# 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:** 227
**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 28, 2018, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/4521 "2018-09-28T00:53:19Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > One of the accusations is that Feinstein sat on the letter waiting until the last minute to bring it forth and demand a delay for an investigation. The implication is that she should have dealt with this situation when it happened as part of the committee interview/questioning process. If so, then why should the Republicans/Kavanaugh agree to a delay? Why not tell the Dems you should have dealt with this already and F Feinstein for using this woman and her story as a political move? What do you mean by “dealt with this” ? What does that consist of? What does feinstein do to be a good public servant? ---
**Author:** ![enipla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/54ee81/32.png) [@enipla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enipla)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2018, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/4522 "2018-09-28T00:54:40Z")
Crap, lost my post. For sure, one thing that Kavanaugh made clear is that he DOES NOT want an investigation. The hearing today was NOT and investigation (as Kavanaugh claims but as a Federal Judge knows it was not). ---
**Author:** ![Iggy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iggy/32/3364_2.png) [@Iggy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Iggy)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2018, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/4523 "2018-09-28T00:55:18Z")
> [@Lamoral](#): > > Lindsey Graham is one strange dude. And the locals in Upstate South Carolina love him. He just guaranteed reelection in 2020, assuming he runs again. His most likely challenge would be in a primary but today he fended off any chance of being challenged successfully from the right wing. Unlikely that South Carolina would turn blue but any Democratic challenger in the general election won’t stand a chance now. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2018, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/4524 "2018-09-28T00:56:18Z")
> [@Lamoral](#): > > Lindsey Graham is one strange dude. He goes from John McCain buddy to Trump lackey. Anything to get re-elected, I guess. ---
**Author:** ![jshore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@jshore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jshore)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2018, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/4525 "2018-09-28T01:00:44Z")
> [@xenophon41](#): > > (Underline added.) I’m pretty sure you meant to write “regarding” or “smearing” Anita Hill, instead of implying she had done the digging up of negatives. > > (Everyone who knows the history understood, I’m sure, but for those who don’t…) Whoops…Yeah, that was a bad typo of mine! Totally changed the meaning of that sentence. Thanks. ---
**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 28, 2018, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/4526 "2018-09-28T01:03:10Z")
That left wing rag the Wall St. Journal wrote that he lied when he said he did not watch her testimony. > **[Collins Set to Announce Stance on Kavanaugh — Live Coverage](https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/kavanaugh)** > > Live coverage of events surrounding teenage sexual misconduct allegations against Trump Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2018, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/4527 "2018-09-28T01:04:06Z")
Okay, it’s official: Lindsay Graham is gay. He’s overcompensating for his perceived lack of straightness by being the uber-macho tough guy for the home team. Let me be clear: nothing wrong with being gay from where I stand, but we all know how conservatives feel about gays, and it’s Graham’s choice to stay in the closet and live a lie knowing that his party would hate him if he ever came out. The irony is that he’s enabling the rise of a religious sectarian cultism and fascism that reviles people like him. ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2018, 1:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/4528 "2018-09-28T01:09:25Z")
> [@Omar\_Little](#): > > According to Ford’s testimony, it was her intention that her letter and claims about Kavanaugh would be kept confidential, period. I guess she was hopeful that Feinstein could do something to stop Kavanaugh’s confirmation without her claims being made public. That was really an unrealistic position. Even though she eventually was forced into publicly sharing her story, it appears that her goal of stopping Kavanaugh’s confirmation is not going to work. > > Also Feinstein’s claim that one of Ford’s friends must have been the leaker of the letter makes no sense. It doesn’t seem realistic that Ford would have given her friends a copy of the letter to Feinstein. The Interceptor received a copy of the letter. Other than Ford, the only people that we know had the letter were Ford herself, the California rep, Feinstein’s office, and likely Ford’s attorneys. Who is most likely motivated to leak the letter, in light of Ford’s insistence that it be kept confidential, which the politicians in the know, knew would result in nothing? Whomever it was that leaked Ford’s name, Democrat, Republican, or neither, I hope they get found out and nailed to a tree. ---
**Author:** ![Banquet\_Bear](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/banquet_bear/32/373_2.png) [@Banquet\_Bear](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Banquet_Bear)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2018, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/4529 "2018-09-28T01:13:18Z")
> [@Omar\_Little](#): > > According to Ford’s testimony, it was her intention that her letter and claims about Kavanaugh would be kept confidential, period. I guess she was hopeful that Feinstein could do something to stop Kavanaugh’s confirmation without her claims being made public. **That was really an unrealistic position**. …what a ridiculous thing to say. Of course she was hopeful that Feinstein could do something to stop Kavanaugh’s confirmation without her claims being made public. She didn’t want to turn her life into a living-fucking-hell. Not making the claims publicly was the only way to avoid that. She came forward not just because she hoped to stop the confirmation: because with the partisan nature of the confirmation process that was exceedingly unlikely. She came forward because it was the right thing to do. > [@](#): > > Even though she eventually was forced into publicly sharing her story, it appears that her goal of stopping Kavanaugh’s confirmation is not going to work. “Her goal” was to speak the truth. There was never really a chance of “stopping the confirmation.” > [@](#): > > Also Feinstein’s claim that one of Ford’s friends must have been the leaker of the letter makes no sense. It makes perfect sense. > [@](#): > > It doesn’t seem realistic that Ford would have given her friends a copy of the letter to Feinstein. The Interceptor received a copy of the letter. Other than Ford, the only people that we know had the letter were Ford herself, the California rep, Feinstein’s office, and likely Ford’s attorneys. Who is most likely motivated to leak the letter, in light of Ford’s insistence that it be kept confidential, which the politicians in the know, knew would result in nothing? We have it on record “where it didn’t come from”. Feinstein’s speculation doesn’t seem unrealistic at all. ---
**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 28, 2018, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/4530 "2018-09-28T01:13:41Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > Okay, it’s official: Lindsay Graham is gay. He’s overcompensating for his perceived lack of straightness by being the uber-macho tough guy for the home team. Also official , the Pope is Catholic ---
**Author:** ![Fiveyearlurker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@Fiveyearlurker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiveyearlurker)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2018, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/4531 "2018-09-28T01:17:45Z")
Is there any discussion of the fact that the GOP hired a person to do the questioning for them, and when it turned out that she was asking legitimate, level headed and fact finding questions, they abandoned her in favor of men screaming indiscriminately and fellating Kavanaugh? ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2018, 1:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/4532 "2018-09-28T01:18:48Z")
> [@Lamoral](#): > > Lindsey Graham is one strange dude. Lindsey Graham losing his shit is, I think, highly instructive. He is [positively beside himself](https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/09/brett-kavanaugh-dianne-feinstein/) that democrats are trying to postpone the vote to confirm Kavanaugh till after the mid-term election. Of COURSE that is what they are trying to do! And guess who laid the groundwork making that ok? Republicans! (SEE: Merrick Garland whose vote was delayed for well over 300 days to get past an election so Republicans could get their way). I think this is the final proof that god does not exist else Graham would have been struck by lightning. It never ceases to amaze me how butthurt politicians get when they are made to sleep in the bed they made. How do they never seem to consider that the precedent they set today can be used against them tomorrow? Also, just because they arrange things to drag out the process does not mean the accusations are false. ---
**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 28, 2018, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/4533 "2018-09-28T01:21:09Z")
> [@Fiveyearlurker](#): > > Is there any discussion of the fact that the GOP hired a person to do the questioning for them, and when it turned out that she was asking legitimate, level headed and fact finding questions, they abandoned her in favor of men screaming indiscriminately and fellating Kavanaugh? I believe they never planned for the woman from Arizona to also question Brett but I could be wrong. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2018, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/4534 "2018-09-28T01:21:28Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > See that’s where I’m having trouble with this. > > 1. Of course we want the facts but … > 2. The Dems purposely delayed this so intellectually I would love the Pubs to say “You had your chance during the regular investigation. You chose not to pursue it then so you lost that chance.” coupled with the worry that … > 3. If the Dems can force a delay based on allegations, then what’s to stop new allegations from cropping up causing more delays, at least until after January 3rd. But all of that is tempered by … > 4. It’s not Ford’s fault for the delay (well some of it is when she delayed her testimony) so her claims shouldn’t go uninvestigated because Feinstein wants to play her games. > I guess what I’m saying is let’s not delude ourselves that Feinstein is concerned over whether or not there was an assault or Ford for that matter. She’s using this for a calculated political gain just like any asshole politician. Feinstein is safe in her job for as long as she wants it. So if the Nazi Party goes true to form, they’ll caucus tomorrow and decide they have 50 votes and have the sexual predator sworn in Monday. And the best part: they’ll _still_ get to whine about Bork! And when he rules that the head Nazi won’t have to go to prison for state crimes if he pardons himself, it will be the _right_ kinds of jackboots on the necks of the _wrong_ kinds of people! All they need do is start a fire somewhere and declare martial law. ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2018, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/4535 "2018-09-28T01:22:04Z")
I keep hearing it mentioned that Graham is auditioning to be AG Jeff Sessions’ replacement after the mid-terms. Explains why he’s acting so nuts. Required skill to work in the current administration. ---
**Author:** ![Lamoral](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lamoral/32/16078_2.png) [@Lamoral](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamoral)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2018, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/4536 "2018-09-28T01:24:20Z")
Well, I’ll be honest. Going into this, I wasn’t sure whether to believe the allegations against Kavanaugh or not. Part of me felt like the Democrats just pulled it out of their ass to stall Kavanaugh as long as possible, and I was fine with that: Trump’s Supreme Court picks deserve to be picked on as much as possible if for no other reason than it’s justified revenge against how the GOP fucked over Garland, and that if this is the time for dirty tricks, so be it. After watching these hearings and seeing Kavanaugh’s behavior when he’s on the spot, I can say that now I _do_ believe the allegations against him, and also that he is a totally arrogant, obnoxious, untrustworthy individual. That’s basically all I have to say about it. ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2018, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/4537 "2018-09-28T01:27:09Z")
If Democrats can take control of Congress and the White House in 2020, I think we’re going to have to take some extreme measures to save this Republic; 1. Nuke the filibuster entirely 2. Congresses passes an act temporarily increasing the size of the Supreme Court 3. The president nominates and the Senate approves 3-5 liberal judges whose spots will _not_ be refilled upon retirement, allowing a safe liberal majority for a generation or two until the Nazi Party has disbanded or become sane again ---
**Author:** ![Omar\_Little](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/omar_little/32/269_2.png) [@Omar\_Little](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Omar_Little)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2018, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/4538 "2018-09-28T01:33:03Z")
> [@Rodney King](#): > > Can’t we all just get along? . . . ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2018, 1:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/4539 "2018-09-28T01:40:04Z")
> [@Smapti](#): > > If Democrats can take control of Congress and the White House in 2020, I think we’re going to have to take some extreme measures to save this Republic; > > 1. Nuke the filibuster entirely > 2. Congresses passes an act temporarily increasing the size of the Supreme Court > 3. The president nominates and the Senate approves 3-5 liberal judges whose spots will _not_ be refilled upon retirement, allowing a safe liberal majority for a generation or two until the Nazi Party has disbanded or become sane again 1. Republicans already killed it. It was called the “nuclear option” and when the Dems were in power the Reps kept telling them that if they went there someday they would regret it…so they didn’t. After 2016 as soon as Gorsuch was nominated the Reps pushed the button on the nuclear option to make it impossible for Dems to filibuster. They did not hesitate even a moment. 2. Congress does not need to pass any such thing. There is no defined limit to the court’s size. Tradition is all that keeps it at nine. Any president, at any time, could nominate a 10th, 11th, 12th (and so on) candidate. All that stops that is the senate confirming them. 3. See #2. You cannot limit the 10th, etc., nominations to disappear after they leave the court. (Well, you could with a constitutional amendment…good luck with that.) That said, given how the Reps stole a seat, I think it is entirely appropriate for the Dems to tell Gorsuch to step down and replace him with Garland (or whoever they pick) or stack the court (since you need 2/3 to impeach Gorsuch that is SUPER unlikely to ever happen). ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [September 28, 2018, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/4540 "2018-09-28T01:46:43Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > 1. Republicans already killed it. It was called the “nuclear option” and when the Dems were in power the Reps kept telling them that if they went there someday they would regret it…so they didn’t. After 2016 as soon as Gorsuch was nominated the Reps pushed the button on the nuclear option to make it impossible for Dems to filibuster. They did not hesitate even a moment. They killed it for nominations, but not for legislation, which is what we need to carry out the second point. > [@](#): > > 1. Congress does not need to pass any such thing. There is no defined limit to the court’s size. Tradition is all that keeps it at nine. Any president, at any time, could nominate a 10th, 11th, 12th (and so on) candidate. All that stops that is the senate confirming them. Ahem; > [@U.S. Code › Title 28 › Part I › Chapter 1 › § 1](#): > > The Supreme Court of the United States shall consist of a Chief Justice of the United States and eight associate justices, any six of whom shall constitute a quorum. > > (June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 869.) To add more justices, we need to change that law, which has been done in the past - statutes have set the size of the Court at everything from five to ten in our history. > [@](#): > > 1. See #2. You cannot limit the 10th, etc., nominations to disappear after they leave the court. (Well, you could with a constitutional amendment…good luck with that.) I see nothing in the law that prohibits it. The statute revising the size of the court should be able to specify that the size of the court shall be reduced by one when one of the justices appointed under it dies or retires. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733.md?page=226) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733.md?page=228)