Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation Hearing Now with Poll

[Bombadil]

Would it be possible to launch an investigation but continue the confirmation hearing as normal? I'm not sure of SCOTUS rules about investigations and charges thereof.

The hearing part of the process is over. The judiciary committee votes tomorrow on taking the nomination to the floor. The Democrats sat on this information throughout the entire vetting process. Now the judiciary committee has set up an emergency phone interview with Kavanaugh, but the Democrats are refusing to participate. This isn't politics. It's just plain wrong.

It's entirely politics, just as the Republicans refused to go through the process with Gorsuch.

However don't worry, the odds of this derailing Kavanaugh's nomination is probably close to zero. Having said that I don't blame the Democrats for trying, this has long ramifications for the direction of the law in the US.

It's practically the epitome of politics.

[Fartsniffage]

Who is running for the Democrats in 2020?

A Democrat.

You say that, but the Democrats nearly had an independent running for them in 2016 and Trump got the Republican ticket. Going of that it might be a goldfish running on the Democrat ticket by 2020.....

[Grinning Dragon]

The hearing part of the process is over. The judiciary committee votes tomorrow on taking the nomination to the floor. The Democrats sat on this information throughout the entire vetting process. Now the judiciary committee has set up an emergency phone interview with Kavanaugh, but the Democrats are refusing to participate. This isn't politics. It's just plain wrong.

It's entirely politics, just as the Republicans refused to go through the process with Gorsuch.

However don't worry, the odds of this derailing Kavanaugh's nomination is probably close to zero. Having said that I don't blame the Democrats for trying, this has long ramifications for the direction of the law in the US.

It's practically the epitome of politics.

*Garland
Gorsuch was confirmed.

[Greed and Death]

We do not know he was a black out drunk. A friend's book kind of sort of references him (O'Kavanauh) but it could easily be someone else or an amalgamation of two people.

Now for Evidence that he was not blackout drunk. 65 women who went to highschool (many attended the same high school and likely were in the same social circles as the accuser) Said Kavanaugh was not a blackout drunk nor anything less than a gentleman. Also he got into Yale how many blackout drunks score that well on the SAT and maintain the GPA to go to Yale ?

Okay, there's still a chance to get dodgy without solid evidence the black out drunk thing is overblown. But still it might be accurate.

I don't want a SCOTUS justice that might relapse into alcoholism. Just sayin. Maybe Old Gentleman is soon his brand.

You'd be surprised the people I know/knew who were smashed half the time in HS/college back in the 1970s who've achieved large measures of professional status. But none of them are high government officials. Especially lifetime appointments.

Then it's best to find people who's personal history minimizes the potential avoidable problems. Too much is on the line.

Unlikely if he has had no relapses since 17. Though here is my thing what Evidence would Kavanaugh need to bring to still get this job?

[Telconi]

A Democrat.

You say that, but the Democrats nearly had an independent running for them in 2016 and Trump got the Republican ticket. Going of that it might be a goldfish running on the Democrat ticket by 2020.....

Ah, yes, the """Independent"""

[Proctopeo]

A Democrat.

You say that, but the Democrats nearly had an independent running for them in 2016 and Trump got the Republican ticket. Going of that it might be a goldfish running on the Democrat ticket by 2020.....

Who will still manage to put up more of a fight than the last one, but end up dropping out due to a sexual abuse scandal.

[Bombadil]

It's entirely politics, just as the Republicans refused to go through the process with Gorsuch.

However don't worry, the odds of this derailing Kavanaugh's nomination is probably close to zero. Having said that I don't blame the Democrats for trying, this has long ramifications for the direction of the law in the US.

It's practically the epitome of politics.

*Garland
Gorsuch was confirmed.

Thanks, damn G's..

[Telconi]

Trump is mean, better replace him with an atrocity.

The point still stands that you can, in fact, replace him ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

As for atrocities, one would think a self-proclaimed "Democrat" would wait to see who the nominee is. Who knows, Tel, maybe you'll get lucky!

I left your stomach churning party some time ago.

[Fartsniffage]

You say that, but the Democrats nearly had an independent running for them in 2016 and Trump got the Republican ticket. Going of that it might be a goldfish running on the Democrat ticket by 2020.....

Who will still manage to put up more of a fight than the last one, but end up dropping out due to a sexual abuse scandal.

Goldfish are well known as horny bastards.

[Tarsonis]

Allegedly, with zero corroborating evidence beyond one person’s unsubstantiated claims.

What I said was not an oversimplification, there is absolutely zero evidence that gives this any credence. There’s no evidence to support her claims, no indication that Kavanaugh was in anyway associated with her until the July letter. I don’t know how you think that she “seems legit” beyond you’re just assuming so because he’s a conservative Trump nominee

The no evidence no evidence no evidence chant is so 2017. It's 2018 and all of Trumps top men have plea deals. Wrong about no evidence then, maybe wrong about no evidence now.
It's not such a leap of faith to consider investigating Ms. Ford's allegations concerning Mr. Kavanaugh. But then Trump blocks the FBI from investigating. May he be forever known as Donald Trump, the Obstructor-in-chief. Labelism!

Except that’s entirely false as I already pointed out to Vess. The FBI is free to open its own criminal investigation against Kavanaugh, without the say of the White House. They chose not to, and rightly so: this case is uninvestigatable.

We’re not talking about a lack of/suppression of evidence of recent crimes, we’re talking about an alleged event 37 years ago, which according to the accusers own accounting of events has no credible eye witnesses. There is absolutely no way to investigate let alone prosecute their case. The FBI knows this, so they chose not to open a criminal investigation.

The White House hasn’t done anything in this case. They haven’t obstructed a criminal investigation and they haven’t asked the FBI to investigate the claim pursuant to the vetting process. The FBI can’t investigate for the nomination without the request of the White House. They can do a their own formal investigation but they chose not to.

[Tarsonis]

Oh god, that means I'm going to have to agree with the goddamn Republicans and think there's not much that can be done besides continue then.

You have to remember the Senate hearings into confirmation aren't a trial, they're a job interview. He could be denied simply because they don't like the colour of his tie.

I mean really, who wears mauve with tweed...

[Greed and Death]

Oh god, that means I'm going to have to agree with the goddamn Republicans and think there's not much that can be done besides continue then.

You have to remember the Senate hearings into confirmation aren't a trial, they're a job interview. He could be denied simply because they don't like the colour of his tie.

Technically the hearings are already closed and they GOP could say tough you should have came forward earlier.

It is also a govnerment job which does accord the interviewee a degree of due process.

[Jerzyland]

The no evidence no evidence no evidence chant is so 2017. It's 2018 and all of Trumps top men have plea deals. Wrong about no evidence then, maybe wrong about no evidence now.
It's not such a leap of faith to consider investigating Ms. Ford's allegations concerning Mr. Kavanaugh. But then Trump blocks the FBI from investigating. May he be forever known as Donald Trump, the Obstructor-in-chief. Labelism!

Except that’s entirely false as I already pointed out to Vess. The FBI is free to open its own criminal investigation against Kavanaugh, without the say of the White House. They chose not to, and rightly so: this case is uninvestigatable.

We’re not talking about a lack of/suppression of evidence of recent crimes, we’re talking about an alleged event 37 years ago, which according to the accusers own accounting of events has no credible eye witnesses. There is absolutely no way to investigate let alone prosecute their case. The FBI knows this, so they chose not to open a criminal investigation.

The White House hasn’t done anything in this case. They haven’t obstructed a criminal investigation and they haven’t asked the FBI to investigate the claim pursuant to the vetting process. The FBI can’t investigate for the nomination without the request of the White House. They can do a their own formal investigation but they chose not to.

Pah-leaze!!! They choose what Trump wants. He fires FBI directors and deputy directors and many others. Ask Mr. Sessions about how ridiculously demanding Mr. Trump is of his appointees. He's gone in November for not giving Trump exactly what baby wants. You can believe your "FBI chose not to" fairytale if you want. I for one prefer not to bury my head in the sand like some ostrich waiting naively before becoming a coat forfeited by a convicted criminal. Hang it up.

[Gun Manufacturers]

There was actual physical evidence against Franken, though. Namely, there was a picture of him groping an unconscious woman.

The picture was him trying to look like he was groping an unconscious woman using a tacky visual trick. But again that was treated like Dark Web Porn.

Source on it being a visual trick, please.

[Major-Tom]

The picture was him trying to look like he was groping an unconscious woman using a tacky visual trick. But again that was treated like Dark Web Porn.

Source on it being a visual trick, please.

Yeah, I'm not quite sure it is. Just as I'm willing to give Kavanaugh what I think is deserved heat and flak, I'm willing to do the same for Franken. Just because he's on "my side," doesn't mean he's pure. The same standards should apply to people across the aisle, whether it be Trump and Kavanaugh or Conyers and Franken.

[Telconi]

Except that’s entirely false as I already pointed out to Vess. The FBI is free to open its own criminal investigation against Kavanaugh, without the say of the White House. They chose not to, and rightly so: this case is uninvestigatable.

We’re not talking about a lack of/suppression of evidence of recent crimes, we’re talking about an alleged event 37 years ago, which according to the accusers own accounting of events has no credible eye witnesses. There is absolutely no way to investigate let alone prosecute their case. The FBI knows this, so they chose not to open a criminal investigation.

The White House hasn’t done anything in this case. They haven’t obstructed a criminal investigation and they haven’t asked the FBI to investigate the claim pursuant to the vetting process. The FBI can’t investigate for the nomination without the request of the White House. They can do a their own formal investigation but they chose not to.

Pah-leaze!!! They choose what Trump wants. He fires FBI directors and deputy directors and many others. Ask Mr. Sessions about how ridiculously demanding Mr. Trump is of his appointees. He's gone in November for not giving Trump exactly what baby wants. You can believe your "FBI chose not to" fairytale if you want. I for one prefer not to bury my head in the sand like some ostrich waiting naively before becoming a coat forfeited by a convicted criminal. Hang it up.

The unwinnable case isn't being investigated becausee the supreme leader said not to, not because it's unwinnable...

And you think other people are naive?

[Fartsniffage]

You have to remember the Senate hearings into confirmation aren't a trial, they're a job interview. He could be denied simply because they don't like the colour of his tie.

Technically the hearings are already closed and they GOP could say tough you should have came forward earlier.

It is also a govnerment job which does accord the interviewee a degree of due process.

The hearings have already been re-opened. And I doubt the protections offered extend to the interviewers thinking the person is unsuited for the job.

[Greed and Death]

Technically the hearings are already closed and they GOP could say tough you should have came forward earlier.

It is also a govnerment job which does accord the interviewee a degree of due process.

The hearings have already been re-opened. And I doubt the protections offered extend to the interviewers thinking the person is unsuited for the job.

So the hearing is reopened, now what evidence can he proffer and still be on track to get the job.

[Fartsniffage]

The hearings have already been re-opened. And I doubt the protections offered extend to the interviewers thinking the person is unsuited for the job.

So the hearing is reopened, now what evidence can he proffer and still be on track to get the job.

I don't think he proffer anything since he claims to have no memory of the event or even the person.

[Greed and Death]

So the hearing is reopened, now what evidence can he proffer and still be on track to get the job.

I don't think he proffer anything since he claims to have no memory of the event or even the person.

I am not asking what you think he will do. I am saying what evidence would exonerate him?

[The Black Forrest]

I'm glad to hear you'll be joining me in voting Democratic in 2020.

Trump is mean, better replace him with an atrocity.

We have already hit rock bottom. Only way is up.

[Fartsniffage]

I don't think he proffer anything since he claims to have no memory of the event or even the person.

I am not asking what you think he will do. I am saying what evidence would exonerate him?

No idea. He will be before a slightly friendly audience in the committee so that will help.

I guess the big question will be how plausible Ford is or if he fucks up in some way. I don't think he will get away with the repeated evasions he's offered so far in his testimony.

[Jerzyland]

Pah-leaze!!! They choose what Trump wants. He fires FBI directors and deputy directors and many others. Ask Mr. Sessions about how ridiculously demanding Mr. Trump is of his appointees. He's gone in November for not giving Trump exactly what baby wants. You can believe your "FBI chose not to" fairytale if you want. I for one prefer not to bury my head in the sand like some ostrich waiting naively before becoming a coat forfeited by a convicted criminal. Hang it up.

The unwinnable case isn't being investigated becausee the supreme leader said not to, not because it's unwinnable...

And you think other people are naive?

I think some people play naive and...
All the world’s their stage,
And all the men and women merely players.
They have their exits and their entrances,
And one man in his time plays many parts...

Yes, many parts. One day people may realize they know what a comedy and a tragedy appears as acted out concurrently ...and we'll call that play... "Donald Trump, the Obstructor-in-Chief." Then admit which people exactly were his enablers.

[Grinning Dragon]

I don't think he proffer anything since he claims to have no memory of the event or even the person.

I am not asking what you think he will do. I am saying what evidence would exonerate him?

I would posit that Kavanaugh does have a history of an esteemed career and his character, the testimony of Mark Judge and those who have worked with him and or dated him, those who have known him since childhood.
Other than that, there really isn't any physical evidence that can be produced.

[Bombadil]

I don't think he proffer anything since he claims to have no memory of the event or even the person.

I am not asking what you think he will do. I am saying what evidence would exonerate him?

No evidence will exonerate him, and that works both ways you read it.