# 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:** 77
**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 18, 2018, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1521 "2018-09-18T23:14:55Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > You are attempting a distinction without a difference. Feinstein did not investigate the allegations, and did ignore them. Do you understand that? > > You cannot credibly claim that investigating the allegations is important and also that the delay was the fault of anyone but Feinstein. She had six weeks to act, and didn’t. Wasn’t investigation important during those six weeks? > > Regards, > Shodan We don’t need 9 justices to do business, anyway. You need to slow down. Let the politics take place. You’re such a huge fan of that, sometimes. ---
**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, 11:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1522 "2018-09-18T23:15:45Z")
Aww, poor widdle Republicans… an investigation into the facts of a serious allegation might harm them politically! How sad. There’s a tiny violin playing a sad march right now, if you listen hard enough. ---
**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, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1523 "2018-09-18T23:17:20Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Aww, poor widdle Republicans… an investigation into the facts of a serious allegation might harm them politically! How sad. There’s a tiny violin playing a sad march right now, if you listen hard enough. I’m only going to feel sorry for us if we’re stupid enough to fall for the political games the Dems have played with this. ---
**Author:** ![Grrr](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/grrr/32/146_2.png) [@Grrr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grrr)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 11:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1524 "2018-09-18T23:18:25Z")
Gosh, that Mark Judge is a real gem. [Link](https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/17/politics/mark-judge-brett-kavanaugh-high-school/index.html) > [@Mar Judge](#): > > Separate from his book, Judge – in a 2013 piece for The Daily Caller – says of former President Barack Obama that he “doesn’t have just a streak of the feminine in him; he seems to be a woman, and a feminist one at that, with a streak of man in him.” > In the same Daily Caller article, he compares Michelle Obama with Laura Bush, writing: “With her love of violent movies, her fixation on fitness and death glare that appears when she doesn’t like what she’s hearing, Michelle is actually more man than her husband. Oh for the days when president George W. Bush gave his wife Laura a loving but firm pat on the backside in public. The man knew who was boss.” No wonder why he isn’t testifying. ---
**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:** [September 18, 2018, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1525 "2018-09-18T23:19:40Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I’m only going to feel sorry for us if we’re stupid enough to fall for the political games the Dems have played with this. The games **Democrats** have played with SCOTUS confirmations? :eek: :smack::dubious: Wow. ---
**Author:** ![GoPostie](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@GoPostie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GoPostie)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1526 "2018-09-18T23:20:00Z")
Is it just the internet enabled people or is the whole USA one enormous basket case now? ---
**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, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1527 "2018-09-18T23:20:26Z")
> [@CaptMurdock](#): > > The games **Democrats** have played with SCOTUS confirmations? > > :eek: :smack::dubious: > > Wow. Yes, sitting on the Ford letter for weeks. Did you miss the previous discussion of that? ---
**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, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1528 "2018-09-18T23:20:54Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > So, subpoena Ford and have the committee cross-examine her until she trips up? That’s _exactly_ the sort of optics the Dems are hoping for. “Look at the mean old white Republican men, beating up on that poor defenseless woman”. > > The odds of anything more exculpatory than Kavanaugh and Judge’s denials coming out of that approach seem slim. The probability of horrible-looking-optics-that-benefit-the-Dems-in-the-midterm seem a near-certainty. So, its a brilliant scheme of cunning, treachery and skulduggery from the Democratic Party? You know, there have been times when I might have wished it were possible. Alas, no. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1529 "2018-09-18T23:21:08Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > So, subpoena Ford and have the committee cross-examine her until she trips up? That’s _exactly_ the sort of optics the Dems are hoping for. “Look at the mean old white Republican men, beating up on that poor defenseless woman”. > > The odds of anything more exculpatory than Kavanaugh and Judge’s denials coming out of that approach seem slim. The probability of horrible-looking-optics-that-benefit-the-Dems-in-the-midterm seem a near-certainty. What about stuff like seeing if a big check from George Soros suddenly appeared in her bank account last month? Or checking with her friends to see if she confided in them that she was going to falsely accuse Kavanaugh? Or seeing if she’s falsely accused other people in the past? Again, investigation doesn’t just mean putting her on the stand and hearing her story. That’s shit that the FBI can do. If it really is he-said she-said then the FBI will turn up nothing and then all we can do is hear the testimony and draw our conclusions. But crazy lying bitches sometimes make mistakes, and I’m not talking about cracking on the witness stand, Perry Mason style. Get the FBI involved for some of that shit. ---
**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, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1530 "2018-09-18T23:21:49Z")
> [@GoPostie](#): > > Is it just the internet enabled people or is the whole USA one enormous basket case now? Definitely the latter. ---
**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 18, 2018, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1531 "2018-09-18T23:24:10Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I’m not arguing that she broke a rule, or did anything “unconstitutional”. See the difference? What did she do wrong by your estimation? ---
**Author:** ![Enginerd](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/bcef8e/32.png) [@Enginerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Enginerd)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 11:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1532 "2018-09-18T23:24:43Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > So, subpoena Ford and have the committee cross-examine her until she trips up? That’s _exactly_ the sort of optics the Dems are hoping for. “Look at the mean old white Republican men, beating up on that poor defenseless woman”. > > The odds of anything more exculpatory than Kavanaugh and **Judge’s denials** coming out of that approach seem slim. The probability of horrible-looking-optics-that-benefit-the-Dems-in-the-midterm seem a near-certainty. Bolding mine. You keep mentioning Judge’s “denial,” but he didn’t deny that the event took place. His statement issued through his lawyer said simply that he has “no memory of this alleged incident” ([cite](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2018/09/17/what-the-man-accused-of-helping-kavanaugh-assault-a-woman-wrote-about-female-sexuality/?utm_term=.cf4a3335539e)). That’s entirely consistent with Kavanaugh being innocent, but it’s also entirely consistent with Ford’s description of the pair as “blackout drunk.” Taken in conjunction with his memoir about ridiculous drinking in high school, Judge’s carefully worded “denial” is less than compelling. ---
**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, 11:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1533 "2018-09-18T23:25:44Z")
> [@Lemur866](#): > > … Get the FBI involved for some of that shit. I feel like we’re going in circles. Earlier I noted that the FBI wasn’t interested in investigating this, because there was no possible federal crime. Your response was “They should at least try to do an investigation. The Senate does have subpoena powers, they can compel witnesses to testify. …” to which I explained the political realities that make such an approach distasteful. Now we’re back to “get the FBI involved”, and my response is, once again, the FBI does not want to. ---
**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, 11:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1534 "2018-09-18T23:28:54Z")
> [@drad\_dog](#): > > What did she do wrong by your estimation? Feinstein? By keeping the allegation secret throughout the whole hearing whose sole purpose (at least officially) was to evaluate Kavanaugh’s fitness for SCOTUS. ---
**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 18, 2018, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1535 "2018-09-18T23:29:00Z")
> [@Enginerd](#): > > Bolding mine. > > You keep mentioning Judge’s “denial,” but he didn’t deny that the event took place. His statement issued through his lawyer said simply that he has “no memory of this alleged incident” ([cite](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2018/09/17/what-the-man-accused-of-helping-kavanaugh-assault-a-woman-wrote-about-female-sexuality/?utm_term=.cf4a3335539e)). That’s entirely consistent with Kavanaugh being innocent, but it’s also entirely consistent with Ford’s description of the pair as “blackout drunk.” > > Taken in conjunction with his memoir about ridiculous drinking in high school, Judge’s carefully worded “denial” is less than compelling. My understanding is that Judge also refused to testify under oath, about his memory. ---
**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, 11:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1536 "2018-09-18T23:29:03Z")
The FBI has stated “The FBI’s role in such matters is to provide information for the use of the decision makers.” The decision makers – the Senate Judiciary Committee – could very easily request the FBI’s assistance in providing more information in this matter, and there’s no indication that they have done so. There’s nothing stopping the Senate from making such a request, except for a lack of a desire to actually fully investigate this allegation. > **[Democrats Want FBI To Investigate Kavanaugh Allegations. It Likely Won't](https://www.npr.org/2018/09/18/649085712/democrats-want-fbi-to-investigate-kavanaugh-allegations-it-likely-wont)** > > The Justice Department says, "The allegation does not involve any potential federal crime." That's ahead of high-stakes testimony scheduled Monday from Kavanaugh and his accuser. ---
**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 18, 2018, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1537 "2018-09-18T23:36:01Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Feinstein? By keeping the allegation secret throughout the whole hearing whose sole purpose \*\*\*(at least officially) \*\*\*was to evaluate Kavanaugh’s fitness for SCOTUS. Makes me start to wonder about the “unofficial” purposes. Do official purposes only matter if it is a democrat? I’m talking about something she did wrong, beyond the norms. What is it? We dispensed with norms in this thread already. If you want to go back that is very hypocritical. She “held” onto something amidst “politics”? Do you want a crying towel? ---
**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, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1538 "2018-09-18T23:36:02Z")
> [@Enginerd](#): > > Bolding mine. > > You keep mentioning Judge’s “denial,” but he didn’t deny that the event took place. His statement issued through his lawyer said simply that he has “no memory of this alleged incident” ([cite](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/arts-and-entertainment/wp/2018/09/17/what-the-man-accused-of-helping-kavanaugh-assault-a-woman-wrote-about-female-sexuality/?utm_term=.cf4a3335539e)). That’s entirely consistent with Kavanaugh being innocent, but it’s also entirely consistent with Ford’s description of the pair as “blackout drunk.” > > Taken in conjunction with his memoir about ridiculous drinking in high school, Judge’s carefully worded “denial” is less than compelling. Your cite says: > [@](#): > > Judge previously told the New York Times that such behavior would be wildly out of character for the Catholic-raised-and-educated boys who went to Georgetown Prep in the early ’80s. To be more thorough, [the New York Times](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/14/us/politics/kavanaugh-assault-allegation-letter.html) published: > [@](#): > > The friend who is said to have participated, Mark Judge, also denied the episode ever happened. > > “I never saw anything like what was described,” he said in an interview after being informed that he was named in the letter. > > Further, he said, it did not match Mr. Kavanaugh’s character: “It is not who he is.” He said that the two were around each other constantly in high school, and recalled him as a “brilliant student,” who was very into sports, and was not “into anything crazy or illegal.” Perhaps still not as iron-clad a denial as you’d like to see, but it does seem a good bit more than just “no memory of this alleged incident.” If the NYT felt comfortable writing “Mark Judge, also denied the episode ever happened”, I feel pretty comfortable labeling it Judge’s “denial”. YMMV. ---
**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, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1539 "2018-09-18T23:39:48Z")
> [@drad\_dog](#): > > Makes me start to wonder about the “unofficial” purposes. Do official purposes only matter if it is a democrat? … The unofficial purposes I had in mind were to provide aspiring presidential candidates an opportunity for political grandstanding. You may recall my earlier reference to Cory “Spartacus” Booker. ---
**Author:** ![Lemur866](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lemur866/32/434_2.png) [@Lemur866](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lemur866)\ **Post date:** [September 18, 2018, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1540 "2018-09-18T23:44:22Z")
OK, some one on the Senate payroll, if the FBI is helpless against crazy lying bitches. I can think of a dozen things that might turn up to exculpate Kavanaugh if we do a little digging and don’t just give up and declare that it’s all impossible. Do I think an investigation is likely to turn up exculpatory evidence? No I do not. Mostly because the most likely explanation is that the story is substantially true, or at least partially true, and the story probably wasn’t cooked up out of whole cloth. So we’re probably not going to find anything like that. But if we live in a universe where the accuser is a crazy lying bitch on a high tech lynching mission, the odds of finding something like that go up substantially. As opposed to the universe where it happened, or the universe where it was just a little horseplay that she built up into a big thing. In that universe then no, we aren’t going to turn up any exculpatory evidrnce. So take your pick. I don’t know for sure which universe we are living in and neither do you. But an investigation at least has the potential of helping the Republicans, right? Not browbeating the witness on live television, but an actual investigation. The only downside is that it gives the Democrats a news cycle win if the vote gets delayed a couple weeks. The Republicans look like sissies. So which is more important? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733.md?page=76) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733.md?page=78)