Feinstein's Letter about Kavanaugh.

[Hawkmoon]

Speaking of touchers, if all this stuff is fair game, then goodbye Cory Booker, right? Because unlike Kavanaugh, Booker said he did it.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/20/bookers-push-for-kavanaugh-vote-delay-called-out-over-his-1992-column-detailing-teenage-groping.html

“This disingenuous right-wing attack, which has circulated online and in partisan outlets for the past five years, rings hollow to anyone who reads the entirety of Senator Booker’s Stanford Daily column,” a spokesperson for the senator said in a statement to Fox News.

“The column is in fact a direct criticism of a culture that encourages young men to take advantage of women -- written at a time when so candidly discussing these issues was rare -- and speaks to the impact Senator Booker’s experience working to help rape and sexual assault survivors as a college peer counselor had on him.”

How does this in any way "ring hollow"? Booker did what the Blasey-Ford woman accused Kavanaugh of doing. Booker admits having done it. Why is it okay for a Democrat to have done it but not okay for a Republican to have maybe done it?

[Ron]

Calling out the lefts hypocrisy never works.

Nobody expects them to have integrity and their whole governing philosophy is the ends justify the means.

Even though the left seems to be populated with lechers pointing it out doesn’t seem to impact their support dramatically.

For whatever reason that is a battle space they never really lose in regardless of how many casualties they take. The pound me too movement is littered with rich leftists but I’m not seeing anyone jumping on the train running on the right rails in response.

The right needs to choose the ground the fight takes place on, like the border and illegal immigration or example.

If the Republicans vote in Kavanuagh as planned I’ll be pleased. That means they chose the terms of the fight and the battle ground.

If Trump has taught us anything it is this, define the terms of the conflict and if your opponent gets the initiative don’t slug it out but work to reframe the conflict.

Never let them define the battle space.

[Perd Hapley]

Speaking of left-wing hypocrisy:

https://www.dailywire.com/news/36114/senator-gillibrand-makes-fool-herself-just-10-ryan-saavedra

[Ron]

Does it make sense that the Dems would trot this old story out with nobody to corroborate her story?

Either they are really, really dumb or they still have an ace up their sleeve.

It’s hard to analyze clown world rationally.

[cordex]

Does it make sense that the Dems would trot this old story out with nobody to corroborate her story?

Yes.

They don’t have to convict him, they just have to derail his nomination and an accusation could do that.

[Scout26]

Does it make sense that the Dems would trot this old story out with nobody to corroborate her story?

Either they are really, really dumb or they still have an ace up their sleeve.

It’s hard to analyze clown world rationally.

Option C.  They are really, really desparate to do anything to delay/deny Kavanaugh's vote/confirmation until after the mid-term.  There are ~5 D Senators that are up for re-election in States that Trump handily carried.  If they don't have to vote on Kavanaugh's confirm (one way or the other) they might survive and be re-elected.  Polling shows that those states may like their D senators, but the people do want them to reach across the aisle to help enact (some of) Trump's agenda.

They also hold out hope that they can take the Senate, although the math is very much against them.

[Ron]

If your analysis is true that’s  a real “Hail Satan” pass on their part then.

[MikeB]

Ya know. The left may be shooting themselves in the foot over this. I’m not really a fan of Kavanaugh. Far better than any Hillary pick I can imagine, but I think he is squishy and was more likely to side with liberals on some things like battling Davos over the Title IX kangaroo courts stuff or the so called emergency protective orders, etc. He is likey to have a different perspective now that he has been the victim of what is almost certainly false accusations about decisions on this stuff.

[DittoHead]

I don't think they thought it even had a real chance of derailing the nomination. I suspect the primary goal of amping this up is to turn woman voters off the GOP for the midterms. Stuff like this:

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/09/brett-kavanaugh-trump-midterms-women-of-color/570727/
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/09/brett-kavanaugh-christine-blasey-ford-hearing/570625/

[Perd Hapley]

Does it make sense that the Dems would trot this old story out with nobody to corroborate her story?

Either they are really, really dumb or they still have an ace up their sleeve.

It’s hard to analyze clown world rationally.

Did they have corroborating evidence for Anita Hill?

I don't think they thought it even had a real chance of derailing the nomination. I suspect the primary goal of amping this up is to turn woman voters off the GOP for the midterms.

That, and delegitimizing another conservative justice.

[Ben]

So now Ford's attorneys (I guess she has multiples now?) are demanding that Ford will only testify if Kavanaugh goes first, so they can see what he says. Is this not pretty much the opposite of our legal system? How can the accused testify before an accuser does in an "innocent until proven guilty" society?

I really hope that neither the Rs nor Kavanaugh agree to this simply to look like they want to show how open they are. Very dangerous precedent.


ETA: In fact I'm trying to remember if I read something about "confess your crimes" in a dystopian SciFi book or else saw it on Game of Thrones a couple of seasons ago.

[Perd Hapley]

[DittoHead]

Trump's twitter fingers have been surprisingly restrained here. Either he knows, or he has five people holding him down, that this is the time to let dems shoot themselves in their collective feet. His tweets so far, from what I have seen, have actually been pretty "presidential" and unbiased. I think that is making the White House look remarkably good here.

Keeping quiet was smart. I don't think this will help.

I have no doubt that, if the attack on Dr. Ford was as bad as she says, charges would have been immediately filed with local Law Enforcement Authorities by either her or her loving parents. I ask that she bring those filings forward so that we can learn  date, time, and place!

The radical left lawyers want the FBI to get involved NOW. Why didn’t someone call the FBI 36 years ago?

[Ben]

Also, the latest now is that we can't have white men questioning Ford because patriarchy? So if I'm ever in court, in front of a judge or a jury, I can demand that everyone involved be sympathetic to me? I can pick the race, gender, and philosophy of everyone involved in ascertaining my guilt or innocence? I can be assured of the opposing attorney supporting me? Because that would be awesome.

https://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2018/09/21/fume-thread-of-media-quotes-claiming-white-men-cant-be-objective-questioning-ford-is-just-infuriating/

[Ben]

Keeping quiet was smart. I don't think this will help.

Well, on the bright side, it was probably one of the longest stretches before he fell back into antagonistic tweets. 

IMO, he would have been better off continuing to support Kavanaugh, while generically saying "let's have testimony". Him directly attacking Ford in any way, deserved or not, will not help things.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/21/trump-calls-on-kavanaugh-accuser-to-provide-police-report-from-alleged-assault.html

[Scout26]

If your analysis is true that’s  a real “Hail Satan” pass on their part then.

Oh, and there's some Merrick Garland payback mixed in there also....

Ya know. The left may be shooting themselves in the foot over this. I’m not really a fan of Kavanaugh. Far better than any Hillary pick I can imagine, but I think he is squishy and was more likely to side with liberals on some things like battling Davos over the Title IX kangaroo courts stuff or the so called emergency protective orders, etc. He is likey to have a different perspective now that he has been the victim of what is almost certainly false accusations about decisions on this stuff.

I actually thought that Kavanaugh would be another Kennedy, just from reading some of his 300+ opinions.   Yes, he's a constitutionalist, but he looks for "wiggle room" to be a little more left then I'd prefer.

However, after his now attempted lynching by the liberal left, I would hope/guess that he'll be far to the right of Scalia. 

[zxcvbob]

I don't remember, but I thought he wasn't a fan of the 4th Amendment.    

[MillCreek]

^^^I always thought that the primary reason for his nomination were his opinions as to a sitting President should enjoy some degree of immunity from criminal prosecution and civil claims while in office.  Perhaps President Trump thinks this would be good for him, or for the office of the Presidency as a whole.

[MechAg94]

Keeping quiet was smart. I don't think this will help.

It is his nature.  Staying quiet too long would be out of character. 

I agree with the comment that this is all about delay.  If they thought this was credible enough to stop the nomination, they would have brought it up sooner. 

[Ben]

Oh, and there's some Merrick Garland payback mixed in there also....


I actually thought that Kavanaugh would be another Kennedy, just from reading some of his 300+ opinions.   Yes, he's a constitutionalist, but he looks for "wiggle room" to be a little more left then I'd prefer.

However, after his now attempted lynching by the liberal left, I would hope/guess that he'll be far to the right of Scalia. 

I was lukewarm on him too. The lynching has now put him into the same category as my (general) support for Trump. I just want him there to piss off the left now, and as you said, this may have him rethinking some of his views to lean a bit more classical liberal regarding the constitution.

[Scout26]

^^^I always thought that the primary reason for his nomination were his opinions as to a sitting President should enjoy some degree of immunity from criminal prosecution and civil claims while in office.  Perhaps President Trump thinks this would be good for him, or for the office of the Presidency as a whole.

I don't think so.  I think that was more of a Dem talking point.  I thought that he was nominated because he had no background baggage like some of the other potential nominees.  Someone who they thought would sail through the process, because while yes, he was staff secretary in the BushII White House, that's not a policy job.  It's to make sure that every one making pronouncements in the name of Administration is on-board with the Administration.  He was more of an editor then a maker or policy.

And his 300+ opinions showed that he was somewhat squishy especially on the 4th, so he could be another Kennedy.  (Thanks Bob, I remember now.) 

[MikeB]

I don't think so.  I think that was more of a Dem talking point.  I thought that he was nominated because he had no background baggage like some of the other potential nominees.  Someone who they thought would sail through the process, because while yes, he was staff secretary in the BushII White House, that's not a policy job.  It's to make sure that every one making pronouncements in the name of Administration is on-board with the Administration.  He was more of an editor then a maker or policy.

And his 300+ opinions showed that he was somewhat squishy especially on the 4th, so he could be another Kennedy.  (Thanks Bob, I remember now.) 

Not just the fourth. The First and Tenth too from what I saw. About the only one where I felt he might be a little better than Kennedy was the Second and I don’t think any guarantees there. He was mostly just another Kennedy. The left may very well have pushed him more to the right with their shenanigans though. That may also be bad for all of us, I want originalists, not someone coming from the left and right. I have a lot of disagreements with the so called conservatives in the GOP too. There are a number of things I actually agree with many liberals/Dems on as more or less a libertarian.

[Ben]

I have a lot of disagreements with the so called conservatives in the GOP too. There are a number of things I actually agree with many liberals/Dems on as more or less a libertarian.

Indeed. As you mentioned, they seem to be especially bad on the 4th and related. There's a pretty large segment of conservatives that are big on safety over freedom, and "If you have nothing to hide..." The Peter King type of conservatives.

[Hawkmoon]

I don't remember, but I thought he wasn't a fan of the 4th Amendment.    

Correct. Which was the reason I was unhappy that he was the nominee.

[Ben]

I thought this was pretty powerful, especially from the aspect, as mentioned here in the thread by several, that if Kavanaugh was what Ford says he is there would be more women like her - even one or two more - from the last 35 years coming forward. Instead we have this from the last 35 years (I thought the pan out at the end was great):

https://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2018/09/21/proud-to-stand-with-brett-video-of-kavanaughs-female-colleagues-and-friends-spells-trouble-for-lefts-smear-campaign/

Also, tangent - Feinstein still refuses to release the original letter as evidence. That is also powerful in another way.