# 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:** 260
**Author:** ![Lance\_Turbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lance_turbo/32/6156_2.png) [@Lance\_Turbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lance_Turbo)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5181 "2018-09-29T18:34:18Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > Further, who in the hell is 100% forthcoming about drinking habits in high school and college in a “job interview”? People under oath. Is that a trick question? Let’s say you run a small business like a law firm or something and you’re interviewing people for the position of office manager or some such. What’s the maximum number of obvious lies that they can tell you and you will consider hiring them? ---
**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, 6:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5182 "2018-09-29T18:38:43Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > How did you feel when Bill Clinton lied about a blowjob? As you may know, Clinton was sued by Paula Jones, a state employee who worked under Clinton for sexual harassment. Under the rules established by statute, case law, and the Rules of Civil Procedure, in such a case, it is relevant testimony to hear about other relationships the Defendant had in the workplaces with subordinates whether that relationship was consensual or non-consensual. As such, his testimony regarding his sexual relationship with Lewinsky was material and relevant to Jones’ accusation. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5183 "2018-09-29T18:40:07Z")
> [@Modesty\_Blaise](#): > > I have not laughed in days. Thank you. 😃 The, “I don’t remember asking you a goddamned thing,” part was my favorite. ---
**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, 6:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5184 "2018-09-29T18:41:36Z")
> [@Lance\_Turbo](#): > > People under oath. Is that a trick question? > > Let’s say you run a small business like a law firm or something and you’re interviewing people for the position of office manager or some such. What’s the maximum number of obvious lies that they can tell you and you will consider hiring them? As noted above, these are not obvious lies. Further, I would not ask them about their drinking habits 30 years ago. ---
**Author:** ![Lance\_Turbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lance_turbo/32/6156_2.png) [@Lance\_Turbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lance_Turbo)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5185 "2018-09-29T18:45:03Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > As noted above, these are not obvious lies. Further, I would not ask them about their drinking habits 30 years ago. Your dodging of the question is noted. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 6:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5186 "2018-09-29T18:47:36Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > 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. How about the fact that he’s [a partisan hack, temperamentally unsuited to be a judge](https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/brett-kavanaugh-political-bias-judge-supreme-court-faith-1.4843788), who will demean and discredit the Supreme Court and destroy whatever vestige of credibility it has left, and who couldn’t make an unbiased ruling on a politically sensitive case if his life depended on it. Even if he’s innocent of Ford’s accusations – which I seriously doubt given everything we know so far – his vicious and totally unsubstantiated attacks Thursday in front of the whole nation against Democrats, the Clintons, and all things progressive should immediately disqualify him from the highest court. He came across as an unhinged spittle-mouthed lunatic. The idea that he would be an impartial judge on such matters if confirmed to the Supreme Court is every bit as much of a fantasy as the blameless choir-boy picture he tried to paint of his debauched alcoholic youth. This is a national watershed moment, and it appears Republicans totally don’t give a shit about their highest court, their judicial system, or their country. > [@UltraVires](#): > > … I would not ask them about their drinking habits 30 years ago. Not even if it had direct bearing on an attempted rape and perjury before Congress? :rolleyes: ---
**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 29, 2018, 6:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5187 "2018-09-29T18:49:17Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > 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. Which senators specifically have _accused_ him of each of those, rather than just asking him about it. I don’t recall that happening. ---
**Author:** ![filmore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7993a0/32.png) [@filmore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/filmore)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5188 "2018-09-29T18:51:07Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > 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. Earlier I posted that I wondered what the D’s would do if the situation was perfectly reversed. That is, Garland was nominated, the D’s are in the majority, and these kinds of allegations came up. But I should have also wondered what the R’s would do in that case. If Garland had these kinds of accusations, would you be as forgiving and dismissive of his accusations? How much of your opinion here is because Kavanaugh is conservative versus what actually he’s being accused of. I personally think in the reverse case that the R’s would be demanding investigations into all areas of Garlands’s life. And not only from the R’s in Congress. I imagine the RW radio and social media outlets would be clogged from people saying we must have an investigation. But I would think that 90%+ percent of their motivation for calling for an investigation would be for political reasons rather than they care about the accuser or the nature of the accusations. I think the D’s are also politically motivated in calling for an investigation of Kavanaugh, but I think it’s more like only 40% of their reasoning. They actually do care a great deal about the nature of the accusations, but because it aligns here with their political desires, they are calling for a full investigation. ---
**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, 6:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5189 "2018-09-29T18:51:46Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > Further, don’t underestimate red states. Among _women_ in West Virginia, 52% believe Kavanaugh while 36% believe Ford. > > [http://wvmetronews.com/2018/09/28/new-poll-shows-west-virginians-support-kavanaugh-confirmation/](http://wvmetronews.com/2018/09/28/new-poll-shows-west-virginians-support-kavanaugh-confirmation/) And not to quote myself, but this is very serious for Manchin. He has a relatively comfortable lead and should win re-election. If he votes against Kavanaugh, he will see himself in a huge dogfight and very likely to lose re-election. People in this state are very strong behind Kavanaugh. Manchin always claims to be pro-life and pro-gun. If he votes no, it will be the last straw for so many people I have personally spoken with who are planning to vote for him. Manchin is the last vote we need and Kavanaugh can be confirmed, even without Collins or Murkowski. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5190 "2018-09-29T18:53:19Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > 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. Yeah, if I were in that position, I’d want the FBI in there, _tout suite_, to prove my innocence. Funny that he didn’t. ---
**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 29, 2018, 6:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5191 "2018-09-29T18:54:26Z")
> [@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. You’ve made it clear that your sympathy lies with the wealthy and powerful white male accused of sexual assault, who very obviously lied during the Thursday hearing, and it’s welcome to see you admit that you don’t care that he lied, even though his drinking habits were absolutely material to the allegation in question, rather than the everyday woman who made the accusation. You’ve also made it clear that you’re not interested in any attempt at an objective investigation into these allegations. With that in mind, do you have any illusion in your mind that those of us with some sympathy for Dr. Ford would consider your analysis as anything other than partisan hackery? ---
**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, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5192 "2018-09-29T18:57:19Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > As you may know, Clinton was sued by Paula Jones, a state employee who worked under Clinton for sexual harassment. Under the rules established by statute, case law, and the Rules of Civil Procedure, in such a case, it is relevant testimony to hear about other relationships the Defendant had in the workplaces with subordinates whether that relationship was consensual or non-consensual. > > As such, his testimony regarding his sexual relationship with Lewinsky was material and relevant to Jones’ accusation. In other words, it’s okay when a Republican lies under oath. ---
**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 29, 2018, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5193 "2018-09-29T18:58:47Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > The, “I don’t remember asking you a goddamned thing,” part was my favorite. My second. First? His wife’s disapproving frown. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5194 "2018-09-29T19:04:34Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > … 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. … **Really, no.** Allow me to make an analogy from my professional experience. I’m a pediatrician and as such am a “mandated reporter.” If there are injuries which must be, by their very nature, considered “suspicious” for abuse, certain sorts of fractures for example, I must report and the family must be investigated. Most families have understood why the system is that way, are nervous but appreciate that the process is a necessary one and express no anger at me at all. Zero. Here I am saying that there needs to be an investigation about whether or not they are abusing their children, and no anger at me at all. Very rare for the complaint to be determined as “founded” in these cases but mandated is mandated. There have been a handful of parents over the years that have gotten very angry when I have filed. What a shock, every one of those families had the investigation come up with a determination of abuse. I think guilty people _think_ that a not guilty person would be offended so that such is how they should act, so they do. But generally the not guilty, while not happy and scared, appreciate how the investigative process protects kids, why it is necessary, and they are mostly confident about their not having done anything wrong. It is unremarkable for a guilty person to react like that, but completely remarkable for a not guilty person to. If not guilty (playing on that hypothetical assumption) that reaction was very unusual, very remarkable, and very much a sign of an unstable temperament. I can imagine Scalia having made a sarcastic joke in the context. Calmly, maybe arrogantly, and with a smile. ---
**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, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5195 "2018-09-29T19:08:44Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Yeah, if I were in that position, I’d want the FBI in there, _tout suite_, to prove my innocence. > > Funny that he didn’t. As has been stated over and over and over and fucking over again, the FBI cannot prove his innocence. Short of testimony from God, there can be no way to prove that he wasn’t at some house on some day between 1981 and 1984. This is a red herring and it always has been. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > You’ve made it clear that your sympathy lies with the wealthy and powerful white male accused of sexual assault, who very obviously lied during the Thursday hearing, and it’s welcome to see you admit that you don’t care that he lied, even though his drinking habits were absolutely material to the allegation in question, rather than the everyday woman who made the accusation. You’ve also made it clear that you’re not interested in any attempt at an objective investigation into these allegations. > > With that in mind, do you have any illusion in your mind that those of us with some sympathy for Dr. Ford would consider your analysis as anything other than partisan hackery? How did he lie? How is his drinking relevant? If a person is an alcoholic, are they a rapist then by definition? If that is relevant, the Ford’s drinking habits are relevant. Perhaps she was intoxicated and unsure about what happened. She cannot even remember how she got home even though she admitted that her home was not in walking distance and would have had to walk back inside the house she just escaped from or gone to a stranger’s house to make a phone call. As I have said before, I don’t know what happened, neither do you, and nothing at this late date can be found to substantiate it. Oh, but we can find people to accuse Kavanaugh of being a drunk or being a dick to women in his yearbook, so let’s keep investigating. Anything to keep him off the Court! ---
**Author:** ![Lance\_Turbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lance_turbo/32/6156_2.png) [@Lance\_Turbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lance_Turbo)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5196 "2018-09-29T19:12:00Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > How did he lie? He responded to questions by saying things that he knew to be untrue. Was that a real question? ---
**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, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5197 "2018-09-29T19:13:15Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > In other words, it’s okay when a Republican lies under oath. By George, I think he’s got it! ---
**Author:** ![susan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/susan/32/17537_2.png) [@susan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/susan)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5198 "2018-09-29T19:16:25Z")
As I watch T and K’s antics, I keep thinking about how Howard Dean was excoriated and dismissed as a serious candidate after the “Dean Scream,” which was nothing at all like “grab her by the ----” or “Lock her up! Lock her up!,” or even (I paraphrase), “Beer, I like beer, everyone likes beer. Beer! Beer!” ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5199 "2018-09-29T19:23:55Z")
Re the Clinton deflection. There is no question that the norms of the late '90s were not the norms of today. He got off easier than he should have (and he _was_ impeached) and few who supported him then would be similarly supporting a repeat of him today. Or tolerate the obfuscation he engaged in. It is of note that Ellison knows that the only way forward for him is to [call for the investigation](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/26/us/politics/ellison-abuse-accusation.html) that might clear him (or not). Franken resigned over much less. We have made progress in our appreciation of sexual assault and harassment since the '90s. Readily agreed that we have much to do yet to get the process right and that there will be lots of arguing over what “right” should look like. Can we agree on that much? ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5200 "2018-09-29T19:24:58Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > I think one of the reasons Kavanaugh may be so angry is that he correctly perceives that not only may his Supreme Court nomination be in jeopardy, but so might his present job on an appeals court, and rightly so. I thought he looked drunk, IMHO. Not falling down drunk, but had a couple to calm the nerves (and dt’s)drunk. I’ve known functional alcoholics. They need to have a bit of sauce in their veins or they physically and mentally hurt. For the most part, they are functional, but they are much easier angered, much more emotional, and much more red faced. I really wish that, after his tirade about liking beer, one of the senators had offered him a breathalyzer and asked him blow in it. He may blow a 0.000, as “sober as a judge”, but I doubt it. If he blew higher than absolute zero, he’d probably use as an excuse having a glass of wine or two with lunch if he blew anything else. Which would show poor judgement, drinking before a hearing about drinking. He’d probably simply refuse and scream about what an outrage it is that he is expected to back up his statements. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733.md?page=259) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733.md?page=261)