Brett Kavanaugh's Confirmation Hearing

[formergothardite]

6 minutes ago, Rachel333 said:

It sounds like they will not have the votes to confirm Kavanaugh if they don't get an FBI investigation first.

Rufus be with us! Any delay is good because it is just more time for either other women to get the courage to speak out or for more damaging info to be brought forward. The GOP knew Kavanaugh couldn't stand up to scrutiny which is why they were rushing this. The more time people have to look closely at his life the better the chances are that this privileged predator won't get on the SC. 

[Rachel333]

Manchin is with Flake and Murkowski.

 

[fraurosena]

Did anyone catch Graham's ominous threat to the Democrats during the meeting today? 

Quote

Republicans continued to express outrage at their Democratic colleagues and the timing of Ford's allegation becoming public. Some, including Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., said that while they believe something traumatic had happened to Ford in the past, they also believed that Kavanaugh had nothing to do with it.

"I know I am a single white male from South Carolina and I’ve been told shut up, but I will not shut up," said Graham, who put his fury on display during the hearing less than 24 hours earlier.

Graham suggested his party has the right to nominate, and confirm, a nominee of their choosing.

"Elections do matter," he said. He later signaled he wanted to be the committee's next chairman, and that if he were in that position, he would hold a grudge against Democrats.

"If I am chairman, next year, if we keep the majority and Sen. Grassley moves over," he said. "I'm going to remember this."

"If you try to destroy somebody you will not get away with it," Graham said.

The quote above is from this article:

Kavanaugh approved by Judiciary Committee, but FBI investigation is possible

[Rachel333]

I don't know what this means but it's interesting.

 

[Drala]

Graham is Trump's bitch now.  I wonder how much Trump gets off listening to Graham's  white male Dixie accent when he's on his high horse? 

OK, I'll give it to the Repugs that the timing and release of Ford's allegation are suspect.  That doesn't change the substance of the allegation or the need for an impartial investigation.   The ABA response to the hearings renewed my faith in humanity and US jurisprudence.  What the Repug Senators need is an excuse to pass the buck.  Hopefully they'll take the call for investigation as an out.

[neurogirl]

From CNN

Quote

Here's the play-by-play of how Flake's day unfolded:

Around 9:30 a.m. ET: Flake releases a statement saying he will vote to confirm Kavanaugh.

A minute later, at 9:31 a.m. ET: As Flake is trying to get into an elevator to head to the committee meeting, two women confront him. They tell him they were victims of sexual assault and say his decision to back Kavanaugh sends a message that women's voices don't matter. Flake is visibly uncomfortable. He quietly listens to the women.

Soon after that: Sen. Chris Coons, a Democrat who is good friends with Flake, gets emotional when he learns of Flake's decision. CNN asks him for comment, and he tears up. “We each make choices for our own reason. I’m struggling, sorry," he says.

12:16 p.m. ET: During the committee hearing, Flake stands up and approaches Coons. The two walk out together. Several other Democrats follow.

1:30 p.m. ET: The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to vote, but Flake still isn't in the room. He's been out of the meeting room for more than an hour at this point.

1:51 p.m. ET: Flake begins speaking to the committee. He says he will vote to move Kavanaugh out of the committee and to the floor of the Senate as long as the mainvote will be delayed by up to one week to allow for an FBI investigation.

1:53 p.m. ET: The committee votes 11-10 to send Kavanaugh to the floor.

After the meeting: Flake says he would only vote yes on the floor if there is a delay and an additional FBI investigation.

Those  women on the elevator have allllll my respect.

There is hope on the internet that this could be a McCain type move where Flake and Collins, Murkowski want to get to the main vote to vote no (like McCain did with healthcare). Other people are less hopeful. 

A bit off-topic: My family is from North Dakota, and supporters of Heidi Heitkamp, the surprise democratic senator. They've met with her more than once and believe her to be a good person, but as ND went strongly for Trump, Heitkamp is in serious danger in her election in November. She's running on healthcare and "for North Dakota" while the other guy, Kevin Cramer, is tying himself to Trump, and Heitkamp to Hillary (who is absolutely loathed in ND). I hope she does the right thing, but I'm still worried about her vote. Although, she probably won't win re-election anyway, so should just go with her conscience. No matter what, this is going to be a very close vote. 

[Drala]

[fraurosena]

2 minutes ago, neurogirl said:

From CNN

 

This whole Flake situation is weird as fuck. If he is so determined that there should be an FBI investigation, why did he vote Yes in the Judiciary Committee? What does that signify? Why was it so important that the whole Kavanaugh thing was wrapped up by the Committee today? Why did it have to be handed over to the floor? I sincerely don't get that.  What is his reasoning here?

I simply cannot come up with a reason that makes any sense.

[Rachel333]

1 minute ago, fraurosena said:

This whole Flake situation is weird as fuck. If he is so determined that there should be an FBI investigation, why did he vote Yes in the Judiciary Committee? What does that signify? Why was it so important that the whole Kavanaugh thing was wrapped up by the Committee today? Why did it have to be handed over to the floor? I sincerely don't get that.  What is his reasoning here?

I simply cannot come up with a reason that makes any sense.

He's trying to appease both factions.

[Rachel333]

CNN is reporting that the Republicans have agreed to allow a week for a background check.

[Cartmann99]

1 hour ago, fraurosena said:

"I know I am a single white male from South Carolina and I’ve been told shut up, but I will not shut up," said Graham, who put his fury on display during the hearing less than 24 hours earlier.

 

[AuntK]

7 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

If this is what he behaves like when sober in front of TV cameras, he must be a right SOB in private.

Can you imagine how this SOB acts when he is shit-faced drunk? Damn. I can certainly envision what Dr. Ford went through! 

[Cartmann99]

Here comes the NRA on their white stallion:

 

[AuntK]

I just read that one of the reasons the Repugs are trying to push Kavanaugh through is Gamble v. U.S., a case which will be heard this term. The issue is whether or not the double jeopardy exception will continue to apply under the separate sovereigns doctrine. "Double jeopardy," as everyone knows, means you cant be tried for the same offense twice. There is an exception to double jeopardy in the case of "separate sovereigns," where you can be tried in BOTH state court and federal court for the same offense. This case is of vital importance to a number of Republicans, as many may face trial in both forums. If the separate sovereign exception is ruled unconstitutional, you're going to hear a huge sigh of relief from the DC area.

[Rachel333]

Trump is ordering the investigation.

https://apnews.com/6cd0cc2774d94da68fc9b92b6f2dae42

[Howl]

Holy Moly!  I went shopping and caught this on NPR coming home.   But just one week, and just on the this one issue.  Which, if other shit comes up, may allow Brett Kavanaugh to withdraw his nomination.  I want to know about the 1998 incident, where Kavanaugh allegedly threw a woman up against a wall outside a bar. 

And his history of alcohol abuse, and his damn finances!!!!!!!

[Howl]

Fascinating article from the Brookings Institution on Native voters in Alaska and Lisa Murkowski.  

Kavanaugh, Murkowski, and the role of Alaska Native voters

Should she vote for Kavanaugh's confirmation, she will alienate the very voters who have strongly supported her and may even be responsible for voting her into office. 

[GreyhoundFan]

"The American Bar Association had concerns about Kavanaugh 12 years ago. Republicans dismissed those, too."

Spoiler

History repeated itself. At least it had a spell of deja vu when the American Bar Association released an extraordinary statement at a crucial moment that raised concerns about Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh’s nomination to a powerful judicial position — just as it had done 12 years earlier.

Late Thursday evening, the ABA called for an FBI investigation into sexual assault allegations against Kavanaugh before the Senate Judiciary Committee voted on his Supreme Court nomination. The warning was all the more remarkable, because just hours earlier, Kavanaugh and his Republican defenders had cited the ABA’s previously glowing endorsement of the nominee — “the gold standard,” as one leading Republican put it.

Flash back to the mid-2000s and another fight in the Senate over Kavanaugh’s nomination to a federal court:

Democrats for three years had been blocking President George W. Bush’s 2003 nomination of Kavanaugh to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. They argued he was biased, as shown by his work as a lawyer for Bush’s presidential campaign, for an independent counsel’s investigation into President Bill Clinton and for other conservative causes.

Republicans kept pushing to make Kavanaugh a judge on the powerful appeals court, year after year. In his defense, they cited multiple reviews by the ABA’s judicial review committee that found him “well qualified” — the big attorney association’s highest possible endorsement, meaning Kavanaugh had outstanding legal abilities and outstanding judicial temperament.

But in May 2006, as Republicans hoped to finally push Kavanaugh’s nomination across the finish line, the ABA downgraded its endorsement.

The group’s judicial investigator had recently interviewed dozens of lawyers, judges and others who had worked with Kavanaugh, the ABA announced at the time, and some of them raised red flags about “his professional experience and the question of his freedom from bias and open-mindedness.”

“One interviewee remained concerned about the nominee’s ability to be balanced and fair should he assume a federal judgeship,” the ABA committee chairman wrote to senators in 2006. “Another interviewee echoed essentially the same thoughts: ‘(He is) immovable and very stubborn and frustrating to deal with on some issues.’”

A particular judge had told the ABA that Kavanaugh had been “sanctimonious” during an oral argument in court. Several lawyers considered him inexperienced, and one said he “dissembled” in the courtroom.

The reviews weren’t all bad.

In the end, the ABA committee weighed Kavanaugh’s “solid reputation for integrity, intellectual capacity, and writing and analytical ability” against “concern over whether this nominee is so insulated that he will be unable to judge fairly in the future.” In a split vote, it downgraded the rating of the nominee to simply “qualified” — meaning he met the ABA’s standards to become a judge but was not necessarily an outstanding candidate.

A day after the ABA lowered its rating, the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee called Kavanaugh to return and sit before them and argued about how seriously the ABA’s concerns should be taken.

“They cannot be dismissed, as some of my colleagues suggest, as merely intemperate rants by Democrats on the committee,” Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) argued. “Predictably, of course, some are already launching a campaign to denigrate the ABA.”

Some did accuse the ABA of bias. Other Republicans dismissed the warnings and noted the group still found Kavanaugh to be qualified overall.

“Based on your going through that experience, would you recommend that we continue to consult the ABA when it comes to judges?” Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) asked Kavanaugh, who laughed and declined to answer.

Two days after the hearing, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to recommend Kavanaugh’s nomination along party lines. The full Senate did much the same later that month — and so Kavanaugh finally became a member of the bench.

In his 12 years on the court, he apparently resolved the ABA’s concerns about his temperament. Kavanaugh cited the bar association’s new unanimous “well qualified” rating for his nomination to the Supreme Court in his opening statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday — an angry, tearful defense against sexual allegations, in which he suggested “revenge on behalf of the Clintons” had inspired his accusers.

“Here’s my understanding,” Graham told other senators afterward, defending Kavanaugh as he had done more than a decade earlier. “If you lived a good life, people would recognize it, like the American Bar Association has — the gold standard. His integrity is absolutely unquestioned. He is very circumspect in his personal conduct, harbors no biases or prejudices. He’s entirely ethical, is a really decent person. He is warm, friendly, unassuming. He’s the nicest person — the ABA.”

But that evening, as Republicans prepared to vote on the nomination, and Democrats accused them of ignoring multiple women’s claims against Kavanaugh, the ABA once again ran up a surprise red flag.

"Deciding to proceed without conducting an additional investigation would not only have a lasting impact on the Senate’s reputation, but it will also negatively affect the great trust necessary for the American people to have in the Supreme Court,” ABA President Robert Carlson wrote in a letter to key senators.

His group’s endorsement of Kavanaugh notwithstanding, Carlson urged the Senate to pause the confirmation and have the FBI investigate the claims against Kavanaugh before making a decision.

Twelve years earlier, the group’s warnings about Kavanaugh had at least delayed his confirmation for the hours it took senators to debate them.

On Friday morning, Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) dispensed with the new one in less than a minute.

“The ABA president’s opinion doesn’t alter the fact that Judge Kavanaugh received a very well-qualified rating from the ABA standing committee, and the standing committee did not join this letter,” Grassley said, as Republicans prepared to vote.

Not everyone dismissed the warning. “The ABA said it made that request because of its — quote — respect for the rule of law and due process under law,” Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) told the committee, and then stopped mid sentence as background chatter washed over the room.

“I’ll just wait until the staff is done talking over there,” Klobuchar said, rubbing her eyes.

 

[Drala]

"There's a chance, if they're delving into specific things," former FBI assistant director Tom Fuentes said of the possibility the bureau will find previously undisclosed facts or witnesses. "Even Kavanaugh raised a few issues all by himself that might merit further looking at. My opinion is he went way over the top when he kept talking about how much he likes beer....Kavanaugh is vulnerable here."

https://www.politico.com/amp/story/2018/09/28/kavanaugh-fbi-investigation-853788?__twitter_impression=true

[countressrascal]

Jeff Flake is my Senator- I have his office numbers in my phone directory both in Phoenix and Washington DC. I called his office last night after the hearings to express my thoughts on Judge Kavanaugh and what he did yesterday being a bully and lying. This morning when I came back from walking the dogs-which are smarter than the president. I heard about Jeff voting for Judge Kavanaugh-I tried to call his office and I got a busy signal for at least 10 min both in Phoenix and Washington DC. I finally got through and left him a message basically that he better not ever run for any elected office because I will launch a campaign against him. I always leave my name. Then he announced the FBI investigation-I left another message thanking him. Also told him to tell Linsday that spirt of John McCain will haunt him for the rest of his life. Karma is a bitch.

[AuntK]

1 hour ago, Drala said:

"There's a chance, if they're delving into specific things," former FBI assistant director Tom Fuentes said of the possibility the bureau will find previously undisclosed facts or witnesses. "Even Kavanaugh raised a few issues all by himself that might merit further looking at. My opinion is he went way over the top when he kept talking about how much he likes beer....Kavanaugh is vulnerable here."

https://www.politico.com/amp/story/2018/09/28/kavanaugh-fbi-investigation-853788?__twitter_impression=true

I agree! Lawrence O'Donnell tonight had multiple statements (with names), from people who went to college with him and say he was a DRUNK and that he lied under oath, as well as 2 women who were in college with him.  Both say he perjured himself. 

[onekidanddone]

How much point is there in calling  Collins,  Murkowski or Flake? They aren’t my Senators so why would they give a rats ass?  

[PreciousPantsofDoom]

After finishing watching Kavanaugh's testimony ( Kavanaugh : My Good and Godly Reputation  has been Wrongly and Unfairly sullied and Besmirched in ways that have Wounded me to the Core of my being! Also Kavanaugh: An FBI probe to clear my good name? What? I can't hear you,  la la la la!) I was feeling pretty down about the state of the world in 2018.

Today, although I was following what was happening with the vote etc,  I hadn't seen the two women confronting Jeff Flake in the elevator until this afternoon.  I was visiting my elderly Uncle in his care home. CNN was on loudly, as it always is there, and they were playing the clip over and over.  DaMN! I am so proud of those two women! They showed up, they said what needed to be said and they did not back down. 

It's funny isn't it, I know the nightmare ain't over yet, but all of a sudden I'm feeling a little hope creeping back in.  It may feel like we are going back to the bad old days sometimes, but history is yet to be written. We all have the power to change  the future, I just needed to hear those two brave women remind me of that. 

 

 

[AmazonGrace]

Rapeublicans are fine with sexual assault 

 

[Drala]

"The awful things Kavanaugh allegedly did only imperfectly correlate to the familiar frame of sexual desire run amok; they appear to more easily fit into a different category—a toxic homosociality—that involves males wooing other males over the comedy of being cruel to women."

Interesting analysis of KavNo's initiation into the boys club.

https://amp.slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/brett-kavanaugh-allegations-yearbook-male-bonding.html