[Cog]

Here is Kavanaugh's opening statement. If the democrats thought he was simply going to be their punching bag for four hours, he soon dissuaded them of that notion. About 50 minutes long but you will get the gist in the first ten minutes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsYF1oOjKio

[Cog]

I didn’t see or hear the show except for about 2 minutes of Kavanaugh, he didn’t look to good. I was getting my hunting license and the gentleman had it in the tube.

So what’s the verdict? Who won?

It won't change anyone's mind on the committee. The Dems were never going to vote for him anyway. But he did himself some good and Ford's story got a few holes poked in it by the prosecutor who questioned her. The fact the Democrats held onto this allegation for weeks and didn't release it until after the hearings were over, pissed off a lot of people. Kavanaugh will win the vote tomorrow in committee and will get the 50 votes he needs for confirmation next week. My prediction anyway.

[Cog]

If you want to see the normally quiet and reserved Lindsay Graham do something different watch this five minute video from the proceedings. He encapsulates what most Republicans thought about this whole affair.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9GONHkIGagY

[Tanada]

In ths case I agree with Cog. When a Senator as squishy as Lindsey Graham goes to bat full bore for Kavenagh its a done deal. In point of fact the attitude of the D's toward both parties was disgusting. Maybe somehing happened to Dr. Ford 38 years ago, but the saccharine sympathy and hostility one two combo on full display today was nauseating.

Without presumption of innocence as the cornerstone of the justice system you have no rights. Guilty until proven innocent is a high bar only the wealthy and well connected can pass, the other 99% of us can not. Mob rule is no way to run a legal system, or a nation.

[Cog]

If even one person who Ford mentioned that was at that house that day had backed up her story with a sworn statement, this might merit further investigation. But all four people, including Ford's best friend said she never saw Kavanaugh there and did not know him.

This along with Senator Feinstein holding onto this allegation for weeks and all during the hearings and only leaking it after the hearings were over says a calculated smear. The committee has procedures in place to investigate, with both Democrat and Republican Senate investigators to check out stories like this and do so while maintaining the privacy of the accuser and the accused. If the Dems valued a FBI investigation that much, then two months ago was the time to do it, with the same privacy provisions. That is not what happened.

[dissident]

I didn’t see or hear the show except for about 2 minutes of Kavanaugh, he didn’t look to good. I was getting my hunting license and the gentleman had it in the tube.

So what’s the verdict? Who won?

This is exactly why such circus BS should not be tolerated. Managing the "winner" by manipulating perceptions is grotesque and destroys the purpose of the hearings. For the same reason, presidential debates are mostly nonsense since no serious subject can be discussed in some time-limited back and forth consisting of sound bites. The shyster who maintains their demeanour and appears to be authoritative, wins. Perhaps as a test for drooling idiocy, such debates have merit but not for policy and understanding of the multitude of complex problems.

[Cog]

As I understand the process going foward.

Friday committee vote
Saturday cloture vote by full senate
30 hours of floor debate monday - Wednesday
Vote to confirm by full senate Thursday

[Newfie]

I didn’t see or hear the show except for about 2 minutes of Kavanaugh, he didn’t look to good. I was getting my hunting license and the gentleman had it in the tube.

So what’s the verdict? Who won?

This is exactly why such circus BS should not be tolerated. Managing the "winner" by manipulating perceptions is grotesque and destroys the purpose of the hearings. For the same reason, presidential debates are mostly nonsense since no serious subject can be discussed in some time-limited back and forth consisting of sound bites. The shyster who maintains their demeanour and appears to be authoritative, wins. Perhaps as a test for drooling idiocy, such debates have merit but not for policy and understanding of the multitude of complex problems.

Dis,

I happen to agree heartedly with your opinion. Yet a circus is what we have.

We are no longer a land of laws, and are approaching mob rule.

Lead by our politicians, of all stripes.

[evilgenius]

I feel bad for this country because we have a man who is about to become a Supreme Court justice who has essentially said that he will adjudicate according to the party line, and not according to justice! The Democrats should be happy that they got him to admit that. The country should wonder what has happened to it, that this nominee wasn't summarily dismissed long ago, back when the gleeful payback to the Evangelicals was first set into the works. The Supreme Court, not unlike the Speaker in the English House of Commons, should be free of partisanship. If he was going to vote a certain way it ought to be out of his convictions regarding the law, not his beliefs or his allegiances.

The right needs to recognize the danger to itself if it repeals Roe vs. Wade. There are many on the right who find themselves there because of economics. Either a majority of them, or a significant minority, would leave that camp if something so pervasive as a decision like that came about. Their kids get pregnant too. There's a chance they could form a third party, but if the Democrats have fashioned their party appropriately enough to receive them, they will go there. All it takes is for the current emotional storm surrounding Democratic politics which is clouding their idea of "rights" to subside, allowing for them to adopt a more aggressive economic stance.

[Cog]

Last minute allegations, particularly without proof, should be rightly rejected. I know when the ATF does a proposed rule change regarding firearms, there is a mandatory 90 period for public comment. When that period is over, no other comment is allowed.

It occurs to me the senate judicial committee could adopt a similar rule after a president nominates someone. You have a certain period to bring forth your allegation, have it investigated by the fbi or senate investigators privately. But two weeks before the confirmation hearings, no further allegations would be entertained. No last minute gotcha to delay the process and wreck people's lives. Just a thought.

Kavanaugh was spot on by blaming senate democrats for holding onto this information and using it to destroy his life and reputation at the last moment. Their purpose was to delay his confirmation and destroy him with allegations that were unproven. Yeah he was pissed and I would be to. No where did he indicate how he would vote on issues before the court.. He did pin the blame exactly where it belonged

[dissident]

Trying to divert from the grotesque, destructive behaviour of the Democrats onto Kavanaugh's alleged party line is pathetic. That is how the system works. Democrats can install their own supreme court judges and the Republicans can too. This cannot be used as an argument that Kavanaugh is not suited for the job.

Sounds like every Democrat and fake progressive believes that only their political slant should be officially enshrined. So we have a one party state.

Fake progressives are the shrills who defame people with differing opinions and never live by their own standards.

[evilgenius]

Yes, he did. You weren't listening.

I agree about last minute allegations, especially coming from only one witness. Without at least two witnesses the one woman's testimony should not have been allowed. The other witness did not have to speak related to the events of that one party, but according to the issue of the man's character. But that raises the issue of when a person's character is formed. In fact, I disagree that such an allegation brought up concerning anyone's formative years should carry such clout. For me there would have to be overwhelming proof that he had some kind of disorder that not only was in him then, but would bend him in all future versions of himself. That does happen to people, especially people who have been abused when young. Any further back and it runs the risk of saying that people are who they are out of some magic, and not because they have arrived at who they are because of experience. That runs the risk of exclusive worship of youth, which operates, by the way, out of fear of death. And when fear, even fear of the left, becomes that prevalent there is always a danger that it will obtain a cult-like grip upon the people. That's why we have the rule of law, to avoid cult-like order within society. I would have preferred this man's attitudes concerning how he would judge be revealed by questioning related to his understanding of the law, what it means to him philosophically, not this way. If he has gotten to where he is out of thought and reflection upon the principles of the law, then he should have been able to answer accordingly. However it came about, though, his paucity was revealed.

[Newfie]

Evil,
I think you are going to have to point to the exact quotation to make your point.

I would be very surprised if Kavaugh would have said such a thing and if he did it should immediately invalidate him for this office or any judge position. I suspect Dis and Cog would agree to that point.

[Newfie]

I would like to thank the posters on this thread for keeping the comments relatively sane and civil. It is a most contentious and emotional matter and could have gone off the rails easily.

[evilgenius]

Let's just put it like this; there is a reason why Jesus, when he was on trial, said nothing to defend himself. What he did say was that he had always spoken openly, not in secret, and in the synagogues. He implored his judges to ask those whom he had spoken to what he had said. He didn't appeal to a group, or claim some kind of oppression.

[jedrider]

Those Democrats. What OBSTRUCTIONISTS they are! They shut down our government several times. When will this extreme partisanship end, I ask?

[Plantagenet]

The vote is delayed another week.

The FBI IS going to investigate the allegations against Kavanaugh.

O-BOY!!!! Another week of fun in DC!!!!

Cheers!

PS: I'm most curious about the D claim that Kavanaugh engaged in a gang rape of a woman at a party, and then that same woman saw him drugging other girls and lining up for gang rapes at at least 10 successive parties. Are the Ds wacky or did this really happen? Did that woman really go to 10 parties with gang rapes and drugging and never warn anyone or call the police? Or was it all a crazy fantasy designed to smear Kavanaugh?

AND I hope the FBI gives Ms. Ford another lie detector test, because in the one she took she said three people were in the room with her, and in her Congressional testimony she said two people were in the room with her, and in her therapy session she said four people were in the room with her. It would be good to pin down those little details when you're claiming your 100% sure it is was Kavanaugh in the room, but you can't remember it was 2 or 3 or 4 people in the room. When you keep telling different strories it makes it all seem....well......bogus.

Cheers!

[Newfie]

Apparently the FBI has discretion to decide what is “credible” and what is not.

That’s a lot of latitude.

I was going to make a guess about this but probably best to not.

“I shot an arrow into the air
And it landed I know not where.”

It’s interesting the Senste Rs are trusting this to the FBI. And Trump is going along. I would have liked to been in on that meeting.

I’m presuming that the optics for the mid terms are looking large in these decisions.

At this point Kavanaugh and Ford are simply pawns in a much bigger game.

I would not want to trade places with either of them.

[Tanada]

Apparently the FBI has discretion to decide what is “credible” and what is not.

That’s a lot of latitude.

I was going to make a guess about this but probably best to not.

“I shot an arrow into the air
And it landed I know not where.”

It’s interesting the Senate Rs are trusting this to the FBI. And Trump is going along. I would have liked to been in on that meeting.

I’m presuming that the optics for the mid terms are looking large in these decisions.

At this point Kavanaugh and Ford are simply pawns in a much bigger game.

I would not want to trade places with either of them.

Its all about the honesty of the investigation. The majority of FBI agents have law degrees and are quite familiar with the concept of actionable evidence of wrongdoing and what will stand up in a court of law.

Provided that the agents are instructed to investigate ONLY those claims which were made before todays vote in committee it should take them about two days to review all the interviews they have already done and do the interviews they need to do with Kavenaugh, Ford and those she claimed were witnesses for her accusations.

It is necessary to instruct the FBI to not investigate the flurry of new claims which will most likely erupt in the next 48 hours as the #MeToo #hate#anything#Trump crowd does their part in the political farce to try and delay/derail things. If a claim wasn't good enough for the D senators to introduce before the vote it certainly isn't worth the waste of time required to investigate it.

In the end this is an accusation of a claimed crime between 38 and 35 years in the past when few if any witnesses will even be able to be found. As was pointed out in the last few days, memory shifts over time and we already have at least three different versions of events from the accuser with no specific date or location to be investigated in any of the accounts.

What exactly does anyone think the FBI will be investigating? The best they can do is interview potential witnesses under threat of perjury. One of those funny federal laws we all live under, lying to any federal agent in any of the police power agencies is treated as perjury under the law. The most you can do is claim fifth amendment rights to stay silent.

Now if President Trump just casually hands the investigation off without any restrictions #Trump#Hate crowd will try and maneuver agents in who will try and take months running down every rumor and delaying the vote past the election the first week of November. I hope he has learned well enough to be very clear and specific in his directions to the FBI.

[Plantagenet]

Provided that the agents are instructed to investigate ONLY those claims which were made before todays vote in committee it should take them about two days to review all the interviews they have already done and do the interviews they need to do with Kavenaugh, Ford and those she claimed were witnesses for her accusations.

The FBI also need to interview her therapist. His written records show that Ms. Ford claimed she was assaulted by four boys. In the hearing she testified under oath that there were two boys, and claimed that the therapist made a mistake in his medical records.

An FBI interview with the therapist will reveal if he knows the difference between two and four, and if he took his notes properly. It is possible Ms. Ford lied under oath about this key issue----indeed, the notes taken during the session constitute strong physical evidence that suggest ms. Ford lied under oath to the committee on this important point.

A similar discrepancy exist with regard to the lie detector test. According to the record, Ms.Ford said during the lie detector test that there were three people in the room with her during the assault----two boys and a girl. Again, a significant discrepancy on a key point with her sworn testimony to the committee.

Cheers!