The one thing @jjstraka34 did not mention is Ginsberg. I am no fan of The Left but I am not a fan of Trump, either, so we had all better hope that her health holds out because that man does *not* need to get a third SCOTUS pick. I don't think we could survive the advice and consent process again.
She won't leave unless she dies, you can be damn sure of that. She exercises everyday and has a personal trainer, so there is that. The fact that I feel the need to know the exercise habits of an 85 year-old Supreme Court Justice is telling in and of itself. If she consented to it in advance, I would favor keeping her on life support as long as Trump is in office if something happened to her. That's where we are at. It's ridiculous I even have to entertain such a notion.
Our analysis of Trump differs somewhat. You seem to think that he has caused the current chaos while I am convinced that he is a product of it--we didn't get to this point because of him, instead we got him because we are at this point.
Our analysis of Trump differs somewhat. You seem to think that he has caused the current chaos while I am convinced that he is a product of it--we didn't get to this point because of him, instead we got him because we are at this point.
I'm not really sure it matters. When the house is on fire how it started becomes a secondary concern. But history tells us that all empires fall. In the greater scope of history, I'm not even entirely certain this country deserves to endure or be saved. Maybe Trump is exactly what we are. Between Vietnam, Iraq and the current Administration thumbing it's nose at the entire world community, I think it's long past time someone take the reigns from us. We've proven we're not be trusted with them. I mean, go read some Hunter S. Thompson quotes. He had this country pegged 45 years ago.
I'm proud of you guys. As difficult as the Kavanaugh thing has been, we've had 30 pages of highly substantive debate with nary a breach of the Site Rules. In any other forum, this would have been a fire storm.
I'm glad I have you all on board. I've learned so much more from this thread than I would learned on my own.
There is no way he is going to be impeached. If it isn't actually impossible to get 67 votes to remove him from the bench, it is definitely functionally impossible.
There's been discussion in this thread before about the extent to which conventions rather than laws constrain government. I think the super-majority required for impeachment is another example of this, as I would be surprised if it were not possible to impeach with considerably less than 67 votes. That works as follows: - the 2/3 requirement is 2/3 of votes cast, not of the total number of senators. - the quorum for the Senate is 51, so in theory you would only need 34 votes to agree an impeachment.
I haven't tried to research all the rules of procedure governing the Senate, but I would be surprised if there were no opportunities to exclude certain potential voters, e.g. through creative use of timetabling, urgency procedures or excluding Senators for bad behavior. Those sorts of things could potentially allow you to pass any legislation despite only having a bare majority.
I'm definitely not recommending this approach be pursued, as if you are unable to rely on conventions democratic government becomes virtually impossible. It would also open up the prospect of having an (even more) open fight with the Supreme Court than would be likely anyway in the event of the Democrats retaking Congress and the Presidency. However, I would be surprised at this point if there were no Democratic staffers researching this sort of approach - I imagine that @jjstraka34 is not alone in wondering whether it's possible to get back to a more consensual approach from the current position.
I'm not really sure it matters. When the house is on fire how it started becomes a secondary concern. But history tells us that all empires fall. In the greater scope of history, I'm not even entirely certain this country deserves to endure or be saved. Maybe Trump is exactly what we are. Between Vietnam, Iraq and the current Administration thumbing it's nose at the entire world community, I think it's long past time someone take the reigns from us. We've proven we're not be trusted with them. I mean, go read some Hunter S. Thompson quotes. He had this country pegged 45 years ago.
The United States has been the most successful experiment in societal creation to date. Yes, there are problems, but at least here we don't outlaw haircuts (Iran), religions aren't outlawed (China), and we aren't engaged in a cycle of actual ethnic violence culminating in cleansings (Sudan)...well, not anymore, even if we have similar things in our history. Ideally, the nation which arises once the United States is gone will retain the things we did correctly while avoiding our mistakes. (unlike many who claim to be conservatives and/or patriots, I am under no illusion that the United States will last some arbitrarily long amount of time)
I am currently watching the floor of the Senate via live stream. Agree...disagree...it is too important to miss.
1445 CST -- Protesters in the galleries. They are muting the microphones from up there and Pence has called on the sergeant at arms to restore order. If they have to keep calling for order they will clear the galleries.
Do you even read the things I post or do you simply see that I have written something and you try to find a way to reach the conclusion that I am somehow incorrect?
Opinions. Don't. Matter. The only people who think opinions matter are self-important talking heads on quasi-news shows watched only by two groups: die-hard fans who love confirmation bias and the people who strongly oppose what the talking heads are saying.
Consider those protesters outside the Supreme Court. They honestly think standing outside a building with some hand-painted sign is actually going to make a difference. The only difference it will make in the short term is when they have to pay a fine to be released from police custody should they find themselves arrested, then again in a few weeks when they go cast a vote--that is when their protest will *really* matter.
Sniping. Great.
I *AM* reading what you say, but I *COMPLETELY* disagree. Just because someone disagrees with you *doesnt* make them wrong, and it doesnt mean they arent reading what you're saying.
Protest is the FOUNDATION of democracy. The right to gather in a public setting in order to bring attention to a position is the BEDROCK of grassroots democracy. To say otherwise suggests that protests against the Vietnam war "didnt matter" (They did). Otherwise, it suggests that the million man march to DC to see MLK speak didnt matter (It did). I could go on for days
For the record - I think opinions matter. I think protests matter. I'm not a talking head, and I'm not self-important. Thanks for the suggestion to the contrary.
Those screams of protesters in the gallery were primal, and could likely only come from people who have personally experienced sexual assault and feel like their government has abandoned them and said they don't matter. And let's be real about it, that is basically true. Out of every 1000 rapes, 994 of the perpetrators walk free. It's not hard to see why.
The ayes are 50 and the nays are 48; the ayes would have been 51 except for the Senator attending a wedding and the nays would have been 49 except one of them retracted her vote (no, I don't have their names on the tip of my tongue).
The ayes are 50 and the nays are 48; the ayes would have been 51 except for the Senator attending a wedding and the nays would have been 49 except one of them retracted her vote (no, I don't have their names on the tip of my tongue).
It was Murkowski, praised yesterday as some kind of hero, but too chickenshit to actually vote no in the end.
And let's be real about it, that is basically true. Out of every 1000 rapes, 994 of the perpetrators walk free. It's not hard to see why.
That is more of a local issue than a Federal one. Detectives not willing to fully investigate all the leads in cases, prosecutors not willing to pursue the case because of evidence which might not result in a conviction, etc. If sexual assault is a priority then elections for district attorney and/or city council (they oversee the local police) are where you want to focus your attention. I also highly recommend getting to know your State representative, as well--we did. He knows our daughter personally and wants to try to introduce into the State Legislature the proposition which @Notabarbiegirl drafted.
In case any of you forgot, I have a personal interest in seeing predators prosecuted, as well. I simply didn't agree with the "guilty until proven innocent" mindset surrounding this confirmation hearing.
It would be a totally different story had Manchin voted "present" as well.
Manchin is horrible. His only purpose is as a warm body who might win who could hypothetically serve as the number that is needed to get the gavel out of McConnell's hands. Why he even bothers running as a Democrat is beyond me.
Thanks for pointing that out. Must've misread an article (made it sound like it was McLean's boyfriend, not Ford's).
Either way, I'd be *totally* fine with an investigation to see if she perjured herself, being interested in the truth. Of course, that would require following up on the dozens of classmates that contend that Kavanaugh perjured himself in saying he never drank to excess. The GOP doesnt want that though, so they narrowed the investigation. We end up at the same point.
Assuming it is true he drank to excess, whatever objective bar you want to call that, and he was misleading about it, which he probably was, that's not perjury.
Much like sexual assault charges, the decision maker for innocence or guilt should be the law and not how much you like their politics.
And really, if I can be frank, it's just incredibly petty that we are now at the level of nit picking his level of alcohol consumption and other such trivialities. This was supposed to be about sexual assault, a serious matter, now that this has crumbled we are reduced to throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks. It couldn't be more obvious that this is an orchestrated smear campaign against an innocent person.
Has Kavanaugh been convicted of perjury? No? Then he is innocent of that charge. Calling him a perjurer, even if true, means nothing. O. J. Simpson is a murderer...but not in the eyes of the law, which are the only eyes which matter.
The Court of Public Opinion is worthless and should be ignored.
Yeah but this is a job interview, not a criminal investigation, so we can throw charges of criminal conduct around and not have to back them up. I remember last time I applied at McDonalds and was put on mock trial for multiple homicides. Just part of life.
And really, if I can be frank, it's just incredibly petty that we are now at the level of nit picking his level of alcohol consumption and other such trivialities. This was supposed to be about sexual assault, a serious matter, now that this has crumbled we are reduced to throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks. It couldn't be more obvious that this is an orchestrated smear campaign against an innocent person.
I dont think it's a triviality to question if someone is lying about how drunk they get, when it's a well known and completely understood physiological effect that upon getting too inebriated, people lose recollection and have an altered state of judgement. The entire underlying argument Kavanaugh has made about not assaulting Ford was based upon him have 100% recollection of the events of his childhood, and being completely in control. If he had admitted to blacking out, he can no longer plausibly say he knows for a fact he didnt do something while blackout drunk.
What makes everyone so upset is we know it's also implausible that he never had that much to drink, but it appears that the confinement of the investigation was done so as to avoid looking into his drinking habits.
Edit -and if we presume that drinking a lot is such a triviality, then why perjure yourself over it? Because it lends credence to the allegations made by Mrs. Ford.
Pretty straight forward definition. If you knowingly tell a falsehood under oath, you've perjured yourself. If you do it unknowingly, it's a different matter. If he *knows* he's blacked out, even once, then he has 100% perjured himself.
Personally, Right, Left, Center - I dont think anyone on the SCOTUS should be allowed to commit perjury and be placed on the court.
Kavanaugh lied over and over again on many topics. He was belligerent, conspiratorial, refused to answer questions, and is just too partisan. The FBI investigation was, again like the Clarence Thomas investigation, sadly a sick joke. A unrestrained investigation will certainly find more evidence of criminal activity.
Kavanaugh must be impeached.
I don't care if the Senate removes him. Don't get me wrong they should throw him out, but he must be impeached things must be made right. This is a bridge too far. This guy is a bad guy and Republicans forced him on us just like he forced himself on Dr. Christine B. Ford. Samuel Chase was a Supreme Court Justice impeached for being too partisan but not removed from office the precedent is there.
We can't let these guys keep breaking the law and get away with it. There must be consequences for these anti-American Republican actions. We must learn something from letting the Wall Street criminals get away scot-free after the 2008 financial crash. We must learn something from letting George W. Bush torturers and war mongering liars get away with no consequences after Iraq War 2.
It's unacceptable to submit to this situation where we have Republican rapists on the Supreme Court and in the White House driving America to fascism. America needs to do much better than this.
And really, if I can be frank, it's just incredibly petty that we are now at the level of nit picking his level of alcohol consumption and other such trivialities. This was supposed to be about sexual assault, a serious matter, now that this has crumbled we are reduced to throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks. It couldn't be more obvious that this is an orchestrated smear campaign against an innocent person.
The extent to which posters have been concerned about the sexual assault allegations is variable, but I don't think anyone has suggested that the extent of his past alcohol consumption should be, in itself, a disqualifying factor. However, there have been numerous comments in the thread, that are not nit-picking, about other reasons why Kavanaugh should not be on the Supreme Court (and what he's said himself about his alcohol consumption is a small part of that). From my perspective his behavior is not consistent with that expected of a good judge (or indeed any representative in the legal system) for a range of reasons, e.g. - he's lied obviously and repeatedly about a range of issues - he often avoids or deflects questions rather than attempting to answer them - he portrays his situation as 'us' vs 'them' and has suggested that once he became a Justice he would get back at 'them' I'm also worried about the extent to which his decisions are based on emotion rather than reason, though given the very difficult situation he was in I wouldn't condemn him for that aspect of his performance in the confirmation hearings if it weren't for the other factors listed above.
There are also plenty of concerns over his role in past events in government, particularly given the decision to classify the vast majority of paperwork relating to what he did.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't people in a court room on trial, even for something as serious as first degree murder, expected to conduct themselves in a proper manner, even though their LIVES are literally hanging in the balance?? Anyone who conducted themselves as Kavanaugh did would have been cited for contempt of court.
The one question I would as Kavanaugh now is “Is your life still destroyed?”
Then once I get his answer, I’d ask the same question to a couple of sexual assault survivors. Compare the answers and maybe make a commercial out of it to run during the election.
And people wonder why football players kneel during the anthem. Execute a kid, go away for a couple of years, get another job doing the same thing.
Speaking of the NFL controversy, I'm sure at least SOME people will remember last year when Mike Pence flew across the country to an Indianapolis Colts game specifically so he could walk out in "disgust" when some of the players took a knee. It has now been revealed how much that stunt cost American taxpayers. The amount??:
Newly released documents from the Department of Homeland Security show more clearly that Pence’s early departure was a stunt — and not a cheap one at that. The Secret Service on Friday released receipts and folios indicating more than $75,000 in expenses, including hotels, travel and additional security measures.
But this is hardly the extent of the bill. As The Washington Post reported in the days after the game, Air Force Two costs approximately $43,000 an hour to operate, which the Post estimated meant a total bill of $250,000 for the flight alone. That’s to say nothing of the cost of local law enforcement, an extra ambulance and extra trauma teams at the local hospitals, with many of these supernumeraries making overtime for Sunday work. None of those expenses was included in the Secret Service’s cost breakdown. All told, it cost $325,000 at the very least for the vice president not to watch a football game.
Remember folks, fiscal responsibility is at the heart of the Republican Party. I mean, who WOULDN'T trust these people with taxpayer dollars over those tax and spend liberals?? I mean, can you think of a better way to spend nearly half a million dollars than flying across the country to purposefully walk out of a football game?? I certainly can't. A liberal would probably want to spend that money on some communist plot like public schools or nutrition assistance for young mothers.
So Susan Collins has now gone on the record and said that she believes Professor Ford was attacked, but that it wasn't Bret Kavanaugh. I had mentioned earlier how I was thinking about treading lightly when bringing up the doppelganger theory that exploded on social media two weeks ago, thinking I would just be opening myself up to charges of cherry-picking the absolute most extreme example of what was being pushed on the right. Within 24 hours, it was clear that the doppelganger theory was NOT a fringe movement, but a coordinated effort to whitewash the narrative. In the end, the theory put forth that night is the EXACT reason the deciding Senator's vote was made in the affirmative. The seed of an idea planted in the public's head that some Kavanaugh look-alike is the one who committed the assault was ALWAYS the out for these Senators. That story pushed that night was the life-raft. Let this be a lesson for everyone about how right-wing media pushes absolute fantastical nonsense into the mainstream of American political discourse.
Want more?? Tonight Trump said this:
"Every single Democrat in the U.S. Senate has signed up for the open borders - and it's a bill. And it's called The Open Borders Bill. What's going on? And it's written by - guess who - Dianne Feinstein."
No such bill exists. It was just spun out of thin air while he was at his rally. It's no different than him coming out and saying "Democrats have sponsored a bill that would require you to feed your children to lions".
Mitch McConnell says these things always blow over. No bro. It won't. Not this time, not after this and Trump's general lying, assholery, and authoritarianism.
'What goes around comes around.
Oh and Chief 'Justice' John Roberts has been sitting on dozens of judicial complaints about Kavanaugh for weeks. If they'd processed them, like normal, his ass would be out on the street. Instead another criminal Republican overlord to overthrow.
The Chinese government detained the president of Interpol, Meng Hongwey, and apparently forced him to resign his post. He issued his resignation while in Chinese custody.
This is a shockingly bold move by the Chinese government, and given the Chinese government's reputation for punishing its enemies with absurd charges, the only reasonable interpretation is that Meng somehow threatened someone in the party--presumably because a corrupt Chinese official was at risk of being exposed by officials at Interpol.
The Chinese Communist Party is notorious for its contempt for the rule of law, both China's own laws (its own constitution has no legal weight) and international law. It's a grim sign that the Party feels safe attacking international authority figures.
Another major international story about an individual is the Saudi dissident who it is suspected was killed in the Saudi consulate in Instanbul after he went there to collect some divorce papers. If true, that will cause a major breach between Saudi Arabia and Turkey and could cause some re-thinking about the extent to which western countries feel comfortable about allying themselves with the Saudi royals.
Mitch McConnell says these things always blow over. No bro. It won't. Not this time, not after this and Trump's general lying, assholery, and authoritarianism.
'What goes around comes around.
Oh and Chief 'Justice' John Roberts has been sitting on dozens of judicial complaints about Kavanaugh for weeks. If they'd processed them, like normal, his ass would be out on the street. Instead another criminal Republican overlord to overthrow.
No. All of the complaints have come about due to his hearing and not his time as a sitting judge. Congress was already in the position to rule on his ability to serve on SCOTUS so sitting on them was the right move.
These complaints were a delay tactic unlike the Ford accusation and would have been addressed as such if they were brought forward.
Comments
I'm glad I have you all on board. I've learned so much more from this thread than I would learned on my own.
- the 2/3 requirement is 2/3 of votes cast, not of the total number of senators.
- the quorum for the Senate is 51, so in theory you would only need 34 votes to agree an impeachment.
I haven't tried to research all the rules of procedure governing the Senate, but I would be surprised if there were no opportunities to exclude certain potential voters, e.g. through creative use of timetabling, urgency procedures or excluding Senators for bad behavior. Those sorts of things could potentially allow you to pass any legislation despite only having a bare majority.
I'm definitely not recommending this approach be pursued, as if you are unable to rely on conventions democratic government becomes virtually impossible. It would also open up the prospect of having an (even more) open fight with the Supreme Court than would be likely anyway in the event of the Democrats retaking Congress and the Presidency. However, I would be surprised at this point if there were no Democratic staffers researching this sort of approach - I imagine that @jjstraka34 is not alone in wondering whether it's possible to get back to a more consensual approach from the current position.
I am currently watching the floor of the Senate via live stream. Agree...disagree...it is too important to miss.
Vote is underway.
I *AM* reading what you say, but I *COMPLETELY* disagree. Just because someone disagrees with you *doesnt* make them wrong, and it doesnt mean they arent reading what you're saying.
Protest is the FOUNDATION of democracy. The right to gather in a public setting in order to bring attention to a position is the BEDROCK of grassroots democracy. To say otherwise suggests that protests against the Vietnam war "didnt matter" (They did). Otherwise, it suggests that the million man march to DC to see MLK speak didnt matter (It did). I could go on for days
For the record - I think opinions matter. I think protests matter. I'm not a talking head, and I'm not self-important. Thanks for the suggestion to the contrary.
In case any of you forgot, I have a personal interest in seeing predators prosecuted, as well. I simply didn't agree with the "guilty until proven innocent" mindset surrounding this confirmation hearing.
Much like sexual assault charges, the decision maker for innocence or guilt should be the law and not how much you like their politics.
And really, if I can be frank, it's just incredibly petty that we are now at the level of nit picking his level of alcohol consumption and other such trivialities. This was supposed to be about sexual assault, a serious matter, now that this has crumbled we are reduced to throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks. It couldn't be more obvious that this is an orchestrated smear campaign against an innocent person. Yeah but this is a job interview, not a criminal investigation, so we can throw charges of criminal conduct around and not have to back them up. I remember last time I applied at McDonalds and was put on mock trial for multiple homicides. Just part of life.
What makes everyone so upset is we know it's also implausible that he never had that much to drink, but it appears that the confinement of the investigation was done so as to avoid looking into his drinking habits.
Edit -and if we presume that drinking a lot is such a triviality, then why perjure yourself over it? Because it lends credence to the allegations made by Mrs. Ford.
Side note: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/perjury
Pretty straight forward definition. If you knowingly tell a falsehood under oath, you've perjured yourself. If you do it unknowingly, it's a different matter. If he *knows* he's blacked out, even once, then he has 100% perjured himself.
Personally, Right, Left, Center - I dont think anyone on the SCOTUS should be allowed to commit perjury and be placed on the court.
Kavanaugh must be impeached.
I don't care if the Senate removes him. Don't get me wrong they should throw him out, but he must be impeached things must be made right. This is a bridge too far. This guy is a bad guy and Republicans forced him on us just like he forced himself on Dr. Christine B. Ford. Samuel Chase was a Supreme Court Justice impeached for being too partisan but not removed from office the precedent is there.
We can't let these guys keep breaking the law and get away with it. There must be consequences for these anti-American Republican actions. We must learn something from letting the Wall Street criminals get away scot-free after the 2008 financial crash. We must learn something from letting George W. Bush torturers and war mongering liars get away with no consequences after Iraq War 2.
It's unacceptable to submit to this situation where we have Republican rapists on the Supreme Court and in the White House driving America to fascism. America needs to do much better than this.
- he's lied obviously and repeatedly about a range of issues
- he often avoids or deflects questions rather than attempting to answer them
- he portrays his situation as 'us' vs 'them' and has suggested that once he became a Justice he would get back at 'them'
I'm also worried about the extent to which his decisions are based on emotion rather than reason, though given the very difficult situation he was in I wouldn't condemn him for that aspect of his performance in the confirmation hearings if it weren't for the other factors listed above.
There are also plenty of concerns over his role in past events in government, particularly given the decision to classify the vast majority of paperwork relating to what he did.
Then once I get his answer, I’d ask the same question to a couple of sexual assault survivors. Compare the answers and maybe make a commercial out of it to run during the election.
Oh well, not my concern.
And people wonder why football players kneel during the anthem. Execute a kid, go away for a couple of years, get another job doing the same thing.
Speaking of the NFL controversy, I'm sure at least SOME people will remember last year when Mike Pence flew across the country to an Indianapolis Colts game specifically so he could walk out in "disgust" when some of the players took a knee. It has now been revealed how much that stunt cost American taxpayers. The amount??:
Newly released documents from the Department of Homeland Security show more clearly that Pence’s early departure was a stunt — and not a cheap one at that. The Secret Service on Friday released receipts and folios indicating more than $75,000 in expenses, including hotels, travel and additional security measures.
But this is hardly the extent of the bill. As The Washington Post reported in the days after the game, Air Force Two costs approximately $43,000 an hour to operate, which the Post estimated meant a total bill of $250,000 for the flight alone. That’s to say nothing of the cost of local law enforcement, an extra ambulance and extra trauma teams at the local hospitals, with many of these supernumeraries making overtime for Sunday work. None of those expenses was included in the Secret Service’s cost breakdown. All told, it cost $325,000 at the very least for the vice president not to watch a football game.
Remember folks, fiscal responsibility is at the heart of the Republican Party. I mean, who WOULDN'T trust these people with taxpayer dollars over those tax and spend liberals?? I mean, can you think of a better way to spend nearly half a million dollars than flying across the country to purposefully walk out of a football game?? I certainly can't. A liberal would probably want to spend that money on some communist plot like public schools or nutrition assistance for young mothers.
Want more?? Tonight Trump said this:
"Every single Democrat in the U.S. Senate has signed up for the open borders - and it's a bill. And it's called The Open Borders Bill. What's going on? And it's written by - guess who - Dianne Feinstein."
No such bill exists. It was just spun out of thin air while he was at his rally. It's no different than him coming out and saying "Democrats have sponsored a bill that would require you to feed your children to lions".
'What goes around comes around.
Oh and Chief 'Justice' John Roberts has been sitting on dozens of judicial complaints about Kavanaugh for weeks. If they'd processed them, like normal, his ass would be out on the street. Instead another criminal Republican overlord to overthrow.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/dc-circuit-sent-complaints-about-kavanaughs-testimony-to-chief-justice-roberts/2018/10/06/c7e7b526-c8d0-11e8-b1ed-1d2d65b86d0c_story.html
This is a shockingly bold move by the Chinese government, and given the Chinese government's reputation for punishing its enemies with absurd charges, the only reasonable interpretation is that Meng somehow threatened someone in the party--presumably because a corrupt Chinese official was at risk of being exposed by officials at Interpol.
The Chinese Communist Party is notorious for its contempt for the rule of law, both China's own laws (its own constitution has no legal weight) and international law. It's a grim sign that the Party feels safe attacking international authority figures.
All of the complaints have come about due to his hearing and not his time as a sitting judge.
Congress was already in the position to rule on his ability to serve on SCOTUS so sitting on them was the right move.
These complaints were a delay tactic unlike the Ford accusation and would have been addressed as such if they were brought forward.