebly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Washington
Posts: 1,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Why do you think acknowledging either of those things "would force them to question their own assumptions about women"? What assumptions about women do you think "those people" have?
Nope, not going to bite, not when to answer that, you only have to review the Ford/Kavanaugh threads from a year ago. The assumptions are right there in plain sight.
  #83  
Old 09-15-2019, 10:27 PM
nelliebly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Washington
Posts: 1,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
I'm reading the transcript. Honestly, Kavanaugh makes an extremely good case. Even if all these allegations are true, they were 36 years ago, and he's coached a woman's basketball team, had women as his clerks, 65 women from his high school have written a letter in support that says he didn't do anything to him.

The evidence is rather damning in his favor - maybe the man got blackout drunk when he was 18 and was sexually aggressive. Maybe he did a few juvenile things later in college. But not a peep of scandal for 30+ years? Everyone testifying he's a good man? Dude.
Re: 65 women testifying from his high school: the population of Chicago in 1966 was about 3,500,000. You could have had a million women testify that Richard Speck never tried to kill them, but it wouldn't have made him less guilty of the 8 student nurses he murdered in July of that year.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
I find it plausible that he might have done it - 34 years ago.

Personally, I am not fine with deciding to discard a candidate with 30 years of service over something he might have done 36 years ago. I feel like we should make decisions as a society and as a country on reliable evidence, not clearly politically motivated rumors. Reading the transcript, an awful lot of the evidence doesn't add up. No one can ever prove Kavanaugh didn't do it, but no reliable evidence that he did was presented.

We should make all our decisions on reliable evidence, not vague suspicions.
They weren't mere suspicions, and they were never vague.
  #84  
Old 09-15-2019, 10:29 PM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 14,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
... We should make all our decisions on reliable evidence, not vague suspicions.
Speaking of which, the penis-touching woman in Max Stier's story apparently does not remember the incident:

It seems like this "story" is mostly a lame attempt to sell books.
  #85  
Old 09-15-2019, 11:01 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 41,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by HurricaneDitka View Post
Speaking of which, the penis-touching woman in Max Stier's story apparently does not remember the incident:



It seems like this "story" is mostly a lame attempt to sell books.
If a Fox News contributor says it's sunny, I'm grabbing an umbrella. Wanna maybe find a more reliable source than that?
  #86  
Old 09-15-2019, 11:05 PM
elucidator is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Further
Posts: 60,116
Ah! So this is the authoritative pronouncement of the venerable Mollie? Well, that certainly settles that!

(Doggies! When it comes to citation, Hurr, you put the hammer down!)
  #87  
Old 09-15-2019, 11:09 PM
Northern Piper is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: The snow is back, dammit!
Posts: 29,953
Quote:
Originally Posted by TriPolar View Post
He doesn't belong on the Supreme Court anyway. He doesn't have the intellect, he's a political hack who was appointed as a judge as a reward for aiding Ken Starr in his Clinton fiasco.
He may be a political hack, but his academic and legal credentials are a classic modern résumé for a Supreme Court appointment:

BA Yale
JD Yale
Clerkships with the 3rd Circuit and then the 9th Circuit, and then with Starr on the DC Circuit.
Associate counsel to a federal Special Counsel (Starr)
Justice on the DC Circuit.

Dislike him as much as you want, but that's the résumé of most people considčre for the Supreme Court nowadays.
__________________
"I don't like to make plans for the day. If I do, that's when words like 'premeditated' start getting thrown around in the courtroom."

Last edited by Northern Piper; 09-15-2019 at 11:10 PM.
  #88  
Old 09-15-2019, 11:23 PM
Richard Parker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 12,153
Getting a prestigious clerkship or government position isn’t as impressive when you’re a federalist society member. The market for fedsoc types is roughly equal in demand to the market for non-fedsoc but maybe a tenth of the supply at most. It is one of the bizarre consequences of the elite law schools having a small minority of conservative students but having conservatives control over half of the judiciary.

Which is not to say Kavanaugh isn’t smart. It just means his credentials don’t mean what they would for someone not committed to his ideological agenda.
  #89  
Old 09-15-2019, 11:32 PM
SamuelA is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Parker View Post
Which is not to say Kavanaugh isn’t smart. It just means his credentials don’t mean what they would for someone not committed to his ideological agenda.
Number 1 in his preppie high school class...in between all his drinking, "devils triangle", "renata alumnus", and I guess attempted sexual assault. Honestly that's pretty impressive.
  #90  
Old 09-16-2019, 12:59 AM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is offline
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
The most infuriating part here is that so many Republicans in office seem to act as if no one could possibly be honestly concerned about fighting sexual assault and rape in our society. That anything beyond political concerns are just not believable to them.
Didn't you advance the position that Democrats should do everything available to oppose Republicans? Does lying or exaggerating a story fall under that umbrella?
  #91  
Old 09-16-2019, 02:00 AM
sps49sd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 592
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I'm not going to defend Feinstein -- I think she mostly sucks, and she's mostly sucked for a long, long time. But she pushed for a full investigation, even if she probably tried to time it for politics. The Republicans prevented a full investigation of the allegations of sexual abuse. DiFi sucks, but pushing for a full investigation of sexual assault is infinitely morally superior to trying to prevent one, whatever the timing.
I don't disagree with this, I was trying to show how she helped justify

"as if no one could possibly be honestly concerned about fighting sexual assault and rape in our society. That anything beyond political concerns are just not believable to them."
  #92  
Old 09-16-2019, 02:02 AM
HurricaneDitka is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 14,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
If a Fox News contributor says it's sunny, I'm grabbing an umbrella. Wanna maybe find a more reliable source than that?
Quote:
Originally Posted by elucidator View Post
Ah! So this is the authoritative pronouncement of the venerable Mollie? Well, that certainly settles that!

(Doggies! When it comes to citation, Hurr, you put the hammer down!)
Go read the article again. The NYT, with considerable egg on its face, has acknowledged what a Fox News contributor first reported:

Quote:
Editors’ Note: Sept. 15, 2019
An earlier version of this article, which was adapted from a forthcoming book, did not include one element of the book's account regarding an assertion by a Yale classmate that friends of Brett Kavanaugh pushed his penis into the hand of a female student at a drunken dorm party. The book reports that the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say that she does not recall the incident. That information has been added to the article.
Oops!
  #93  
Old 09-16-2019, 04:47 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,868
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
I find it plausible that he might have done it - 34 years ago.

Personally, I am not fine with deciding to discard a candidate with 30 years of service over something he might have done 36 years ago. I feel like we should make decisions as a society and as a country on reliable evidence, not clearly politically motivated rumors. Reading the transcript, an awful lot of the evidence doesn't add up. No one can ever prove Kavanaugh didn't do it, but no reliable evidence that he did was presented.

We should make all our decisions on reliable evidence, not vague suspicions.
I think he's unsuitable based on his obvious lies and obfuscation from last year.
  #94  
Old 09-16-2019, 04:51 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,868
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
Didn't you advance the position that Democrats should do everything available to oppose Republicans? Does lying or exaggerating a story fall under that umbrella?
I've advocated that the Democrats use any political and parliamentary tactics that they can get away with to gain an advantage, but that doesn't include, and I would categorically and explicitly reject and oppose, inventing/exaggerating stories regarding possible sexual assault/rape/etc. The broader societal issue of sexual assault and rape is even more important than politics. I've also explicitly advocated booting Democrats who are abusers, even if it would have a short or medium term harm to Democrats' political prospects.
  #95  
Old 09-16-2019, 05:14 AM
Budget Player Cadet's Avatar
Budget Player Cadet is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 9,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
Didn't you advance the position that Democrats should do everything available to oppose Republicans? Does lying or exaggerating a story fall under that umbrella?
No. We care about the truth.

Next question flimsy justification for awful shit?
__________________
"Until their much-needed total political extinction, you can expect the GOP to continue to take corporate money to systemically murder you and everyone you know."
- A. R. Moxon

Last edited by Budget Player Cadet; 09-16-2019 at 05:15 AM.
  #96  
Old 09-16-2019, 06:45 AM
RTFirefly is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Maryland
Posts: 39,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
I find it plausible that he might have done it - 34 years ago.
He allegedly perjured himself just last year.

And IIRC, one of the questions that the GOP-controlled Senate didn't bother to investigate last year was allegations that he'd perjured himself in his testimony in his confirmation hearings for lower courts.
Quote:
We should make all our decisions on reliable evidence, not vague suspicions.
Depends on the decision, doesn't it? If I'm thinking of putting my retirement fund in the hands of an investment outfit, vague suspicions would be sufficient to disqualify them. The downside risk is too great, and there are plenty of trustworthy places to put my money.
  #97  
Old 09-16-2019, 09:16 AM
SamuelA is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by RTFirefly View Post
He allegedly perjured himself just last year.

And IIRC, one of the questions that the GOP-controlled Senate didn't bother to investigate last year was allegations that he'd perjured himself in his testimony in his confirmation hearings for lower courts. Depends on the decision, doesn't it? If I'm thinking of putting my retirement fund in the hands of an investment outfit, vague suspicions would be sufficient to disqualify them. The downside risk is too great, and there are plenty of trustworthy places to put my money.
Ok. Quote which statement he made that you are certain is perjury. We can email Diane Feinstein in 2020 after the Democrats take the government.

As for the "vague rumors", ok, so in this analogy you have researched investment outfits. And you are about to pick Fidelity. And suddenly, in the last week of the decision making process, the other outfit brings forward a witness who says Fidelity stole money from her account. 36 years ago. And she can't establish the account number, or if she ever even had a Fidelity account, or how much money was stolen.

Oh, and money wasn't actually stolen, but someone at Fidelity attempted to steal the money and was stopped. She swears. And some other people come forward with similar stories but no one can actually come up with account details. And there's hundreds of millions of account holders and no one can find even a rumor of theft that isn't more than 30 years old.

Is this a reason to go with the "other guys"? I think Kavanaugh is a bad thing for my political beliefs. But I can't deny he appears to be a solid, reputable judge for the political side of the fence he is on. And whatever he did while drunk as a teenager, to me, sounds like the kind of aggressive behavior that was encouraged in 1982 by culture among other factors. The film Revenge of the Nerds, made 2 years later, is a series of rapes by deception, and there wasn't an outcry when the film was released.

Last edited by SamuelA; 09-16-2019 at 09:18 AM.
  #98  
Old 09-16-2019, 09:18 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,868
Quote:
Originally Posted by SamuelA View Post
And whatever he did while drunk as a teenager, to me, sounds like the kind of aggressive behavior that was encouraged in 1982 by culture among other factors. The film Revenge of the Nerds, made 2 years later, is a series of rapes by deception, and there wasn't an outcry when the film was released.
Then why does he lie and obfuscate about it so obviously, even to the point of clearly lying about silly little things like text in his yearbook?
  #99  
Old 09-16-2019, 09:21 AM
Bone's Avatar
Bone is offline
Extrajudicial
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 10,982
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I've advocated that the Democrats use any political and parliamentary tactics that they can get away with to gain an advantage, but that doesn't include, and I would categorically and explicitly reject and oppose, inventing/exaggerating stories regarding possible sexual assault/rape/etc. The broader societal issue of sexual assault and rape is even more important than politics. I've also explicitly advocated booting Democrats who are abusers, even if it would have a short or medium term harm to Democrats' political prospects.
Ok. Given the nature of the latest claim you chose to highlight (third party allegation, raised by people selling a book, and the alleged actual victim with no recollection of the event, and no other people recalling the event), do you think it is possible that this is an exaggerated or fabricated story? People have done much worse for money, or for politics.

If you advocate for any political tactic, why wouldn't exaggerated or false stories be part of that? Or do you draw the line at things that are sexual in nature? I'm trying to figure out what you think is okay as a tactic and what isn't. For you, would lying or exaggerating be okay if it were about non-sexual topics?
  #100  
Old 09-16-2019, 09:41 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is online now
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,868
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bone View Post
Ok. Given the nature of the latest claim you chose to highlight (third party allegation, raised by people selling a book, and the alleged actual victim with no recollection of the event, and no other people recalling the event), do you think it is possible that this is an exaggerated or fabricated story? People have done much worse for money, or for politics.
It's certainly possible, which is why I advocate for a full and extremely thorough investigation. At the same time, I advocate for a full and thorough investigation into whether Kavanaugh may have lied under oath. The latter is more about politics (and law, I suppose -- dissauding future folks from lying under oath); the former is about the principle of fighting sexual assault and rape (by thoroughly investigating every serious allegation, of which this one certainly qualifies).

Quote:
If you advocate for any political tactic, why wouldn't exaggerated or false stories be part of that? Or do you draw the line at things that are sexual in nature? I'm trying to figure out what you think is okay as a tactic and what isn't. For you, would lying or exaggerating be okay if it were about non-sexual topics?
In general, no. Maybe there are certain circumstances in which I'd be okay with it, but I'd take it case-by-case, and none come to mind immediately. My recurring "all out political knife fight" theme is mostly about the kinds of things McConnell does -- by all means, the Democrats (if they get the Senate) should get rid of the filibuster; refuse to consider (or stall) many or most Republican judges; investigate any and all possibility of wrongdoing by any Republican in (or seeking) high office; pack various courts that they can get away with; immediately take action to admit PR and DC as states by whatever legislative means might have a chance to get through; otherwise use and twist and change the rules to get whatever possible political and legislative benefit they can; and generally abandon any and all pretense of collegiality and pretense that this is anything but that all out political knife-fight.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:26 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017