SCOTUS Nomination II: I Like Beer

[metalhead]

Well, for November. Successfully landing Kavanaugh is a 'win' for Trump and the Republicans who have hitched their wagons to him. By preventing his success, they're preventing a 'win'.

I'm not convinced it's an intentional delay tactic. It certainly looks like one in retrospect, but I think that's luck (?) more than anything. I don't see how Feinstein could have informed the committee earlier without first getting Ford's permission to do so.

Kavanaugh supposedly doesn't care what happens in the election though. Hehehe posits Kavanaugh knew this was a delay tactic, but from Kavanaugh's perspective - so what? He can't wait a little longer? Why does an election matter to him even the slightest bit when a seat on the Supreme Court is hanging in the balance?

 

[El_Machinae]

Kavanaugh supposedly doesn't care what happens in the election though.

Well, Kavanaugh knows that if the election goes against the Republicans, he will lose his chance to become a Supreme Court justice. Things are terrifically partisan, and he knows that. So, he knows that the delay in the process will cause him to not get confirmed. It's not like the FBI can find anything that will actually get them to vote for him, right?

I'm agnostic on whether it was an intentional delay tactic. But I certainly can recognize that it was well-played if it was.

 

[metalhead]

Well, Kavanaugh knows that if the election goes against the Republicans, he will lose his chance to become a Supreme Court justice. Things are terrifically partisan, and he knows that. So, he knows that the delay in the process will cause him to not get confirmed. It's not like the FBI can find anything that will actually get them to vote for him, right?

I'm agnostic on whether it was an intentional delay tactic. But I certainly can recognize that it was well-played if it was.

There is zero chance that an investigation would have pushed this off until January. Zero. There is no possible way they could have delayed this long enough to keep his nomination from going through. In fact with the GOP setting the rules, they could have set a deadline for mid-October for delivery of a report.

No, Kavanaugh's nomination was not threatened by delay. COULD NOT have been threatened by delay, given who is in charge. And EVEN IF that was possible, why not answer the question, "I support an FBI investigation so long as it doesn't drag on too long?" If his concern was that the proceedings would be delayed, he could have just said so.

 

[onejayhawk]

There is zero chance that an investigation would have pushed this off until January. Zero. There is no possible way they could have delayed this long enough to keep his nomination from going through. In fact with the GOP setting the rules, they could have set a deadline for mid-October for delivery of a report.

No, Kavanaugh's nomination was not threatened by delay. COULD NOT have been threatened by delay, given who is in charge. And EVEN IF that was possible, why not answer the question, "I support an FBI investigation so long as it doesn't drag on too long?" If his concern was that the proceedings would be delayed, he could have just said so.

It could have easily been delayed til January. All that had to happen is for McConnell to come up short on the vote count. November is a chance to gain votes.

J

 

[El_Machinae]

And EVEN IF that was possible, why not answer the question, "I support an FBI investigation so long as it doesn't drag on too long?" If his concern was that the proceedings would be delayed, he could have just said so.

I don't want to defend a position too strongly, or defend anyone's phrasing. I am just saying that there is political gain for the Democrats in delaying his nomination, and that he would be cognizant of that. It's fair if he feels that part of the investigation is being done for political gain, and for someone to object to that. Heck, even I don't see the point of a further investigation. At this point, we're just looking for perjury charges in everyone's testimonies.

 

[Lexicus]

I am just saying that there is political gain for the Democrats in delaying his nomination

The only political gain the Democrats gain from this is if the investigation turns up bad things about Kavanaugh. Which, incidentally, is also the real reason he refused to support it.

 

[El_Machinae]

The only political gain the Democrats gain from this is if the investigation turns up bad things about Kavanaugh.

We will disagree. I think there's serious value in delaying Kavanaugh's confirmation until after the November elections. Plucky and misunderstood Trump will then be denied another 'win' in the win column.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

If anything the week-long delay and pushback has energized the Republican base. This hasn't really seemed to help Democrats.

 

[Berzerker]

The GOP will lose steam if they confirm him now but they cant afford to drag this out until the election with all the shoes dropping.

She was born Christine Margaret Blasey.
I find it odd that people keep calling her "Ford". And i'm supposed to be the vile evul misogynist.

Ford is the last name she used while testifying under oath

Is it safe to assume that, aside from the corrections Innonimatu made, my account (page 21, post 417) of the events between Ford and Kavanaugh was more or less correct? No-one else here disagrees? Also, it seems to me that the bulk of the accusations against Kavanaugh have shifted from the sexual assault incident to his testimony.

In 'she said, he said' cases testimony is where people seek the truth

some republicans are saying that this is a delay tactic

Too bad we cant put them under oath

Wait what? How is this a non-answer? What would an innocent man say? I mean, Kavanaugh seems to agree to these investigations? Is this a point against Kavanaugh?

An innocent man would ask for his name to be cleared, not 'I'm fine with this committee sweeping this under the rug'. The FBI didn't interview him.

I feel like this post was a reply to me, even though technically it wasn't.

Showing perjury didn't address your skepticism?

 

[El_Machinae]

If anything the week-long delay and pushback has energized the Republican base. This hasn't really seemed to help Democrats.

But, again, we only know in retrospect. I can still suspect that it was an intentional tactic, just that it misfired.

 

[metatron]

They had a procedural vote.

Murkowski voted no, every other Republican voted yes. Murkowski says she will announce her final vote intention this evening. Final vote scheduled for 30 hours from now.

Trump is calling the survivors of sexual assaults that are trying to reach the senators outside their offices crisis actors.

1. The procedural vote is a cloture motion. Hehehe is supposed to know what that is if they are posting on page #27 of such a thread. That can be reasonable asked for at that point.
2. This cloture motion is a very strong predictor (massive understatement) of the actual confirmation vote.
3. What cannot be reasonably asked for is for Hehehe to know the exact composition of the Senate (including all the murky statūs of various senator's leanings).
So we may inform them that Republicans hold a 51 seat majority, lost Murkowsky but gained Manchin and have to do without Daines tommorow (and likely will).
4. I shall not be maligned for usage of rectangular language here, so as to not misrepresent Hehehe's gender identity.
I, in checking up on how white, blonde, dreaded persons won (bigly) the news in my own stupid country, just witnessed one such blonde unkempt winner use the term RWE-AufsichtsratsmitgliederInnen in an actual copulating sentence.
(No, you don't get that. And yes, that's largely for the purpose of entertaining my good friend @Owen Glyndwr).

Ford is the last name she used while testifying under oath

Yeah, i know.
I also appreciate the Senate clerks refer to Sen. Moore Capito as "Sen. Capito".
You are a weird people, no offense.

 

[Hrothbern]

If anything the week-long delay and pushback has energized the Republican base. This hasn't really seemed to help Democrats.

The Rasmussen poll indicates something similar.
IDK how good the Rasmussen poll is, but I like the distinction in the categories strong approve-strongly disapprove-total approve-total disapprove with the difference between strongly as first indicator.
And I take a glance at it every time there is some burst of media attention.
That difference between strongly approve-disapprove has never been so favorable for Trump since the first two months of his Presidency.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/pub...p_administration/trump_approval_index_history

 

[Lexicus]

We will disagree. I think there's serious value in delaying Kavanaugh's confirmation until after the November elections. Plucky and misunderstood Trump will then be denied another 'win' in the win column.

Metalhead has already pointed out that the investigation need not drag on past the elections. I would add that the only way for Kavanaugh's nomination to be put in jeopardy would be for Democrats to win the Senate and for the confirmation process to be dragged on until next January when the new Congress is sworn in.

You honestly believe that's a serious possibility? Or perhaps you honestly believe that Donald Trump getting his "win" is a legitimate reason for Kavanaugh to refuse to support an investigation - to, in effect, debase and entirely de-legitimate the confirmation proceedings and by extension the Court itself?

 

[Zelig]

Kavanaugh is looking better now than before the circus started. What was a bland portrait has been filled in with humanizing details.

I guess if you consider "creepy" to be humanizing.

 

[HoloDoc]

I guess if you consider "creepy" to be humanizing.

Most rapists are human, so I guess he's technically correct. The best kind of correct.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

If anything the week-long delay and pushback has energized the Republican base. This hasn't really seemed to help Democrats.

I think my Republican hack congressman, who was a serious underdog already, is now a lock to lose to his millennial female challenger. But I'd guess that for every Republican in a blue state that was pushed over the edge there's probably a Democrat in a red state going off the brink as well. The polarization is becoming ever more definitive.

 

[HoloDoc]

I think my Republican hack congressman, who was a serious underdog already, is now a lock to lose to his millennial female challenger. But I'd guess that for every Republican in a blue state that was pushed over the edge there's probably a Democrat in a red state going off the brink as well. The polarization is becoming ever more definitive.

And if a Republican actually does something legitimately conservative, as opposed to ractionary and evil, they will be replaced by a raving lunatic in a primary battle. Less so on the Democrat side, but there are left-wing challengers to the traitorous right-wing scumcentrist candidates.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

And if a Republican actually does something legitimately conservative, as opposed to ractionary and evil, they will be replaced by a raving lunatic in a primary battle. Less so on the Democrat side, but there are left-wing challengers to the traitorous right-wing scumcentrist candidates.

I'm actually okay with the "legitimate conservatives" being replaced by the reactionary and evil. The legitimate conservatives have long since demonstrated that they will go along with whatever the reactionary and evil want anyway, so long as they get an occasional bone...and the only bones they get are the ones that the reactionary and evil can get behind anyway. Shifting demographics will put paid to the reactionary and evil more easily than the "legitimate conservatives," so in the long run it works out better faster.

 

[Lexicus]

In the 19th century there was a 'legitimate conservative' movement. Since the 20th century conservatism and evil reaction are one and the same thing. In the US for example modern conservatism's raison d'etre was undoing the New Deal and resisting the dismantling of white supremacy in the United States. Both of these goals are fundamentally evil.

 

[metalhead]

I don't want to defend a position too strongly, or defend anyone's phrasing. I am just saying that there is political gain for the Democrats in delaying his nomination, and that he would be cognizant of that. It's fair if he feels that part of the investigation is being done for political gain, and for someone to object to that. Heck, even I don't see the point of a further investigation. At this point, we're just looking for perjury charges in everyone's testimonies.

Surely you recognize if one of the two testifying parties was provably dishonest, that has significant bearing on the import of the proceedings? "He said, she said" takes on a whole different meaning if one of the parties wasn't being honest in their testimony. I don't see how you can write that off as pointless, when there is already evidence showing probable cause to believe Kavanaugh perjured himself.

Also, and I'm not trying to pick on you here, I'm still not clear on how you believe that the Democrats had any way to delay this past the midterms. The story broke publicly on Sept. 16th, or thereabouts. 7 weeks from the midterms. Time estimates on a thorough investigation with FBI buy-in on providing significant resources were 2 weeks. There is simply no credible claim to make that Democrats ever thought they could delay this past November, even if they got the investigation they requested.