Kennedy to retire - USSC will swing even further right

trial or no, there is that pesky confrontation clause in the Constitution--more as a matter of basic principle, no?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confrontation_Clause

otherwise, what is Kavanaugh responding to? rumors of a letter nobody's seen? articles in the Washington Post?

 

There are also these pesky matters that you right-wingers are ignoring:

1. This concerns attempted rape, something far more serious than the allegations raised by Anita Hill against Clarence Thomas during his 1991 confirmation hearings.

2. The FBI investigated Hill’s claims within three days (Republicans could have sent the FBI and gotten a report back by now if they hadn’t been stalling).

3. Mark Judge allegedly witnessed the attack, but Republicans refuse to call him as a witness, so we can assume that they regard him as a person who would harm Kavanaugh’s defense.

4. Republicans’ insistence that Ford provide even more detail is hypocritical (since they don’t want an FBI investigation) and misguided, given the large body of research concerning memories of victims of sexual assault (e.g., gaps in memory are common).

5. If Kavanaugh was an excessive drinker in high school, as has been alleged, he’s in no position to testify accurately as to what he did and didn’t do.

6. The unsubstantiated attacks on Ford by members such as Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) reveal that they have predetermined the outcome of the hearing. (“She had plenty of chances to bring it up, she did not,” Graham said. “We’re not going to play this game anymore. We [want] Miss Ford to be heard but clearly to me, in August, she hired a lawyer who’s a very activist lawyer, who does not like President Trump and paid for a polygraph.”) But this is no “game,” and Ford has every right to seek counsel to fend off attacks like the very ones that Republican senators are making.

7. There is no need to rush to a vote in the next few days. None. Republicans have set an artificial deadline for fear that more damaging information might come out.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...options/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.001969b55a0f

 

I reject the label of "you right-wingers" . . . didn't read anything else yet

 

The conditions she has put on her testimony are reasonable. She aligned herself with people who want to investigate rather than those who have already said they believe proven liar, Kavanagh.

If the FBI finds no evidence to corroborate then that's the end of the story. What is the harm in doing that?

 

If someone walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, they are probably a duck.

Too bad you ignore my post because your feelings were hurt. Shall we make a safe space for you?

 

too bad you have to resort to name-calling. seriously, breakfast dude. get some.

 

May I suggest that you grow some thicker skin. If being called a right-winger is too hurtful, perhaps D&D is too rough for you to handle? The GARM is calling!

 

She should go first. She makes the accusations and he responds. If he has already denied being there what else is he going to say before hearing her? Other than that I don't see a problem with her requests.

I also said the republicans should have used the FBI to investigate. They could have interviewed her earlier in the week before she hired the prep team. Then look for any inconsistencies between her statement to the FBI and testimony to the senate.

 

Wow. I have just sat back to see how this unfold. I got to said, this craziness is what happen when you try to rush through things too quickly or even hide instead of at honest attempt at getting to the truth. If you simply have the FBI investigate and sit back and wait, things will just settle on it own.

Now, you got more than just what she accused of him and his denial that it happen. What is all of this crazy maneuvering, seeking outside counsel for questioning, supposedly huddling to get the story straight, Ed the amazing detective with his nutty defense, and who knows what all the Senators have done and what level of collaboration between the Judge, the GOP and the amazing detective work of Ed Whelan.

Someone should ask Kavanaugh if he has anything to do with Whelan's crazy defense of YES, it happen, but it was by a Kavanaugh look alike.

 

And with all of this it's funny to me how quiet Trump has been for Trump.

 

Yeah, I'm fine with her going first. I don't care if she doesn't go first. I don't think it is really that important who goes first.

 

You know Powerline isn't credible.... yet you still decided to post it.

They are also the conservative outfit that claimed that bogus "revenge" angle based on the accusers parent's foreclosure on this very case.... then they spread the absurd theory that she accuser was almost gang raped by someone else at the same school that vaguely looked like BK.

This isn't their first rodeo of being despicable either.

Shame on you.

 

This could've been a layup with dozens of other nominees. He chose the disaster.

 

He has a really shitty track record with women...... so the less he says, the better.... I am surprised that his handlers have been able to reign him in somewhat.

 

Powerline bloggers are mostly attorneys, retired attorneys, or scholars who lecture at law schools. What part of their background isn't "credible"? Is it simply that you don't agree with the viewpoints they express?

https://www.powerlineblog.com/about-us

ABOUT US
John H. Hinderaker practiced law for 41 years, enjoying a nationwide litigation practice. He retired from the practice of law at the end of 2015, and is now President of Center of the American Experiment, a think tank headquartered in Minnesota.

Mr. Hinderaker lives with his family in Apple Valley, Minnesota. He is a graduate of Dartmouth College and Harvard Law School. During his career as a lawyer, he was named one of the top commercial litigators and one of the 100 best lawyers in Minnesota, and was voted by his peers one of the most respected lawyers in that state. He was repeatedly listed in The Best Lawyers in America and was recognized as Minnesota’s Super Lawyer of the Year for 2005. John can be reached by phone at (612) 354-1239.

Scott W. Johnson is a Minneapolis attorney. For twenty-five years Scott has written with his former law partner John H. Hinderaker on public policy issues including income inequality, income taxes, campaign finance reform, affirmative action, welfare reform, and race in the criminal justice system. Both Scott and John are fellows of the Claremont Institute. Their articles have appeared in magazines including National Review and the Weekly Standard as well as newspapers including the New York Times, the New York Post, the Minneapolis Star Tribune and the St. Paul Pioneer Press.

Scott lives with his family in St. Paul, Minnesota. He is a graduate of Dartmouth College and the University of Minnesota Law School. He can be reached by phone at (612) 414-6464.

Paul Mirengoff is a retired attorney in Washington, D.C. He is a 1971 graduate of Dartmouth College and a 1974 graduate of Stanford Law School. He has two daughters and lives with his family in Bethesda, Maryland.

Paul supports Everton FC of the English Premier Soccer League, as well as the Washington Redskins, the Washington Wizards, and the University of Maryland basketball team.

Steven Hayward is currently senior resident scholar at the Institute of Governmental Studies at UC Berkeley, and a visiting lecturer at Berkeley Law School. He was previously the Ronald Reagan Distinguished Visiting Professor at Pepperdine University’s Graduate School of Public Policy, and was the inaugural visiting scholar in conservative thought and policy at the University of Colorado at Boulder in 2013-14. From 2002 to 2012 he was the F.K Weyerhaeuser Fellow in Law and Economics at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington DC, and has been senior fellow at the Pacific Research Institute in San Francisco since 1991.

He writes frequently for the New York Times, Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, National Review, the Weekly Standard, the Claremont Review of Books, and other publications. The author of six books including a two-volume chronicle of Reagan and his times entitled The Age of Reagan: The Fall of the Old Liberal Order, 1964-1980, and The Age of Reagan: The Conservative Counter-Revolution, 1980-1989, and the Almanac of Environmental Trends. His most recent book is Patriotism is Not Enough: Harry Jaffa, Walter Berns, and the Arguments That Redefined American Conservatism.

Steven Hayward can be reached at hayward487@aol.com.

Joe Malchow has since 2006 been Power Line’s publisher of sorts, managing its business affairs and development team. He is an active technology investor in Menlo Park, California. He is cofounder of Publir, which develops algorithmically driven ad technology for digital publications of exceptional writing and wide influence. He has written on culture and politics for The Wall Street Journal, The Far Eastern Economic Review, The Manhattan Institute, National Review Online, and for The Wall Street Journal’s Europe and Asia editions. ABC News Chief White House Correspondent Jake Tapper profiled him in 2008. In 2012 he was named to the Forbes “30 Under 30” list.

He also writes occasionally on jazz standards and opera; his knowledge of the Great American Songbook is a terrific annoyance to all. He is a 2008 graduate of Dartmouth College. He received his J.D. from Stanford University in 2013. More about Joe here.

Malchow currently resides in Palo Alto, Calif. He can be reached at (650) 223-5379.
​

 

The sad thing is that we are talking about life long appointments to the highest Court in the USA......... there are plenty of candidates that are beyond reproach and those are the candidates that should be on the court.......... and that doesn't just go for Republicans, but Democrats choosing candidates as well.

 

from all outward appearances it looks like Trump has been and is being carefully coached on all of this . . . well, at least more than usual