Kennedy to retire - USSC will swing even further right

take Hatch's comment w a grain of salt.

as per Barbara Boxer, retired senator from Calif, Hatch sat in the Anita Hill Senate hearing back in 1992.
Thomas was the SC nominee; Hill, his former subordinate, accused hims of sexual harrassment

Hatch had asserted that

Clarence Thomas “honest” and “straightforward” and
Anita Hill might be “mixed up” cos she is a "loose" woman, after all she was not married​

 

Yeah it’s pretty binary now. There were supposedly 4 girls and 2 boys there or maybe 4 boys? Was this including Kav and the accuser? Either way he’s dead if someone else steps up and says he was there.

 

No way in hell. I bet Trump actually looks at this as a positive. If he sticks with Kavanaugh through this, he will be loyal to Trump when the time is right.

It is just astounding that Trump fans wouldn’t want to pull him yesterday. On top of potential purgery charges, don’t forget that the freedom of information act will ultimately make all of those hidden documents public knowledge.

If the Dems are in charge of Congress and the White House then they could easily impeach Kavanaugh which would lead to a vacancy the Dems could grab. Why if you are a Trumpkin you’d unnecessarily risk that is beyond me. You must really REALLY love Trump more than any loyalty to conservative policy.

There was a woman candidate that I can’t recall, but she was basically a female Gorsuch with a squeaky clean record. Trumpkins are idiots for not pushing for her, but go ahead .... enjoy Kavanaugh! He’s Trumps guy I guess so go for it.

 

Ok thank you. Do you have anymore shot out of a cannon posts for me?

I wouldn’t call the Examiner radical fwiw. Show me why I’m wrong.

 

I wouldn't put it past Democrats to impeach someone without cause, but I'd imagine that would be political suicide and would set a really terrible precedent which would come back to bite them in the ass after they lost control of congress and the Republicans impeached all of their justices in retaliation.

 

If she cannot establish he was there (and that she was there), it's all over for her.

 

Of course to do that, she is first going to have to clarify exactly when and where this party supposedly occurred.

 

I think she'd have to establish that he was there, that him and the other guy took to into a room, then establish that something actually happened in that room. If she can do all of that, then she'll have something but right now it's just her repeating essentially a fever dream.

 

How does Kavanaugh know he wasn't at a party if she can't identify the party? Is he saying he never went to any parties in high school?

 

He could say that he wasn't at a 6 person party with her and the other guy she accused getting drunk when he was 17.

 

He has stated that he never went to any parties in high school that were anything like the one she described.

 

Using the nuclear option, like Harry Reid did in 2013, came back to bite them.

Don’t put it past the party of division to burn themselves twice.

 

Oh I absolutely don't. Impeaching someone without cause for political reasons is absolutely something that would be in character for Democrats....I'm just hoping that they'll be smart enough not to do it because it would be the kind of thing that could bring down the entire system.

 

I hear he has never told a lie in his life too.

I don't know about you but I don't think I could trust a justice who never went to any parties in high school

By the way, if he is lying and did go to the parties like she described...and anyone at those parties said he was at those kinds of parties, he's basically just F'd himself

 

For a man who couldn't recall so many things in his earlier testimony it's interesting he remembers so precisely the party where this woman is claiming he assaulted her at -- even though he says she wasn't there. However all this information is coming from Hatch's office so we'll have to wait and see if it's even accurate.

 

C'mon, be fair, how could he remember which girl he was on top of at which party?

And who remembers anything about their job?

 

He's saying there was no party, not that he remembers some specific party that the woman had an impanted false memory of due to engaging in pseudoscience with a quack shrink.

 

The Dems played this well because I can definitely see Trump being stubborn about this to the detriment of his party.

I'm pretty sure if they go through with this the Dems have already built a pretty strong case for impeachment. It's a pretty big risk to continue going forward with him.

For that reason the conservative senate strategy has to remain the same. Just get it to a vote before the month is over with. I think there's a chance some of the senators are smart enough to see the risk and vote no and force Trump's hand on picking someone else.

 

Oh yeah? What case is that? That there is an unsubstantiated accusation based on literally nothing but pseudoscience? Is that what you consider a "pretty strong case for impeachment"?

I mean, own it if that's the case, but that is kind of a foolish stance.

 

Possible sexual assault and perjury.

If either is true it's enough for impeachment. I know you will say neither is true, but you know nothing more than the average person does. I'm not saying that the sexual assault story is true or not, just that it is a huge risk to put through a guy with so much controversy surrounding him.

Anyways, you can continue telling yourself that it's nothing until you believe it. I won't get in the way of your ramblings. Just know that I'm taking a wait and see approach but it seems to me that Kavanaugh is a risky choice.