# 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:** 81
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2018, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1601 "2018-09-19T02:05:39Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Huh? I think you missed an important fact somewhere along the way. From WaPo: > > On what planet is that not the _very definition_ of “leak this to the media”? I did miss that fact: apparently Dr. Ford reported the incident to a WAPO tip line in early July and wrote her Senator in late July. I stand by the remainder of the sentence though: she shouldn’t be forced to testify, but if she doesn’t cooperate with the investigation her claims should be deweighted. She seems to be cooperating though: it is the Republican regime which is resisting a full and fair investigation. > [@Ravenman](#): > > What good are FBI background investigations of major political appointees if they are “prohibited” from investigating non-Federal crimes? > > Jesus Christ, if Charlie Manson had been nominated to be Secretary of State, would he have gotten a thumbs up because his murders were just state matters? > > I’m guessing that the real reason the FBI won’t investigate is that Director Wray likes his job and it would be a real shame if something happened to it. That’s my take as well. I trust FBI background investigations review a range of behavior. When they ask about illegal drug use, I doubt whether they emphasize a disinterest in state law. ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2018, 2:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1602 "2018-09-19T02:13:19Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > \ > > I’m guessing that the real reason the FBI won’t investigate is that Director Wray likes his job and it would be a real shame if something happened to it. The reason the FBI won’t investigate is because their background investigation was previously closed before these allegations arose, and it requires an order from the White House to reopen it. Something that is… not forthcoming. Huh. I would have thought Judge Kavanaugh would welcome an opportunity to remove any besmirch to his name via an impartial investigation. I guess he prefers the shadow of attempted rape to haunt the entirety of his time on SCOTUS. I note Dr. Ford appears to have no fears about what may be learned through an investigation. Just sayin’. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2018, 2:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1603 "2018-09-19T02:14:43Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > … I trust FBI background investigations review a range of behavior. When they ask about illegal drug use, I doubt whether they emphasize a disinterest in state law. This is funny because drug abuse is actually one of the relatively few federal crimes. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2018, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1604 "2018-09-19T02:28:11Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > This is funny because drug abuse is actually one of the relatively few federal crimes. You keep saying the FBI only investigates federal crimes. That is incorrect. The FBI has routinely investigated SCOTUS nominees, including all kinds of things that are not crimes and including updating when new information comes to light. If they choose not to do so now, that is a political decision. Please get your facts straight. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2018, 2:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1605 "2018-09-19T02:30:01Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > This is funny because drug abuse is actually one of the relatively few federal crimes. I got that. But federal and state law varies on the subject: you can be tried for both, right? [Drug Crimes: A Look at Federal and State Laws - Drug Rehab Options](https://www.rehabs.com/pro-talk-articles/drug-crimes-a-look-at-federal-and-state-laws/) [INDENT]Though there is a longstanding federal strategy in place to combat the abuse and distribution of controlled substances, each state also has its own set of drug laws. One key difference between the two is that while the majority of federal drug convictions are obtained for trafficking, the majority of local and state arrests are made on charges of possession. [/INDENT] At any rate, my assertion that conservatives oppose a full and fair investigation of these charges is strengthened in this thread. If Kavanaugh is innocent, this doesn’t help his reputation, but that doesn’t matter to them. ---
**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 19, 2018, 2:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1606 "2018-09-19T02:52:13Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > It takes a certain amount of gall for [Feinstein to now claim “What we have wanted is an investigation carried out to look at the facts before there was a hearing.”](https://twitter.com/alanhe/status/1042174165057454080) The fact that she gave the letter to the FBI without commenting on it sort of props up her comments, doesn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2018, 3:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1607 "2018-09-19T03:26:27Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > You keep saying the FBI only investigates federal crimes. That is incorrect. The FBI has routinely investigated SCOTUS nominees, including all kinds of things that are not crimes and including updating when new information comes to light. If they choose not to do so now, that is a political decision. Please get your facts straight. The FBI updated his file with the letter containing her allegations, and considers the matter closed. Their background checks on Supreme Court nominees are to determine threats to national security, which this wouldn’t really qualify as one. ---
**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 19, 2018, 3:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1608 "2018-09-19T03:35:08Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > The FBI updated his file with the letter containing her allegations, and considers the matter closed. Their background checks on Supreme Court nominees are to determine threats to national security, which this wouldn’t really qualify as one. It certainly is if it is something he could be blackmailed over. ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2018, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1609 "2018-09-19T03:44:59Z")
> [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > The FBI updated his file with the letter containing her allegations, and considers the matter closed. Their background checks on Supreme Court nominees are to determine threats to national security, which this wouldn’t really qualify as one. It isn’t up to the FBI to “consider the matter closed.” They had concluded their background investigation and now require direction from the White House to reopen it. That’s all it would take. You need only cast your mind back to the days of Rob Porter and the additional investigation made into his background after allegations surfaced about wife-beating to know what you say is incorrect. And while Porter’s position was an important one, it is not as important as determining the integrity of a Supreme Court justice. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2018, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1610 "2018-09-19T03:49:26Z")
> [@Rick\_Kitchen](#): > > The fact that she gave the letter to the FBI without commenting on it sort of props up her comments, doesn’t it? I think the point escaped you. If Feinstein wanted an investigation to be carried out “before there was a hearing”, she should have shared the letter with the FBI before the hearing was scheduled to begin. She waited until after. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2018, 3:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1611 "2018-09-19T03:57:20Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > You keep saying the FBI only investigates federal crimes. That is incorrect. The FBI has routinely investigated SCOTUS nominees, including all kinds of things that are not crimes and including updating when new information comes to light. If they choose not to do so now, that is a political decision. Please get your facts straight. I don’t believe I used the word “only” anywhere in this context (if I did, please share). I essentially repeated what the DOJ had said: “The allegation does not involve any potential federal crime.” ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2018, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1612 "2018-09-19T03:59:25Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > I think the point escaped you. If Feinstein wanted an investigation to be carried out “before there was a hearing”, she should have shared the letter with the FBI before the hearing was scheduled to begin. She waited until after. Please cite the authority Feinstein has to order the FBI to conduct any additional investigation. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2018, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1613 "2018-09-19T04:10:57Z")
The FBI couldn’t investigate because there was no Federal crime involved _before_ the hearings began. After the hearings began, the situation was totally different! The hearings began, and then there _was_ a Federal crime! ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2018, 4:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1614 "2018-09-19T04:23:33Z")
> [@Aspenglow](#): > > Please cite the authority Feinstein has to order the FBI to conduct any additional investigation. She does’t have “authority to order the FBI” (and I never claimed she did), but she was the one withholding the only piece of information we’re aware of that might have prompted an additional investigation. Turns out it probably wouldn’t have anyways, but it’s more than a bit crass to say “I wanted you to investigate this weeks ago” when you didn’t report it until six days ago. ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2018, 4:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1615 "2018-09-19T04:31:44Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > She does’t have “authority to order the FBI” (and I never claimed she did), but she was the one withholding the only piece of information we’re aware of that might have prompted an additional investigation. Turns out it probably wouldn’t have anyways, but it’s more than a bit crass to say “I wanted you to investigate this weeks ago” when you didn’t report it until six days ago. Feinstein withheld the letter at the request of the alleged victim, who hoped that Kavanaugh would be otherwise disqualified so she (the alleged victim) would not have to suffer the nasty disruption to her life that she’s now enduring. That’s not unreasonable, and Feinstein had an ethical obligation to honor Ford’s wishes. Ford is understandably very torn about subjecting herself to this ugly partisan “process.” She’s asking for an impartial investigation to determine the truth. You seem to think that’s unreasonable. The only real question here is who is telling the truth. The matter should be investigated, and those with the authority to order such an investigation should order it. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2018, 4:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1616 "2018-09-19T04:45:25Z")
It’s still crass as all git-out, you can’t squirm your way out of that! ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2018, 5:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1617 "2018-09-19T05:01:45Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > And now a Judicial Crisis Network (right-wing outfit that promotes and advocates for the GOP judicial nominees) spokesperson [raises the question](https://twitter.com/joshtpm/status/1042074734807146502) of whether the incident was really attempted rape, or whether it was just “rough horseplay.” > > Guess it must’ve happened, then, otherwise it would be neither one, right? 😉 In the video in your link at 1:06 the Kav supporter says “We have to get all of the facts” then backs up all over herself realizing she fucked up. It’s like she accidentally read the Democratic talking points cue card, not the GOP one. ---
**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 19, 2018, 5:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1618 "2018-09-19T05:28:31Z")
> [@Aspenglow](#): > > … The only real question here is who is telling the truth. … This really needs emphasis. Honestly an incident from 30 years ago as a drunk teen, with no pattern of sexual abuse of power, assault, or harassment reports since (barring people coming out of the woodwork now that it is public as seems to sometimes happen)? I’d be thinking he should be disqualified for other reasons but not that. But I do not think she is _misremembering_ that a drunk Kavanaugh pinned her down, tried to tear her clothes off, and covered her mouth to prevent her from screaming. Nor do I think she planned this years in advance and told a therapist about it ahead of time just to be ready for a lie now. _It happened._ And no matter how drunk I do not think that he is honestly forgetting that it happened. He was, shall we say, less than completely truthful, when on the stand already. He is outright lying now (and it is telling that his friend and egger on is refusing to state _under oath_ that it never happened). _That_ completely disqualifies him. ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2018, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1619 "2018-09-19T05:34:31Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Linky-dinky parlay voo? Not doubting, want it for ammo. Dude. It’s “silver play” not “parlay voo”. Get your bad French right. ---
**Author:** ![I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/i_love_me_vol.i/32/521_2.png) [@I\_Love\_Me\_Vol.I](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/I_Love_Me_Vol.I)\ **Post date:** [September 19, 2018, 5:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733/1620 "2018-09-19T05:41:44Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Calling other witnesses, including Mark Judge. > > Having counsel for the majority and minority asking questions, instead of the Senators. > > Not rushing the hearing, to allow more investigation before putting Kavanaugh back under oath. I don’t get the benefit of having counsel ask the questions instead of Senators. Shouldn’t Senators speak (and ask questions) on record about this so they can’t avoid politically difficult questions/positions? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733.md?page=80) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/can-democrats-actually-stop-the-nomination-of-brett-kavanaugh/820733.md?page=82)