# Can Democrats actually stop the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [September 4, 2018, 12:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733 "2018-09-04T12:49:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 105
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2018, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/2081 "2018-09-20T20:33:00Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > “Maybe”? “Maybe” you’re mistaken? Dude, you ARE mistaken. She wrote it as plainly as one can: “a gathering that included me and four others.” You said “6 people.” You were wrong. Trying to beat around the bush with this “Maybe” bullshit makes you look silly. From an interview with Ford’s lawyer: BANKS: OK. Well, I think much as was reported in The Washington Post, which was accurate. When in high school, Ms. Blasey was at a party in the early summer around her junior year, before her junior year, where she ran into or was there with four boys, two girls. Two of the boys were Brett Kavanaugh and his friend Mark Judge. Those at the party were drinking. She describes Brett Kavanaugh and Mark Judge as stumbling drunk. Notice the word “boys” after the word “four”? And then the word “girls” after the word “two”? So I think the math might be: 1+2+4=7. But I could be mistaken. Seems like a silly point to argue. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2018, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/2082 "2018-09-20T20:35:54Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Even if that were true, and you haven’t provided a reference to support it, that would be SEVEN people, not 6 (4 boys, Ford, and “2 other girls”) Probably why I wrote “6 other people besides Ford.” > [@](#): > > That would also represent a pretty radical shift from the letter she wrote, in which she claimed 5 attendees. Or it be a clarification that she was referring to boys when she said “four others”. Or the lawyer could be wrong. Seems a silly nitpick, and deliberate distraction, from the issue that a SCOTUS nominee might have committed felony sexual assault. ---
**Author:** ![Fiddle\_Peghead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddle_peghead/32/3506_2.png) [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2018, 8:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/2083 "2018-09-20T20:39:11Z")
> [@XT](#): > > Sure. The answer is he isn’t more or less likely to answer truthfully, even if we assume he’s lying. Assuming he’s totally lying for whatever reason, making that statement pretty much makes him immune to any consequences if, by some miracle some actual facts to the contrary come out. I thought that was clear in my post there, but perhaps now. Does that satisfy you? Then for you there’s no reason to put him under oath. Fair enough. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2018, 8:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/2084 "2018-09-20T20:40:32Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > From an[interview with Ford’s lawyer](https://www.npr.org/2018/09/17/648670994/sexual-assault-allegation-could-derail-kavanaugh-s-supreme-court-bid)… Added link to cite. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2018, 8:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/2085 "2018-09-20T20:42:53Z")
> [@Rick\_Kitchen](#): > > Amy Chua, who wrote the best selling parenting book “Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother”, is a professor at Yale and a supporter of Kavanaugh as a mentor to women. But she also counsels the young Yale students she mentors that if they want to interview for an internship with him, they need to look like models, because it’s “not an accident” that Kavanaugh’s female law clerks all “looked like models”. > > ['No accident' Brett Kavanaugh's female law clerks 'looked like models', Yale professor told students | Brett Kavanaugh | The Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/20/brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court-yale-amy-chua?CMP=share_btn_fb) From your article: > [@](#): > > The conversation then turned to Kozinski’s protege and good friend Kavanaugh, who one source said was a familiar name even though he had not yet been nominated to the high court. Chua allegedly told the students that it was “no accident” that Kavanaugh’s female clerks “looked like models”. Student reacted with surprise, and quickly pointed out that Chua’s own daughter was due to clerk for Kavanaugh. Her concern is duly noted. At any rate, Amy Chua had plenty of opportunity to express this concern before the Committee hearings began, which she didn’t do for whatever reason. Someone as famous as she is could surely have gained a sympathetic ear from one of the Democrats on the committee. ---
**Author:** ![Bijou\_Drains](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bijou_drains/32/2814_2.png) [@Bijou\_Drains](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bijou_Drains)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2018, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/2086 "2018-09-20T20:43:10Z")
Roy Moore supports Brett!!! He added that 17 is a bit old for the type of girl he likes. [https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/09/20/brett-kavanaugh-wins-roy-moore-endorsement-not-that-he-asked-it/?utm\_term=.dd0d342f2ad5](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/09/20/brett-kavanaugh-wins-roy-moore-endorsement-not-that-he-asked-it/?utm_term=.dd0d342f2ad5) ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2018, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/2087 "2018-09-20T20:43:13Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > There’s no slippery slope in treating credible allegations of sexual assault seriously. I suppose it’s possible to manufacture credible allegations, but that would be extremely difficult, and thoroughly investigating them all would have the best chance of revealing any questionable ones. > > I have no illusions that there aren’t more Democrats out there who have mistreated women and lied about it. And you know what? Fuck 'em. I hope any and all women who have been abused by politicians (or anyone) come forward, whether now or later or even at the exact most politically harmful moment. Whatever time they want is fine with me. Fuck every single abuser of women out there. So, you don’t see an outcome where, when trying to avoid the appointment of a second progressive down the line that the Republicans might not try and find everyone who went to school with the prospective USSC candidate and if they have anything at all that could be used against them? Something thin like a hazy party they went to when they were 17 that we don’t know many of the details on but that the accuser is sure happened? And that they wouldn’t bring this person forth at the last minute with their accusation and then go ‘well, recall what you all said about Kavanaugh’? Because my devious mind indicates that the Republicans would totally do this, and they would do it as part of this seemingly endless game of ramping things up. Hell, they might just do it simply to point out the hypocrisy of those who are currently buying this story and totally don’t think there are political implications, that this is really just about a woman wronged 36 years ago. I can completely see a slippery slope here if we start accepting this sort of ‘evidence’ as enough to warrant a full on FBI investigation (and I’m willing to come back to this thread in a month or so when Kavanaugh doesn’t get the appointment and this is still a hot topic being totally investigated by the FBI and eat crow…since I think that once he’s out this will not even be on the back page). And not just for politicians. There has to be some level of proof to the accusation, some details or some evidence. But, as you pointed out, I’m no LEO or lawyer, so what do I know? I’m totally sympathetic to women who have been and continue to be abused. I think it’s a travesty that this has happened and continues to happen. I have two daughters and don’t want to see something like this EVER happen to them. But this thing has a pretty obvious political dimension, it’s something that should have been reported 36 years ago, and the fact that nothing about this has been brought forth until now (why not, say, during the process for his current appointment? Or at myriad other points in his career? Why wait until now?), at this late date and with so little corroborating evidence is pretty freaking suspicious…and to me, it would be a precedence for abuse in the future. I don’t think that would do much good for women’s rights on sexual abuse in the future as well as a bad precedence for future USSC appointments if something this thin keeps someone off the bench. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2018, 8:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/2088 "2018-09-20T20:43:56Z")
Now her lawyer is contradicting her story, therefore. > [@SmellMyWort](#): > > So for the purposes of your comparison, you wish to alter the narrative to make one scenario seem worse than it is. Got it. I didn’t see any alteration in the narrative. Booker committed sexual assault by his own admission. He continued to try to fondle her after she refused him (No Means No) and she was drunk, and drunken people cannot consent. It was sexual assault. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2018, 8:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/2089 "2018-09-20T20:44:39Z")
> [@CoolHandCox](#): > > It’s entirely different to put out a written statement than giving live testimony, especially under oath. > > A written statement has no emotions and is generally perfect. > > Testifying live, I get to look at you while you’re answering. Say if you say “That never happened” I don’t only hear you, I also see you while you’re saying it. It goes toward the credibility of your statement in a way a written statement does not allow. > > Conversely, I get to judge your credibility while you describe the alleged assault. Do you _look_ truthful in your allegations. For better or worse, that’s how it works. More than tone and body language, when you put out a written statement it’s not you yourself answering on the spot. It’s your lawyer and whoever else carefully crafting it with all sorts of other considerations - including credibility, impact, etc. - in mind. When it’s you answering live, you get much less chance to script things. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2018, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/2090 "2018-09-20T20:47:43Z")
> [@XT](#): > > So, you don’t see an outcome where, when trying to avoid the appointment of a second progressive down the line that the Republicans might not try and find everyone who went to school with the prospective USSC candidate and if they have anything at all that could be used against them? Something thin like a hazy party they went to when they were 17 that we don’t know many of the details on but that the accuser is sure happened? And that they wouldn’t bring this person forth at the last minute with their accusation and then go ‘well, recall what you all said about Kavanaugh’? Because my devious mind indicates that the Republicans would totally do this, and they would do it as part of this seemingly endless game of ramping things up. Hell, they might just do it simply to point out the hypocrisy of those who are currently buying this story and totally don’t think there are political implications, that this is really just about a woman wronged 36 years ago. > > I can completely see a slippery slope here if we start accepting this sort of ‘evidence’ as enough to warrant a full on FBI investigation (and I’m willing to come back to this thread in a month or so when Kavanaugh doesn’t get the appointment and this is still a hot topic being totally investigated by the FBI and eat crow…since I think that once he’s out this will not even be on the back page). And not just for politicians. There has to be some level of proof to the accusation, some details or some evidence. But, as you pointed out, I’m no LEO or lawyer, so what do I know? > > I’m totally sympathetic to women who have been and continue to be abused. I think it’s a travesty that this has happened and continues to happen. I have two daughters and don’t want to see something like this EVER happen to them. But this thing has a pretty obvious political dimension, it’s something that should have been reported 36 years ago, and the fact that nothing about this has been brought forth until now (why not, say, during the process for his current appointment? Or at myriad other points in his career? Why wait until now?), at this late date and with so little corroborating evidence is pretty freaking suspicious…and to me, it would be a precedence for abuse in the future. I don’t think that would do much good for women’s rights on sexual abuse in the future as well as a bad precedence for future USSC appointments if something this thin keeps someone off the bench. I’m sure the Republicans might try such a thing, but the Democrats could then proceed with a full and thorough investigation, which would be likely to reveal more information. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2018, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/2091 "2018-09-20T20:50:31Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Now her lawyer is contradicting her story, therefore… Now I’m interested in your thoughts on the guilt or innocence of other people whose lawyers contradict them. Start with Trump. ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2018, 8:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/2092 "2018-09-20T20:55:41Z")
> [@Cheesesteak](#): > > You realize that you’re asking a woman if the man who: > > - shoved her into a room > - held her down > - covered her mouth, and > - forcibly removed her clothes > > REALLY meant to rape her, or was he just clumsily coming on to her? Can’t you tell the difference between rape and “uncontrollable male passion”? > **['Uncontrollable male passion': Writings of Brett Kavanaugh's classmate under...](https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2018/09/18/mark-judge-brett-kavanaugh-classmate/1343556002/)** > > Mark Judge, Brett Kavanaugh's high school friend and alleged accomplice in an "attempted rape," has written about "uncontrollable male passion." This is from the “famous teenage blackout drunk.” ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2018, 8:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/2093 "2018-09-20T20:57:55Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > Now I’m interested in your thoughts on the guilt or innocence of other people whose lawyers contradict them. Start with Trump. No one is discussing Ford’s “guilt or innocence”. They’re discussing her credibility. She originally wrote a letter that said “The assault occurred in a suburban Maryland area home at a gathering that included me and four others.” Now you’re saying that her lawyer is “clarifying” that she didn’t mean “a gathering that included me and four others”, but that she really meant “a gathering that included me and four [DEL]others[/DEL] other boys and two other girls”. That change in her story calls her credibility into question. ---
**Author:** ![Fiddle\_Peghead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddle_peghead/32/3506_2.png) [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2018, 8:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/2094 "2018-09-20T20:59:50Z")
> [@Rick\_Kitchen](#): > > Amy Chua, who wrote the best selling parenting book “Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother”, is a professor at Yale and a supporter of Kavanaugh as a mentor to women. But she also counsels the young Yale students she mentors that if they want to interview for an internship with him, they need to look like models, because it’s “not an accident” that Kavanaugh’s female law clerks all “looked like models”. > > ['No accident' Brett Kavanaugh's female law clerks 'looked like models', Yale professor told students | Brett Kavanaugh | The Guardian](https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/20/brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court-yale-amy-chua?CMP=share_btn_fb) I started reading that article, but stopped after getting to this gem: “There is no allegation that the female students who worked for Kavanaugh were chosen because of their physical appearance or that they were not qualified.” Could you do me a favor and clarify exactly why you posted this link and the conclusions you may draw from it? ---
**Author:** ![Happy\_Lendervedder](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/happy_lendervedder/32/8488_2.png) [@Happy\_Lendervedder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Happy_Lendervedder)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2018, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/2095 "2018-09-20T21:00:04Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > No one is discussing Ford’s “guilt or innocence”. They’re discussing her credibility. She originally wrote a letter that said “The assault occurred in a suburban Maryland area home at a gathering that included me and four others.” Now you’re saying that her lawyer is “clarifying” that she didn’t mean “a gathering that included me and four others”, but that she really meant “a gathering that included me and four [DEL]others[/DEL] other boys and two other girls”. That change in her story calls her credibility into question. No it doesn’t. Not knowing the exact number of people at a party 35 years ago has fuckall to do with remembering if Brett Kavanaugh tried to stick his dick inside her against her will while his hand was over her mouth. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2018, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/2096 "2018-09-20T21:00:18Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I’m sure the Republicans might try such a thing, but the Democrats could then proceed with a full and thorough investigation, which would be likely to reveal more information. I hope you are right, and that this isn’t another filibuster fiasco. But I think people are being short sighted on this stuff and that it’s likely to come back and bite them on the ass, and that there are some serious unintended consequences that are being hand waved away. ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2018, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/2097 "2018-09-20T21:01:28Z")
> [@Bijou\_Drains](#): > > Don’t think I would support Booker for president either. I wouldn’t hire him as my gamekeeper, but he seems well suited for congress. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2018, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/2098 "2018-09-20T21:01:32Z")
> [@XT](#): > > I hope you are right, and that this isn’t another filibuster fiasco. But I think people are being short sighted on this stuff and that it’s likely to come back and bite them on the ass, and that there are some serious unintended consequences that are being hand waved away. If it was a bullshit accusation, maybe. But all that Democrats are demanding is serious consideration and a full investigation. The only “slippery slope” for that would be serious consideration and a full investigation for future credible accusations, and that would be a FUCKING AMAZING THING FOR AMERICA. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2018, 9:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/2099 "2018-09-20T21:02:21Z")
> [@XT](#): > > I hope you are right, and that this isn’t another filibuster fiasco. But I think people are being short sighted on this stuff and that it’s likely to come back and bite them on the ass, and that there are some serious unintended consequences that are being hand waved away. Yup. Cory Booker’s exploratory committee weeps at this. ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [September 20, 2018, 9:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/2100 "2018-09-20T21:06:00Z")
> [@andros](#): > > Possibly an agreement that she would not be treated as abominably as Anita Hill was? As said, she has been offered a private hearing. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733.md?page=104) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733.md?page=106)