Kennedy to retire - USSC will swing even further right

We should ask someone that served on the Supreme Court. Maybe someone should reach out to John Paul Stevens and see how he feels about Kavanaugh’s partisanship and demeanor.

 

It's so stereotypical conservative. No apologies. No contrition. Never admit a mistake.

Silly.

 

Because they aren't going to set the precedent that uncorroborated false allegations are enough to sink a SCOTUS nomination.....and they shouldn't.

Don't worry, when Ginsburg dies they'll find some other extremely conservative ideologue to nominate.

 

That's your team's version of the narrative. And your team knows better than 2,400 legal scholars, many of whom supported Kavanaugh's nomination originally.

"Even in his prepared remarks, Judge Kavanaugh described the hearing as partisan, referring to it as “a calculated and orchestrated political hit,” rather than acknowledging the need for the Senate, faced with new information, to try to understand what had transpired. Instead of trying to sort out with reason and care the allegations that were raised, Judge Kavanaugh responded in an intemperate, inflammatory and partial manner, as he interrupted and, at times, was discourteous to senators."

Look, I get your angle. Team > Truth. Team > Morality. Team > Country (or at least greater than the parts of the country you just don't like or accept). Nothing anyone types here will ever make a dent in that.

But I tell you this. I criticized Judge RBG when she made a political statement (in response to a man who bragged of his sexual assault exploits, no less -- the horror of speaking up over that; but it was inappropriate for a judge on the high scourt). And if there is ever a candidate for the supreme court, a qualified uber-liberal, who is accused of sexual assault in his or her past, and then fumes to the Senate, under oath, that "it's all an orchestrated campaign by the Koch Brothers! What comes around, goes around," I will absolutely withdraw my support for that candidate. That kind of **** doesn't belong on the high court. It belongs on am radio or random BBS postings, if anywhere.

 

No: more accurately 2,400. And no, law schools are not uniformly full of liberals. Quit dismissing people who actually study things, despite the lies FOX feeds you.

See my comments on RBG. Show me any conservative poster on this board who has complained one iota about Kavanaugh's wholly inappropriate comments. Team > Morality. Team > Country. Y'all Qaeda High Five. Enjoy your SCOTUS.

 

I find this whole hurry to jam it through very odd. McConnell is really cutting it close. What does McConnell do if the Democrat flips? Does he know that the Republican no vote is flipping back to yes?

Seems like playing with fire, because if he fails to get 51 votes, it would not be a good day for the Republicans.

 

Only needs 50 with the VP breaking a tie right? Or am I wrong on that?

 

They technically only need 50 votes anyway. If the Republican can't be there it still passes 50-49 unless someone flips. There's no reason for him to think Flake, Collins or Manchin will change their vote now. They voted to end debate, they'll vote to approve the nominee.

 

That's what a normal president would do, so of course Trump would do the opposite. I often imagine how the pre-presidential Trump must have sat in his living room in his underwear yelling at the TV news each evening about how stupid or weak he thinks whatever US president is being. Now is his chance to do it 'right,' be tough and whatever.

RBG later acknowledged fault and apologized, so I'm not sure there was much left to decry.

 

Won't be a tie. 50-49.

 

Sorry for my ignorance... why would only 99 senators be voting?

 

Currently there's 47 yes, 48 no.

One republican senator will not be present for the vote Saturday.

4 undecideds.

Murk, Collins, Flake, Machin.

They need 3 out of 4 to confirm.

 

Flake has confirmed he is a yes vote.
Manchin's spokesperson said he wouldn't change his vote on the floor tomorrow to avoid being John Kerry. (Flip Flopper)
Susan Collins historically is consistent from the cloture vote to the final vote.

They'll get those 3 and Murkowski will probably stay a no.

 

Agree. The turtle don't play: if it's coming to a vote, he is sure of that vote.

Take that, vast-Clinton-network conspiracy!

 

In a trial, each side gets to present evidence. I understand that this wasn't a trial, but it isn't right to force someone to meet only one side's conditions or they don't get to present any of their evidence.

 

Every nominee deserves an up or down vote.

 

kavanaugh may or may not be guilty of sexual assault. But, this much we know. We know he's dishonest. We know that he thinks it's ok to lie to get a job.

He clearly lied when he was asked about the comments in the yearbook. He looked and sounded ridiculous.

Some people may say it's ok to tell a lie to get a job. But, this isn't just any job, and the lies he told were part of an effort to keep hidden certain behavior that could have played a role in the alleged sexual assault. You want people on the Supreme Court to be honest. Kavanaugh is not honest.

 

What you are describing is what Dr. Ford has attempted to do time and time again always making ultimatums about any part of her contribution....even when it takes lies to get her way such as the fear of flying to get a 3 day delay in the process at one point. She withheld the therapists' notes and polygraph information saying that unless they met her conditions she wouldn't allow them to have the evidence.....which isn't the actions of a victim who wants justice. When you factor in that she effectively had no evidence one way or the other outside of the therapists' notes and polygraph....neither of which really helps her story much, it's odd that she'd choose to withhold it. Again, makes you wonder what she was hiding. We know she perjured herself, so even if she did come forward with the therapists' notes I would have expected parts to be redacted to hide her lies.

 

Donny has bought into the smear campaign 100%!

"Derp, why don't the Republicans just find somebody else?" Because there's no evidence to suggest Kav is guilty of anything! Did you forget that little detail?

 

nope.

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/kavanaugh-hearings-perjury-claims-never-credible/

the lie claims are similar to the sexual assault claims. Throw a bunch of false claims out there and hope the perception sticks. Similar story for the 'he called himself a choir boy' nonsense. He never did, but people claimed it enough so it sticks. Its a very common, simple tactic that people fall for.