Political Roundtable Part XXII

[I_Like_Dirt]

They do it all the time. They could have quietly listened to Ford's story, and then went to interview all the players - all without media attention.

In this case, not really. A lot of the legal implications to Ford's story wouldn't fall under FBI jurisdiction overall. Where the actions are more relevant aren't so much to do with Ford as with Kavanaugh's nomination. If Kavanaugh wasn't actually nominated for the Supreme Court and there wasn't potential for perjury and other issues that wouldn't fall under the statute of limitations, then the FBI would have no business here whatsoever, as best I can make out.

Again, for Republicans, the path forward is pretty clear, if they actually want to avoid these kinds of problems in the future. Stop nominating guys like this with pasts like Kavanaugh has. Heck, I'd suggest Democrats are also struggling to come to similar terms with some officials in their own ranks. I'd suggest Republicans have more widespread issues but it's serious everywhere. I'm not actually convinced Republicans want anything to do with that kind of change, though. I am convinced that significant portions of Democrats are interested in change, though there is also some pretty strong pushback as well.

[nate33]

I hadn't heard any such thing. Certainly Kavanaugh was more in the Scalia/Gorsuch range rather than an Anthony Kennedy, and there were arguments that it would be harder to confirm someone that ideological, but I hadn't heard anything about Kavanaugh being morally suspect. Do you have a link?

A lot of it is buried on the internet now that we have a landslide of new stuff, but Mitch McConnell, for example, was keenly aware that this was a possibility with Kavanaugh beforehand, and made it clear to trump, too. It doesn't say anything about Ford specifically; that much I'm sure was a surprise. But a LOT of what has come up isn't surprising Republicans whatsoever. A lot of this information is coming from friends and co-workers and such.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/07/us/politics/trump-mcconnell-supreme-court.html

Thanks for the link, but I see nothing in there about Kavanaugh having a morally shady past. It reads to me that he has a well-defined judicial track record that will make it harder for him to obfuscate his position on hot-button issues like abortion.

If Democrats were protesting every day about abortion and pressuring pro-choice Republicans like Susan Collins to vote no, I'd have no problem with their tactics. That's normal politics.

[nate33]

They do it all the time. They could have quietly listened to Ford's story, and then went to interview all the players - all without media attention.

In this case, not really. A lot of the legal implications to Ford's story wouldn't fall under FBI jurisdiction overall. Where the actions are more relevant aren't so much to do with Ford as with Kavanaugh's nomination. If Kavanaugh wasn't actually nominated for the Supreme Court and there wasn't potential for perjury and other issues that wouldn't fall under the statute of limitations, then the FBI would have no business here whatsoever, as best I can make out.

Again, for Republicans, the path forward is pretty clear, if they actually want to avoid these kinds of problems in the future. Stop nominating guys like this with pasts like Kavanaugh has. Heck, I'd suggest Democrats are also struggling to come to similar terms with some officials in their own ranks. I'd suggest Republicans have more widespread issues but it's serious everywhere. I'm not actually convinced Republicans want anything to do with that kind of change, though. I am convinced that significant portions of Democrats are interested in change, though there is also some pretty strong pushback as well.

What past? There is one completely unsubstantiated accusation that is refuted by every witness named and categorically refuted under oath by Kavanaugh. And the allegation is 35 years old and is completely contradictory to everything we know about Kavanaugh's professional career.

[I_Like_Dirt]

Again, you aren't going to get stuff about Ford specifically. There is no way Republicans were going to let that slip even if they only suspected it. I mean, the allegations are far from proven right now. What actually happened in any given case isn't clear. There are enough allegations at this point, to throw quite a bit of doubt on Kavanaugh's charater, though.

Stuff like this absolutely was, known, for example:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/20/brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court-yale-amy-chua

Again, not damning in the criminal sense or anything, but the kind of actions that definitely raise concerns, or should, but probably didn't amongst many Republicans. The mock surprise and indignation over all of this is flat ridiculous.

And despite all that, yes, this is absolutely being used as a political tool by the Democrats. But again, Republicans have put themselves in a situation where they made themselves vulnerable to this kind of thing. If this really was the kind of issue with Republicans you suggest where they had no idea had no idea and Kavanaugh hid everything from them, there would be quite a bit more anger against Kavanaugh himself at this point for hiding everything from them... unless some of them also have skeletons in their own closets.

[I_Like_Dirt]

What past? There is one completely unsubstantiated accusation that is refuted by every witness named and categorically refuted under oath by Kavanaugh. And the allegation is 35 years old and is completely contradictory to everything we know about Kavanaugh's professional career.

What do you actually know about Kavanaugh's career that is completely contradictory to the evidence as stated? See that other article I posted. There were hints, at the very least. Or maybe you're referring to his continuous legal and judicial campaigning for women's rights.

[Ruzious]

It's clear he lied when asked about the things he bragged about in his senior Yearbook. https://www.yahoo.com/news/twitter-users-school-brett-kavanaugh-225506017.html

But lying under oath ain't what it used to be. It's okay if you can whimper, cry, screach, and pretend your life's over while acting like the most pretentious childish f tha't's ever been considered for the high court. It's actually admired and cheered by certain folks.

[nate33]

Again, you aren't going to get stuff about Ford specifically. There is no way Republicans were going to let that slip even if they only suspected it. I mean, the allegations are far from proven right now. What actually happened in any given case isn't clear. There are enough allegations at this point, to throw quite a bit of doubt on Kavanaugh's charater, though.

Stuff like this absolutely was, known, for example:

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/20/brett-kavanaugh-supreme-court-yale-amy-chua

Again, not damning in the criminal sense or anything, but the kind of actions that definitely raise concerns, or should, but probably didn't amongst many Republicans. The mock surprise and indignation over all of this is flat ridiculous.

And despite all that, yes, this is absolutely being used as a political tool by the Democrats. But again, Republicans have put themselves in a situation where they made themselves vulnerable to this kind of thing. If this really was the kind of issue with Republicans you suggest where they had no idea had no idea and Kavanaugh hid everything from them, there would be quite a bit more anger against Kavanaugh himself at this point for hiding everything from them... unless some of them also have skeletons in their own closets.

Oh please! That's all they had? EVERY male conservative is going to get the "he's a misogynist" treatment. If not that, they'd count the number of black interns he's ever had and if turned out to be 1% less than the percentage of blacks in the general population, they would label him a racist. These aren't actual, tangible weaknesses in a nominee. This is just par for the course when you are a Republican.

[nate33]

It's clear he lied when asked about the things he bragged about in his senior Yearbook. https://www.yahoo.com/news/twitter-users-school-brett-kavanaugh-225506017.html

But lying under oath ain't what it used to be. It's okay if you can whimper, cry, screach, and pretend your life's over while acting like the most pretentious childish f tha't's ever been considered for the high court. It's actually admired and cheered by certain folks.

Fine, attack him on the lying under oath angle. I don't have a problem with that. I don't think conflict with Urban Dictionary is enough to get someone on perjury, but that's just me.

[I_Like_Dirt]

Thanks for the link, but I see nothing in there about Kavanaugh having a morally shady past. It reads to me that he has a well-defined judicial track record that will make it harder for him to obfuscate his position on hot-button issues like abortion.

But beyond that, hot button issues wouldn't nearly be enough to derail confirmation hearings for the length of time that would be required to actually cause concern to the Republicans. Again, they weren't going to let anything slip - it would be ridiculous to expect them to do that - but they had concerns they might not actually be able to get him confirmed, through up somewhat questionable reasons for those concerns that weren't particular suspicious, and then low and behold he gets nominated and we suddenly see a bunch of issues that risk derailing Kavanaugh's nomination process to some degree. I mean, it's not impossible that McConnell didn't at least suspect, but it's improbable. And if McConnell knew or suspected, you can be sure he wasn't the only one.

[Ruzious]

It's clear he lied when asked about the things he bragged about in his senior Yearbook. https://www.yahoo.com/news/twitter-users-school-brett-kavanaugh-225506017.html

But lying under oath ain't what it used to be. It's okay if you can whimper, cry, screach, and pretend your life's over while acting like the most pretentious childish f tha't's ever been considered for the high court. It's actually admired and cheered by certain folks.

Fine, attack him on the lying under oath angle. I don't have a problem with that. I don't think conflict with Urban Dictionary is enough to get someone on perjury, but that's just me.

You have to be a dumb ass to not know what those terms mean.

[Pointgod]

I think they are legitimately worried about not retaining the senate and then not being able to drive their candidate onto the court.

Yes. This whole demand for an FBI investigation is nothing but a stall tactic in the hopes that a Democrat-controlled Senate can stop the nomination after the midterms.

If the Democrats had a good faith interest in these allegations, they would have had the FBI privately investigate the matter 67 days ago when it first came to Feinstein's attention. But they chose to sit on the allegations until the eve of the vote and then leak it so that a spectacle would ensue.

False. The FBI investigation could have been completed before yesterday's hearing. The only reason Republicans didn't do it is because they know more dirt would come up against Kavanaugh and it would give credibility to his accusers. The whole process has been a bull scam from the beginning.

[Kanyewest]

I think they are legitimately worried about not retaining the senate and then not being able to drive their candidate onto the court.

Yes. This whole demand for an FBI investigation is nothing but a stall tactic in the hopes that a Democrat-controlled Senate can stop the nomination after the midterms.

If the Democrats had a good faith interest in these allegations, they would have had the FBI privately investigate the matter 67 days ago when it first came to Feinstein's attention. But they chose to sit on the allegations until the eve of the vote and then leak it so that a spectacle would ensue.

It convinced Jeff Flake.

[Zonkerbl]

Well that's a fine how do you do.

[I_Like_Dirt]

Oh please! That's all they had? EVERY male conservative is going to get the "he's a misogynist" treatment. If not that, they'd count the number of black interns he's ever had and if turned out to be 1% less than the percentage of blacks in the general population, they would label him a racist. These aren't actual, tangible weaknesses in a nominee. This is just par for the course when you are a Republican.

Okay. So your argument is that they were concerned over Kavanaugh as a potentially weak nominee but had no real reason for it. Gotcha.

[I_Like_Dirt]

Fine, attack him on the lying under oath angle. I don't have a problem with that. I don't think conflict with Urban Dictionary is enough to get someone on perjury, but that's just me.

Nobody is actually trying to convict him of perjury, is the thing. But the idea that a person who is skirting the boundaries of perjury as closely as Kavanaugh has makes a good candidate for the Supreme Court is entirely different.

[Zonkerbl]

I think the Dems have every right to play whatever dirty political trick they want. The GOP abdicated the right to complain when they stole the Merrick Garland appointment. They're reaping what they sowed.

I'm pretty sure Kavanaugh is guilty. Ford is credible, Kavanaugh is almost as bad a liar as Trump, friends say he gets belligerent when drunk, and he himself apologized to friends for anything he did while blacked out. He showed on the stand he's hot tempered and, based on his flagrantly partisan remarks, inclined to blame everyone else but himself for his mistakes.

This hearing has really ripped bare Kavanaugh's true self - an elitist partisan hack who hates half the country and happens to be good enough at law to be a willing stooge for the GOP's extremist right wing.

Now if Kavanaugh doesn't go through I have no doubt the GOP has another stooge ready to go, so it's not like the Dems really "win" anything from preventing his nomination. All this stuff is accomplishing is lifting up the rock so we can see just how evil these people are.

[I_Like_Dirt]

Now if Kavanaugh doesn't go through I have no doubt the GOP has another stooge ready to go, so it's not like the Dems really "win" anything from preventing his nomination. All this stuff is accomplishing is lifting up the rock so we can see just how evil these people are.

That's where I think the Republicans are making a mistake here. The longer this drags out, the worse it is for them. It's also awful for them if they have to change candidates midway through, so I can see why they're resistant to that idea, but there was concern about potential delays with Kavanaugh in general even before he was nominated and they've gone ahead anyway... I do think there is a certain rift here that is being hidden. Kavanaugh was the choice so they have to try to push him through because those who argued for his nomination won't change course so easily.

[Zonkerbl]

Now if Kavanaugh doesn't go through I have no doubt the GOP has another stooge ready to go, so it's not like the Dems really "win" anything from preventing his nomination. All this stuff is accomplishing is lifting up the rock so we can see just how evil these people are.

That's where I think the Republicans are making a mistake here. The longer this drags out, the worse it is for them. It's also awful for them if they have to change candidates midway through, so I can see why they're resistant to that idea, but there was concern about potential delays with Kavanaugh in general even before he was nominated and they've gone ahead anyway... I do think there is a certain rift here that is being hidden. Kavanaugh was the choice so they have to try to push him through because those who argued for his nomination won't change course so easily.

Agree, I think this is where Trump's "Never, ever, ever admit you are wrong" rule is really biting them on the butt.

[Zonkerbl]

Oh please! That's all they had? EVERY male conservative is going to get the "he's a misogynist" treatment. If not that, they'd count the number of black interns he's ever had and if turned out to be 1% less than the percentage of blacks in the general population, they would label him a racist. These aren't actual, tangible weaknesses in a nominee. This is just par for the course when you are a Republican.

Okay. So your argument is that they were concerned over Kavanaugh as a potentially weak nominee but had no real reason for it. Gotcha.

In Nate's defense, the worry was that the sheer volume of material available on Kavanaugh would 1) take a long time to produce and hand over to the Dems and 2) god knows what is in there that the Dems could use as political ammunition. I believe the GOP senators when they say nothing like this came up in the FBI's background investigation. The FBI can only find out what people are willing to talk about, and they can't interview an infinite number of people. They need leads and there weren't any until Ford stepped forward.

[nate33]

Oh please! That's all they had? EVERY male conservative is going to get the "he's a misogynist" treatment. If not that, they'd count the number of black interns he's ever had and if turned out to be 1% less than the percentage of blacks in the general population, they would label him a racist. These aren't actual, tangible weaknesses in a nominee. This is just par for the course when you are a Republican.

Okay. So your argument is that they were concerned over Kavanaugh as a potentially weak nominee but had no real reason for it. Gotcha.

That isn't my argument at all. Did you even read what I wrote?

I said, if Kavanaugh has a weakness, it is that his track record of being an idealogue is long. Moderates might have trouble voting for him because he won't be able to obscure his stance on hot button issues like abortion. You are arguing that Kavanaugh is a bad candidate because it was well understood that he has a bunch of dirt in his personal history. I've seen no indication that that was the case.