# 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:** 300
**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:** [October 4, 2018, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5982 "2018-10-04T14:42:54Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > Yes. Apparently someone who knew Kavanaugh in College is a good source for what Kavanaugh was in HS. Sounds better than a boyfriend of Ford’s that spent a lot of the time in a long distance relationship with her. > **[Ex-Boyfriend of Christine Blasey Ford Claims She Told a Falsehood About a...](https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/10/ex-boyfriend-christine-blasey-ford-polygraph.html)** > > It had to do with advice she allegedly gave a friend in the ’90s. > [@](#): > > Ford stood by her testimony, and a source told Politico that she “is not going to get into a tit-for-tat.” > > **The friend mentioned in the statement, Monica McLean, denied the polygraph claim. “I have NEVER had Christine Blasey Ford, or anybody else, prepare me, or provide any other type of assistance whatsoever in connection with any polygraph exam I have taken at any time,”** she told Politico in response. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2018, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5983 "2018-10-04T14:52:23Z")
Well he actually claimed to have seen what he alleged, so it would not be inadmissible hearsay as the other stuff is. On the other hand, by his own admission, she cheated on him and he believes she stole from her, so his crdibility has issues. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2018, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5984 "2018-10-04T15:02:31Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > Yes. Apparently someone who knew Kavanaugh in College is a good source for what Kavanaugh was in HS. A guy is breathlessly revealing that Kavanaugh lied about drinking in college to excess, since he well, said under oath he drank to excess. :rolleyes: > > We have gone from one plausible accusation (Ford), to a much more far fetched one (Ramirez) to ludicrous (Swetnick), to accusations of lying because of subjective reasons, to news about the lamest bar fight ever, to a letter about not bothering the neighbours being somehow DQing, to a schoolboy shenagin about imagined sexual conquests being somehow relevant…to I dunno, he probably pulled some girls pigtails in grade school, and grabbed some adult females tit when he was an infant… I don’t understand your motivation to stretch so far to try to defend Kavanaugh. He should be rejected for a variety of perfectly legitimate reasons. Care to explain the push back? ---
**Author:** ![CaptMurdock](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captmurdock/32/11736_2.png) [@CaptMurdock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CaptMurdock)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2018, 3:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5985 "2018-10-04T15:07:23Z")
> [@Lance\_Turbo](#): > > How can one investigate an allegation without talking to the allegator? 😉 That’s a croc. > [@Shodan](#): > > Let Feinstein read it first - I’d like to hear what’s in it. > > Regards, > Shodan [slow clap] Yes, that was very good. Class, that was Shecky Green from the beloved classic **Mr. Smith _Schlepps_ to Washington**. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2018, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5986 "2018-10-04T15:12:53Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > I don’t understand your motivation to stretch so far to try to defend Kavanaugh. He should be rejected for a variety of perfectly legitimate reasons. Care to explain the push back? I’m not **AK84** , but I have not seen any legitimate reason to reject Kavanaugh. None of the allegations against him have been substantiated, and this includes the allegations that he lied during his testimony. I know you and most of the other Dopers believe otherwise, really really hard. But they haven’t. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2018, 3:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5987 "2018-10-04T15:21:29Z")
> [@Procrustus](#): > > I don’t understand your motivation to stretch so far to try to defend Kavanaugh. He should be rejected for a variety of perfectly legitimate reasons. Care to explain the push back? I offer no opinion on confirmation. Merely the legal and factual issues. Trying to hide a subjective reason for denying him with a manufactured objective one is disingenuous in my opinion. Simply saying “I don’t think he should be on the Court”, is perfectly fine, trying to add dubious claims of perjury and lying are not. The decision is one which does not require reasons and is not reviewable. _Fuck off, not going to vote for you_ is perfectly fine, and needs no substantiation. _OMG, liar, liar_ does so. ---
**Author:** ![Procrustus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/procrustus/32/2994_2.png) [@Procrustus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Procrustus)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2018, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5988 "2018-10-04T15:27:18Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I’m not **AK84** , but I have not seen any legitimate reason to reject Kavanaugh. None of the allegations against him have been substantiated, and this includes the allegations that he lied during his testimony. > > I know you and most of the other Dopers believe otherwise, really really hard. But they haven’t. > > Regards, > Shodan He lied about [“Spy Memos”](https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/the-ghosts-of-memogate-are-haunting-brett-kavanaugh-720152/) when he worked in the Bush White House. He lied about Devils Triangle, and a host of other things. None of which would be important on its own, but it reveals a willingness to say what he needs to say regardless of the truth. He fails his own test for judicial temperament: > [@](#): > > To be a good judge and a good umpire, it’s important to have the proper demeanor. Really important, I think. To walk in the others’ shoes, whether it be the other litigants, the litigants in the case, the other judges. To understand them. To keep our emotions in check. To be calm amidst the storm. On the bench, to put it in the vernacular, don’t be a jerk. I think that’s important. To be a good umpire and a good judge, don’t be a jerk. In your opinions, to demonstrate civility—I think that’s important as well. To show, to help display, that you are trying to make the decision impartially and dispassionately based on the law and not based on your emotions. That we’re not the bigger than the game…There’s a danger of arrogance, as for umpires and referees, but also for judges. And I would say that danger grows the more time you’re on the bench. And he has very little experience actually lawyering, if that matters. Finally, he’s a bit of an asshole. ---
**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:** [October 4, 2018, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5989 "2018-10-04T15:30:58Z")
Senator Collins says the FBI investigation appears “very thorough”. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2018, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5990 "2018-10-04T15:32:16Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > Well he actually claimed to have seen what he alleged, so it would not be inadmissible hearsay as the other stuff is. What he said in the letter is way too unspecific to be anything other than hearsay. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2018, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5991 "2018-10-04T15:33:51Z")
> [@CoolHandCox](#): > > That’s a common process when the WH “loans” the Senate executive material (here, the FBI report). It was agreed to by Feinstein. It’s the same process Obama used. > > It might be a joke, but it’s a running gag. So the cloture vote was always after just one day of this, under Obama? And did Feinstein agree to that part? ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2018, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5992 "2018-10-04T15:36:14Z")
> [@CoolHandCox](#): > > Senator Collins says the FBI investigation appears “very thorough”. After interviewing just 9 people, none of whom were Ford or Kavanaugh, and didn’t seem to include any of the people who could have corroborated Ramirez’ account. Yeah, she’s taking a dive. ☹ ---
**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:** [October 4, 2018, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5993 "2018-10-04T15:38:26Z")
Manchin says “no problems as an adult” so mark him down as a yes. ---
**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:** [October 4, 2018, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5994 "2018-10-04T15:40:41Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > So the cloture vote was always after just one day of this, under Obama? And did Feinstein agree to that part? Sorry, I meant the process of viewing executive material only in a secure location. I didn’t mean how long someone should get to view it before they vote. Practically though, only a few Senators need to view it to decide on how to vote - if they don’t think they have enough time, they can speak up, or vote against ending the debate on the floor. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2018, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5995 "2018-10-04T15:41:53Z")
Sounds like they’ve got 50, then. In that case, they’ll probably get the rest of the undecideds, but if there’s any question about that, Pence will show up to break the tie. ---
**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:** [October 4, 2018, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5996 "2018-10-04T15:43:09Z")
Senator Flake says, “No additional corroborating information”. He always agrees with Collins assessment it was a thorough investigation. Remember, Flake previously said he was a “yes” but wanted the FBI to investigate to make it a more fair process. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2018, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5997 "2018-10-04T15:43:34Z")
> [@CoolHandCox](#): > > Sorry, I meant the process of viewing executive material only in a secure location. I didn’t mean how long someone should get to view it before they vote. > > Practically though, only a few Senators need to view it to decide on how to vote - if they don’t think they have enough time, they can speak up, or vote against ending the debate on the floor. Maybe so, but if I were a Dem Senator with a good relationship with one of the undecideds, I’d want to see the report myself so that I could try to persuade my colleague while being on the same footing in terms of what we knew. ---
**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:** [October 4, 2018, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5998 "2018-10-04T15:48:12Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Maybe so, but if I were a Dem Senator with a good relationship with one of the undecideds, I’d want to see the report myself so that I could try to persuade my colleague while being on the same footing in terms of what we knew. Absolutely. Tomorrow, they will vote to end the debate (not a vote to confirm Kav). If they need more time, they should vote no - don’t end the debate - we need more time to debate/view this FBI report, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Beckdawrek](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/beckdawrek/32/3647_2.png) [@Beckdawrek](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beckdawrek)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2018, 3:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/5999 "2018-10-04T15:51:53Z")
All this choking smoke. It’s coming from somewhere. ---
**Author:** ![CaptMurdock](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/captmurdock/32/11736_2.png) [@CaptMurdock](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CaptMurdock)\ **Post date:** [October 4, 2018, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/6000 "2018-10-04T15:54:10Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > I’m not **AK84** , but I have not seen any legitimate reason to reject Kavanaugh. None of the allegations against him have been substantiated, and this includes the allegations that he lied during his testimony. > > I know you and most of the other Dopers believe otherwise, really really hard. But they haven’t. > > Regards, > Shodan I know you believe this, really really hard. But you’re wrong. Guitars, CaptMurdock ---
**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:** [October 4, 2018, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/6001 "2018-10-04T15:54:55Z")
in the end the problem will be they (Dems) did not have enough time to look into this. If they had started in July the outcome might have been different. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733.md?page=299) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733.md?page=301)