# 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:** 65
**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 18, 2018, 12:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1281 "2018-09-18T12:57:51Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > :dubious: > You have to be extremely naive to think that Kavanaugh (or Gorsuch, Kagan, Sotomeyer etc) did not undergo a screening much much much more extensive and deeper than that of a guy who is an accountant in the Dept of Agriculture. Kavanaugh has been in important positions the better part of two decades, there are probablyt files (plural) on him. In such cases, the FBI is probably the point of contact, no doubt other agencies are also involved. > > What is most eye opening is that the parties are behaving the opposite of what you expect. The Democrats seem to want this to be done by the FBI (i.e out of the public eye) while the Republicans have delayed the vote and gone for public hearings. In my understanding, the Democrats also want a public hearing, they just want a full FBI investigation before the hearing. They also want to call witnesses like Mark Judge (the alleged accomplice) at the public hearing. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1282 "2018-09-18T13:11:17Z")
> [@Bijou\_Drains](#): > > confirm him and GOP lose women’s votes , find someone else and that does not happen. Seems like a simple choice I think the political effects of this nomination and its various possible resolutions (confirmed, withdrawn, voted down) are more complicated than that. The GOP’s theocratic base is basically saying, “this is why we support you - are you going to keep your promises, or what? No mulligan for you!” The GOP leadership is scared that if they back down on Kavanaugh, enough of their voters will stay home to make a real dent in their prospects. Meanwhile, red-state Dem Senators would love to avoid having to vote at all, because then nobody can get mad at them for voting the ‘wrong’ way. And yeah, a lot of women will be pissed at the GOP if they vote to confirm. But at this point, I suspect that if the Dems stop Kavanaugh, those same women will be eager to show their support for the Dems for having blocked his confirmation. On the whole, I agree with [Josh Marshall](https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/you-never-win-by-losing): “as a general matter victories energize and defeats demoralize.” ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 1:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1283 "2018-09-18T13:13:34Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > The difference is impartiality and thoroughness vs. cherry-picking and theatrics. Also, the GOP **did** at first try to get away with private interviews with both Ford and Kavanaugh. They accepted a public hearing only when they realized that wasn’t gonna fly. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 1:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1284 "2018-09-18T13:15:25Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > The Democrats seem to want this to be done by the FBI (i.e out of the public eye) while the Republicans have delayed the vote and gone for public hearings. Wouldn’t the committee receive the _results_ of the FBI investigation, if there were one? Sure, the investigation itself would happen out of the public eye, but so what? ---
**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 18, 2018, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1285 "2018-09-18T13:16:00Z")
if he quits or is voted down the next person likely won’t be up for a vote until after the election. Which means the people running this year may not have to vote and as you said that would be good for red state Dems. Also Trump does not want to lose in anything so he may not want a vote if it looks like he is going down. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 1:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1286 "2018-09-18T13:18:56Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > :dubious: > You have to be extremely naive to think that Kavanaugh (or Gorsuch, Kagan, Sotomeyer etc) did not undergo a screening much much much more extensive and deeper than that of a guy who is an accountant in the Dept of Agriculture. Kavanaugh has been in important positions the better part of two decades, there are probablyt files (plural) on him. In such cases, the FBI is probably the point of contact, no doubt other agencies are also involved. This is surely so, but it sounds as if it’s limited to the same question: is this guy vulnerable to being a security risk? As long as that’s the case, assuming none of the investigations turn up a hint of a ‘yes’ answer to that question, those repeated exhaustive investigations have little to do with Kavanaugh’s fitness to serve as a Supreme Court Justice. ---
**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 18, 2018, 1:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1287 "2018-09-18T13:32:03Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > John Mace has asked whether we are really sure that Dr. Ford identified the right guy. FBI questioning should clarify that. > > Sandra Newman, an author who has written about false rape accusations before, says [this doesn’t match the typical profile of a false accusation](https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1041709681989836801.html). [INDENT]False accusations tend to paint the attacker as extraordinarily evil and deliberately cruel, not as a kid who is doing something really awful and stupid while black-out drunk. [/INDENT] There’s more at the link. She’s talking about situations where the woman deliberately fabricates a false story. I’m not suggesting that Ford deliberately fabricated a false story, and I don’t think that will be a narrative pressed during the committee hearings. It may be pressed by the right-wing noise machine, but that’s a different matter. BTW, I heard this morning that an FBI investigation can only happen at the request of the president. That was from a Democratic (I think) Congressman being interviewed (can’t remember who it was) either on CNN or MSNBC. ---
**Author:** ![Fiveyearlurker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@Fiveyearlurker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiveyearlurker)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 1:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1288 "2018-09-18T13:39:38Z")
> [@Bijou\_Drains](#): > > confirm him and GOP lose women’s votes , find someone else and that does not happen. Seems like a simple choice If they pull him, they may have to try to confirm during a lame duck session where they’ve been trounced, perhaps even losing the Senate, thus making them have to commit to a mind bending level of hypocrisy. Obviously that’s not a deal breaker. ---
**Author:** ![carlb](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carlb/32/5930_2.png) [@carlb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carlb)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 1:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1289 "2018-09-18T13:40:08Z")
> [@Bijou\_Drains](#): > > if he quits or is voted down the next person likely won’t be up for a vote until after the election. Which means the people running this year may not have to vote and as you said that would be good for red state Dems. > > Also Trump does not want to lose in anything so he may not want a vote if it looks like he is going down. I think it was the Slate Political Gabfest that was discussing this, and concluded that McConnell’s best strategy is to have the Kavanaugh nomination pulled soon, get another potential Justice nominated before the mid-terms, but schedule his or her confirmation vote for after the elections. Having a nominee in the pipeline could get more Republican voters out to the polls, but in the worst-case scenario they could approve the nominee in lame-duck session. For all that I think he’s been terrible for the country, McConnell’s a decent tactician; this scenario wouldn’t surprise me in the least. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1290 "2018-09-18T13:46:08Z")
> [@carlb](#): > > For all that I think he’s been terrible for the country, McConnell’s a decent tactician; this scenario wouldn’t surprise me in the least. It isn’t up to McConnell but Trump, and it isn’t a tactical situation. A withdrawal of the nomination would mean Trump lost, and he doesn’t lose. :rolleyes: Unless Kavanaugh can make it look like it’s \*his \*decision to withdraw, this is going to the end - and Kavanaugh looks like he’s as honorable as Trump. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1291 "2018-09-18T13:58:33Z")
I don’t believe as of this morning that Ms. Ford has agreed to appear before the committee. If she doesn’t, that would be kind of an anti-climax. I would also like to hear from the former FBI agent who supposedly administered the lie detector test - does he claim it has value as evidence, how was it administered, etc. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 2:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1292 "2018-09-18T14:01:52Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > It isn’t up to McConnell but Trump McConnell can decide to refuse to bring the nomination to the floor for a vote. And if he told Grassley he was doing that, Grassley would fall in line and end consideration of Kavanaugh in the committee. > [@](#): > > and it isn’t a tactical situation. A withdrawal of the nomination would mean Trump lost, and he doesn’t lose. :rolleyes: Yabbut insisting on a vote and losing there is a bigger deal as a loss than pulling the nomination. If McConnell tells Trump he can’t get 50 votes for Kavanaugh, Trump will tell Kavanaugh that Kavanaugh needs to withdraw his name voluntarily without having been asked by anyone to do so. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 2:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1293 "2018-09-18T14:09:45Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > …Nobody is attacking her and they are handling her with kid gloves. Hell, they even have Trump under control and off Twitter! A commenter was on last night and said that in 2018 with the #metoo culture, there cannot be a harsh cross-examination of her like Arlen Specter with Anita Hill. They will be handling her with kid gloves. And you expect that to last, do you? This decorum and restraint, which had been noticeably absent, will be the unshakeable standard. Trumpy no tweety? Even if it looks like things are going South? Kavanaugh is on record as urging Ken Starr to make Bill Clinton’s case an exercise in pornography, up to and including explicit testimony about the sexual utility of cigars. His pursuit of HRC on the Vince Foster “murder scandal” exceeded all bounds on decency. You know about Judge Kozinski and the multiple accusations of sexual harassment? Massive, huge, drove him from the bench. Was he aware of any of this, did he object? He was right there, but didn’t see _anything_ and remembers even less. His female colleagues didn’t tell him anything about it? Told each other, but not him. Why? Even without the recent nastiness, he is revealed as a partisan activist who is being rewarded for his loyalty by granting him massive power to fuck up people’s lives. And this is the best you can do? Seriously? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1294 "2018-09-18T14:12:59Z")
(omitted) ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1295 "2018-09-18T14:13:32Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > Nobody is attacking her and they are handling her with kid gloves. Yeah, they only rabidly attacked some _other_ California professor with the same first and last names! 😃 😃 😃 ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1296 "2018-09-18T14:14:31Z")
_Addendum_ > [@](#): > > Sen. Christopher Coons: “At least 15 women have accused Judge Kozinski of sexual harassment. Do you believe that Judge Kozinski treated women inappropriately?” > > Kavanaugh: “As I said at the hearing, I have no reason to doubt the claims of these women.” > > Coons: “During the entire course of your relationship with Judge Kozinski, did you ever witness him engaging in inappropriate behavior?” > > Kavanaugh: “Judge Kozinski was known to be a tough boss, but I did not witness him engaging in inappropriate behavior of a sexual nature.” > **[Senators Press Kavanaugh Over Kozinski Clerkship, Loyalty, Personal Debt...](https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/2018/09/12/senators-press-kavanaugh-over-kozinski-clerkship-loyalty-personal-debt-more/?slreturn=20240407233135)** > > Brett Kavanaugh responded to more than 1,000 written questions—more than any recent Supreme Court nominee. Here are some highlights from 263 pages of records released late Wednesday. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 2:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1297 "2018-09-18T14:19:47Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > The difference is impartiality and thoroughness vs. cherry-picking and theatrics. The first round of hearings demonstrated quite vividly that [DEL]Spartacus[/DEL] I mean the Dems, prefer the latter. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1298 "2018-09-18T14:20:12Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > (omitted) Yes, typical profile. From Sandra Newman’s [original May 2017 piece](https://qz.com/980766/the-truth-about-false-rape-accusations/): > [@](#): > > In every academic study, one of the most common kinds of false accuser is a teenage girl who tells her parents she was raped to avoid getting in trouble. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 2:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1299 "2018-09-18T14:21:50Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Yes, typical profile. > > From Sandra Newman’s [original May 2017 piece](https://qz.com/980766/the-truth-about-false-rape-accusations/): Yup. I posted, then saw that, realized it was in fact consistent with one of her typical profiles, and zapped my post. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1300 "2018-09-18T14:22:42Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > The first round of hearings demonstrated quite vividly that [DEL]Spartacus[/DEL] I mean the Dems, prefer the latter. Who knew that in a hearing such as this, the questioners might want to thoroughly check out parts of his record which might be reasons he _shouldn’t_ be elevated to the Supreme Court? Man, knock me over with a feather! [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733.md?page=64) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733.md?page=66)