# 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:** 259
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5161 "2018-09-29T17:01:25Z")
Twitter thread on Kavanaugh speaking at Yale— > > [@](#): > > As a then-almost-50-year-old man, Kavanaugh should have been exercising some judgment. He didn’t. Or, more precisely, he did, & his judgment even after 25 years of life experience was to celebrate his substance abuse in a context where he is a role model. /15 > > Kavanaugh’s speech is also about having the privilege not to take law school seriously. This privilege is indeed afforded to many YLS students, if they choose to take it. They don’t have traditional grades, & can (as he did) take advantage of connections through mentors. /16 ---
**Author:** ![CoolHandCox](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/coolhandcox/32/16233_2.png) [@CoolHandCox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CoolHandCox)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5162 "2018-09-29T17:04:04Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I just watched the news I had recorded from last night, and I didn’t see any explanation about how the FBI report will be handled once it’s done. Are we going to get to see it? How are the Senators supposed to debate it, or are they even going to have time to do so? I assume it doesn’t go back to Committee, as they have already voted. The report goes to the White House. The White House can give it to the committee/Senators (I’m not clear hear as it’s moved out of the committee). The committee/Senators can decide to make it public or not. They will debate it on the Senate floor (we are in the full floor debate part of the process now). With the that said, people interviewed by the FBI in a background check can request the interview be confidential. I’d expect those confidential parts to remain so and therefore not privy to the public. You can imagine a confidential statement/interview being spun one way by R’s, and another by D’s, with the public having no way to see the original statement/interview. Lastly, the FBI will just turn over the “transcript” of the statement/interview. They won’t weigh in on credibility. ---
**Author:** ![ThelmaLou](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thelmalou/32/390_2.png) [@ThelmaLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThelmaLou)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5163 "2018-09-29T17:20:26Z")
> [@CoolHandCox](#): > > … > > You can imagine a confidential statement/interview being spun one way by R’s, and another by D’s, with the public having no way to see the original statement/interview. > > Lastly, the FBI will just turn over the “transcript” of the statement/interview. They won’t weigh in on credibility. Maybe some civic-minded person will leak the original. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5164 "2018-09-29T17:21:31Z")
> [@Aspenglow](#): > > Kavanaugh pointedly did not answer the question posed to him about whether a president can pardon himself. He also believes a president should not be investigated, sued or prosecuted while in office. ## Unless it’s Bill Clinton, apparently. Kavanaugh wrote up a long brief of intimate, detailed questions he wanted asked about Clinton’s sex life. I read an article yesterday, and I can’t find it now, that said that he lied about being legal to drink in Maryland when he was in high school. The article said Kavanaugh was 17 when the law was changed making the legal drinking age in Maryland 21. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5165 "2018-09-29T17:22:53Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Republican Presidents only. He had the opposite extreme view of President Clinton, and has never explained his shift. > I’d rather they just quit ducking, remember who they really represent and who their responsibilities are to, and act accordingly. It may not be easy, but it’s simple. Collins is screwed. There is already a funded movement to find a Democrat to run against her in 2020 if she votes for Kavanaugh, and if she votes against, she’ll find there will be a right wing primary opponent. ---
**Author:** ![Rick\_Kitchen](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rick_kitchen/32/522_2.png) [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5166 "2018-09-29T17:24:47Z")
> [@CoolHandCox](#): > > The report goes to the White House. The White House can give it to the committee/Senators (I’m not clear hear as it’s moved out of the committee). The committee/Senators can decide to make it public or not. They will debate it on the Senate floor (we are in the full floor debate part of the process now). > > With the that said, people interviewed by the FBI in a background check can request the interview be confidential. I’d expect those confidential parts to remain so and therefore not privy to the public. > > You can imagine a confidential statement/interview being spun one way by R’s, and another by D’s, with the public having no way to see the original statement/interview. > > Lastly, the FBI will just turn over the “transcript” of the statement/interview. They won’t weigh in on credibility. Mike Judge says he wants his interviews confidential, which makes no sense, since he already wrote a book detailing his past sex and alcohol abuse. ---
**Author:** ![CoolHandCox](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/coolhandcox/32/16233_2.png) [@CoolHandCox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CoolHandCox)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5167 "2018-09-29T17:33:01Z")
> [@Rick\_Kitchen](#): > > Mike Judge says he wants his interviews confidential, which makes no sense, since he already wrote a book detailing his past sex and alcohol abuse. I’ve been confusing him with Mike Judge too, because I’m a huge fan. But it’s Mark Judge. Personally, I’d want it kept confidential, just to stay out of the circus as much as possible. I’d add, I wouldn’t equate requesting confidentiality with hiding/offering something juicy or incriminating. It can often help get to the truth. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 5:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5168 "2018-09-29T17:34:17Z")
nm ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 5:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5169 "2018-09-29T17:58:39Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > The term “preaching to the choir”, comes to mind, but it’s not a good fit. > Have you read right leaning sites? I did. They **loved** his performance. They think it shows he should be confirmed. And it’s their pressure which matters to those who make the decision. > Don’t make me add links to them please. I have looked at right leaning sites, when they claim to love what he did, it includes dodging questions and lying about drinking and other issues. It follows that the church they follow has noting to do with facts or ethics. > **[Every time Ford and Kavanaugh dodged a question, in one chart](https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/9/28/17914308/kavanaugh-ford-question-dodge-hearing-chart)** > > There was a striking difference in style — and substance. > **[It Ain’t So Bad - Digby's Hullabaloo](https://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2018/09/the-difference-between-ford-and.html)** > > Kevin Drum tells everyone to buck up. Life in these United States really isn't more miserable than it's ever been. He posted a video of Congressman Jamal Bowman saying: > > > > > Young people are TIRED. They’re tired of growing up with forever wars, with... > [@](#): > > This is an extraordinary chart, developed by Alvin Chang and others at Vox. Every line represents a question and answer from Thursday’s infamous hearings of Ford and Kavanaugh. If the witness answered directly, the line is coded blue. If the witness tried to dodge the question, the answer was coded red. If you go to the article, you can click on each line and read the actual response from the transcript. > > What the chart illustrates is how forthright Ford and Kavanaugh were. From the article: > > > [@](#): > > > > [T]here was a striking difference in the content of their words. Both Ford and Kavanaugh fielded questions from senators and the prosecutor hired by Republicans, Rachel Mitchell. > > > > ``` > > But only Ford made an effort to answer every single question. > > > > Kavanaugh actively dodged questions. He often repeated the same non-answer over and over. Other times, he insisted on answering a question with “context” — which inevitably was a long story about his childhood — but never actually answered the question. > > > > ``` ---
**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 29, 2018, 6:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5170 "2018-09-29T18:11:48Z")
One thing that isn’t coming up is the idea that K will go on the court with a lot of old baggage which judge shares, and will be potential for blackmail or extortion. To me this is a weakness in k as nominee. He is subject to pressures from outside. We know this based on his willingness to lie about yearbook stuff. Not only is that ridiculous but it would be easy to prove he lied to congress about it. He proved that he has got more important priorities than the truth. This points to bad outcomes with him as a judge. ---
**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 29, 2018, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5171 "2018-09-29T18:13:05Z")
To go forward: What is the penalty for lying to the committee? He did it numerous times. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5172 "2018-09-29T18:16:57Z")
The political environment in this country is absolutely toxic. If Kavanaugh had come out like he did on Fox News on Monday, he would have been accused of dodging the questions and that would have been used as evidence of his guilt. If we assume his innocence, then it is totally unremarkable that he would go on the attack against senators who have accused him of gang rape, being a drunk, and sexually assaulting women. It has nothing to do with his temperament as a judge on case in which he has no personal knowledge. Further, who in the hell is 100% forthcoming about drinking habits in high school and college in a “job interview”? If the interviewer asked you if you have ever passed out, do you say, “Fuck, brother, I woke up in a different county not knowing how I got there.”? When asked about casual sex, do you tell the interviewer that you pulled more tail than a slow kid at a petting zoo? In the first place, the questions are bullshit as it has nothing to do, at least in my mind, as to his qualifications to be a judge _today_. The Dems are asking him questions that if posited to Ford would be the source of national left-wing outrage. If he lied about those things, then I do not care, nor do I believe they amount to perjury because they are not issues that are at all material to the allegations made by Ford. I will personally admit to blacking out several times in my college years. That does not mean I sexually assaulted someone during these blackouts because it is wholly inconsistent with how I conduct myself normally. Drunkenness, although it certainly reduces inhibitions, does not make a person act completely contrary to his character or beliefs. This is a witchhunt comparable to Salem in 1692. Flake, Collins, Murkowski, and Manchin should be ashamed for asking for this FBI investigation which will not resolve anything except to possibly uncover more embarrassment to Kavanaugh and his family. Any person who would volunteer to be nominated to the Supreme Court in the future is a fool to subject himself or herself to this kind of partisan nonsense for a job at 1/10 of the salary that they could make in private practice. ---
**Author:** ![CoolHandCox](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/coolhandcox/32/16233_2.png) [@CoolHandCox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CoolHandCox)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 6:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5173 "2018-09-29T18:20:22Z")
FBI reaches out to second woman (Ramirez) who has accused Brett Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, per Washington Post. They haven’t reached out to Avenatti client Ms. Swetnick, per Avenatti. ---
**Author:** ![Icarus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/icarus/32/72_2.png) [@Icarus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Icarus)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5174 "2018-09-29T18:21:33Z")
> [@drad\_dog](#): > > To go forward: What is the penalty for lying to the committee? He did it numerous times. Apparently being recommended for vote to the SCOTUS, a lesson we can all learn from, yah? ---
**Author:** ![ThelmaLou](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thelmalou/32/390_2.png) [@ThelmaLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThelmaLou)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5175 "2018-09-29T18:24:06Z")
[The American Bar Association had concerns about Kavanaugh 12 years ago. Republicans dismissed those, too.](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/09/28/american-bar-association-had-kavanaugh-concerns-years-ago-republicans-dismissed-those-too/?utm_term=.73571b68613d) > [@](#): > > Flash back to the mid-2000s and another fight in the Senate over Kavanaugh’s nomination to a federal court: > > Democrats for three years had been blocking President George W. Bush’s 2003 nomination of Kavanaugh to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. They argued he was biased, as shown by his work as a lawyer for Bush’s presidential campaign, for an independent counsel’s investigation into President Bill Clinton and for other conservative causes. > > Republicans kept pushing to make Kavanaugh a judge on the powerful appeals court, year after year. In his defense, they cited multiple reviews by the ABA’s judicial review committee that found him “well qualified” — the big attorney association’s highest possible endorsement, meaning Kavanaugh had outstanding legal abilities and outstanding judicial temperament. > > But in May 2006, as Republicans hoped to finally push Kavanaugh’s nomination across the finish line, the ABA downgraded its endorsement. > > The group’s judicial investigator had recently interviewed dozens of lawyers, judges and others who had worked with Kavanaugh, the ABA announced at the time, and some of them raised red flags about “his professional experience and the question of his freedom from bias and open-mindedness.” > > “One interviewee remained concerned about the nominee’s ability to be balanced and fair should he assume a federal judgeship,” the ABA committee chairman wrote to senators in 2006. “Another interviewee echoed essentially the same thoughts: ‘(He is) immovable and very stubborn and frustrating to deal with on some issues.’” > > … More at the link. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5176 "2018-09-29T18:27:00Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > This is a witchhunt comparable to Salem in 1692. I can think of some subtle, potentially relevant differences. For example, if this “witch hunt” goes poorly, Kavanaugh will not be dragged kicking and screaming to be executed. He will simply have to make due with a position on the _second-highest_ court in the country. Also, I’m not sure why you thought it would be a good idea to compare a historic atrocity committed primarily against women to a supreme court nominee being accused of sexual assault by multiple women. ---
**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 29, 2018, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5177 "2018-09-29T18:28:14Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > The political environment in this country is absolutely toxic. If Kavanaugh had come out like he did on Fox News on Monday, he would have been accused of dodging the questions and that would have been used as evidence of his guilt. > > If we assume his innocence, then it is totally unremarkable that he would go on the attack against senators who have accused him of gang rape, being a drunk, and sexually assaulting women. It has nothing to do with his temperament as a judge on case in which he has no personal knowledge. > > Further, who in the hell is 100% forthcoming about drinking habits in high school and college in a “job interview”? If the interviewer asked you if you have ever passed out, do you say, “Fuck, brother, I woke up in a different county not knowing how I got there.”? When asked about casual sex, do you tell the interviewer that you pulled more tail than a slow kid at a petting zoo? > > In the first place, the questions are bullshit as it has nothing to do, at least in my mind, as to his qualifications to be a judge _today_. The Dems are asking him questions that if posited to Ford would be the source of national left-wing outrage. > > If he lied about those things, then I do not care, nor do I believe they amount to perjury because they are not issues that are at all material to the allegations made by Ford. I will personally admit to blacking out several times in my college years. That does not mean I sexually assaulted someone during these blackouts because it is wholly inconsistent with how I conduct myself normally. Drunkenness, although it certainly reduces inhibitions, does not make a person act completely contrary to his character or beliefs. > > This is a witchhunt comparable to Salem in 1692. Flake, Collins, Murkowski, and Manchin should be ashamed for asking for this FBI investigation which will not resolve anything except to possibly uncover more embarrassment to Kavanaugh and his family. Any person who would volunteer to be nominated to the Supreme Court in the future is a fool to subject himself or herself to this kind of partisan nonsense for a job at 1/10 of the salary that they could make in private practice. How did you feel when Bill Clinton lied about a blowjob? ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5178 "2018-09-29T18:31:01Z")
Further, don’t underestimate red states. Among _women_ in West Virginia, 52% believe Kavanaugh while 36% believe Ford. > **[Trump orders FBI investigation into Kavanaugh; Manchin supports inquiry - WV...](https://wvmetronews.com/2018/09/28/new-poll-shows-west-virginians-support-kavanaugh-confirmation/)** > > New poll shows a majority of state residents support confirmation. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5179 "2018-09-29T18:31:37Z")
> [@drad\_dog](#): > > One thing that isn’t coming up is the idea that K will go on the court with a lot of old baggage which judge shares, and will be potential for blackmail or extortion. To me this is a weakness in k as nominee. He is subject to pressures from outside. We know this based on his willingness to lie about yearbook stuff. Not only is that ridiculous but it would be easy to prove he lied to congress about it. > > He proved that he has got more important priorities than the truth. This points to bad outcomes with him as a judge. It also points to why he did not take the prudent choice of demurring “so as to not become a distraction”. Because it would mean failing to move forward those priorities, and he’d stand to be punished for it. Or is he just gonna come across as such a wuss he fears that if he humbled himself the Prez would call him a weak loser? And speaking of wuss: Dude, you are getting a SUPREME COURT SEAT. And you say your life is ruined because parents now won’t trust you to coach their teen girls??? Jesus on rollerskates, what an extra large combo serving of fragility. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5180 "2018-09-29T18:33:23Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > The political environment in this country is absolutely toxic. If Kavanaugh had come out like he did on Fox News on Monday, he would have been accused of dodging the questions and that would have been used as evidence of his guilt. > > If we assume his innocence, then it is totally unremarkable that he would go on the attack against senators who have accused him of gang rape, being a drunk, and sexually assaulting women. It has nothing to do with his temperament as a judge on case in which he has no personal knowledge. > > Further, who in the hell is 100% forthcoming about drinking habits in high school and college in a “job interview”? If the interviewer asked you if you have ever passed out, do you say, “Fuck, brother, I woke up in a different county not knowing how I got there.”? When asked about casual sex, do you tell the interviewer that you pulled more tail than a slow kid at a petting zoo? > > In the first place, the questions are bullshit as it has nothing to do, at least in my mind, as to his qualifications to be a judge _today_. The Dems are asking him questions that if posited to Ford would be the source of national left-wing outrage. > > If he lied about those things, then I do not care, nor do I believe they amount to perjury because they are not issues that are at all material to the allegations made by Ford. I will personally admit to blacking out several times in my college years. That does not mean I sexually assaulted someone during these blackouts because it is wholly inconsistent with how I conduct myself normally. Drunkenness, although it certainly reduces inhibitions, does not make a person act completely contrary to his character or beliefs. > > This is a witchhunt comparable to Salem in 1692. Flake, Collins, Murkowski, and Manchin should be ashamed for asking for this FBI investigation which will not resolve anything except to possibly uncover more embarrassment to Kavanaugh and his family. Any person who would volunteer to be nominated to the Supreme Court in the future is a fool to subject himself or herself to this kind of partisan nonsense for a job at 1/10 of the salary that they could make in private practice. I’ll pass on commenting on the political and social opinioms expresses , but I generally agree with you. 1. He said he never passed out. He didn’t deny drinking too much. A the end of the day, drinking too much is a subjective assessment. Bringing in classmates who say that “OMG, I saw him drunk, hence he lied to Congress, perjurer, perjurer”, is getting real old. 2. He was angry. Yeah so? Firstly, if he has remained calm, people would have said “look at him, so robotically stoic, inhumanly calm, unfeeling, unfit to be a judge”. Yeah, how he reacts to claims against him in a personal capacity is distinct from how he acts as judge. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733.md?page=258) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733.md?page=260)