[hrothgar]

 Flem72, on 2018-October-02, 18:58, said:

and there is nothing in any of this about his adult life--30-35 years after the "fact."

There are some things in life where you don't get a do over. You particularly don't get a do over when you deny everything and show zero remorse.

Ben Wittes has a pretty good summary:

https://www.theatlan...vanaugh/571936/

[Winstonm]

 Flem72, on 2018-October-02, 18:58, said:

@PassedOut: "What a guy."@Winstonn: You know, I really don't care so much what a college guy did during drunken frat weekends - what I do mind is that he hasn't changed - we don't need a smart-ass drunken frat boy SC justice.
You both seem very certain of the conclusion that K is the same person now that he was in high school. Is it fair to conclude that you folks are the same persons now that you were in high school?

I would rather have had Barrett, Eid or Thapar in any case: K was a priori too much of a Yalie for me from the get-go. I think K was a serious twit, an immature prep school and Yalie jerk. He's also a top rank jurist, and there is nothing in any of this about his adult life--30-35 years after the "fact."

Other than his actions with the Bush administration and his actions in the confirmation hearings, you mean?

[Flem72]

 hrothgar, on 2018-October-02, 22:46, said:

No, its

"I saw him at the punch bowl dropping Quaalude into red cups and handing them to girls"

Feel free to show where that claim was made. I listened to her NBC interview and can remember no reference to Quaaludes; jeez, it was nearly impossible to get them after the mid-'70s.

[Flem72]

 Winstonm, on 2018-October-03, 05:36, said:

Other than his actions with the Bush administration and his actions in the confirmation hearings, you mean?

Elaborate? what "actions"?

[Winstonm]

 Flem72, on 2018-October-03, 07:37, said:

Elaborate? what "actions"?

First, this is not a courtroom, so rules of evidence don't apply, counselor. This is an interview for a job as a supreme court justice. But you are well aware of all that.

IMO, and it seems many others including classmates of K who previously approved of him, his temperament and the bias he showed while answering the Ford allegations disqualify him as a legitimate candidate.

Edit: Wapo:

Quote

Perhaps the most symbolic pullback, though, came from conservative legal scholar Benjamin Wittes. Although he doesn’t have a vote, as Flake does, he does count Kavanaugh as a longtime ally and has defended him. Yet he said Tuesday that he no longer thinks Kavanaugh should be confirmed. And while he said the allegations are troubling, he said Kavanaugh’s testimony left him “nonviable” to serve on the Supreme Court:

His opening statement was an unprecedentedly partisan outburst of emotion from a would-be justice. I do not begrudge him the emotion, even the anger. He has been through a kind of hell that would leave any person gasping for air. But I cannot condone the partisanship—which was raw, undisguised, naked, and conspiratorial—from someone who asks for public faith as a dispassionate and impartial judicial actor. His performance was wholly inconsistent with the conduct we should expect from a member of the judiciary.

You appear to disagree. Why are you so intent on K instead of the myriad of other qualified conservative judges who do not carry the baggage of Bart?

[Winstonm]

From The Guardian:

Quote

As hundreds of supporters cheered, Trump delivered a crude imitation of Ford from her testimony, in which she vividly described a violent sexual assault she alleges Kavanaugh committed against her in the early 1980s, while admitting that certain details of the time and place were lost to memory.

What should those who continue to support this crass, classless, crude, lying filth of a human being be called? Deplorable? Too mild. Pieces of ***** seems more like it.

[Winstonm]

A little more from the NTY about the Dennison family values:

Quote

....the company[All County Building Supply & Maintenance] was a middleman entity created by President Trump and his siblings essentially to move cash from Fred Trump’s companies to his children. After All County bought various items for Fred Trump’s buildings, like boilers and cleaning supplies, a secretary would bill the items to Fred Trump’s buildings with a 20 to 50 percent markup. The siblings would then pocket the difference.

In short, the siblings received millions in untaxed gifts from their father, skirting a 55 percent tax on gifts over a certain value that would have cut the total significantly.

But I suppose a supporter would say that makes Dennison "smart" - but it also makes him a crook and most likely liable to RICO statues, of which I am unsure of statutes of limitations but surely one of our lawyers in the WC can fill us in.

[barmar]

 Winstonm, on 2018-October-03, 07:54, said:

What should those who continue to support this crass, classless, crude, lying filth of a human being be called? Deplorable? Too mild. Pieces of ***** seems more like it.

It's the same Trump who mocked someone with Parkinson's during the campaign. He's their guy, and he hasn't changed.

[Winstonm]

 barmar, on 2018-October-03, 11:21, said:

It's the same Trump who mocked someone with Parkinson's during the campaign. He's their guy, and he hasn't changed.

I think there is a distinction. During the campaign, he was trying to provide a show and prove he was an outsider; now, he is simply showing his true character, a piece of filth to be scraped from the bottom of the shoes of history.

[Flem72]

 hrothgar, on 2018-October-02, 22:52, said:

There are some things in life where you don't get a do over. You particularly don't get a do over when you deny everything and show zero remorse.

Ben Wittes has a pretty good summary:

https://www.theatlan...vanaugh/571936/

Re: Wittes' position What do you think about RBG and her public statements? Kagan's emails on the ACA? I hope you'd agree that both should either resign or recuse on a bunch of cases?

[barmar]

 Winstonm, on 2018-October-03, 12:45, said:

I think there is a distinction. During the campaign, he was trying to provide a show and prove he was an outsider; now, he is simply showing his true character, a piece of filth to be scraped from the bottom of the shoes of history.

And of course it was also full of the kinds of lies we've come to expect from Trump. He kept saying that she didn't remember this, she didn't remember that, on and on. One of the late night talks shows, probably Stephen Colbert, replayed Trump's speech, and followed each of those claims with a clip from the hearing where she recounted specifically the things he claimed she didn't remember.

Does he think we're total idiots? Well, enough of us did vote for him, so I guess he knows....

[Winstonm]

 barmar, on 2018-October-04, 09:14, said:

And of course it was also full of the kinds of lies we've come to expect from Trump. He kept saying that she didn't remember this, she didn't remember that, on and on. One of the late night talks shows, probably Stephen Colbert, replayed Trump's speech, and followed each of those claims with a clip from the hearing where she recounted specifically the things he claimed she didn't remember.

Does he think we're total idiots? Well, enough of us did vote for him, so I guess he knows....

IMO the recent article from the NYT recounting the criminal enterprise that explains the Fred Trump distribution of his wealth to his children and the elevation of David Dennison as favored son is under-reported and under-appreciated in its significance. It is a factual narrative the shows that the U.S. government executive branch is in the hands of the head of a criminal enterprise that includes not only the U.S. president's office but a federal judgeship, as well, and that the criminal enterprise has been in operation for decades.

The article describes the genuine kompromat - Dennison's willingness to use any means, legal or illegal, in order to gain personal wealth and position, someone who counted on family-based Omerta to hide his complicity and then created a fictionalized account to obscure the truth. Is there any doubt that he would have conspired with Russia if he thought it would give him an edge or there were vast profits to be made?

And the Republican party is totally fine with it all.

[johnu]

 Winstonm, on 2018-October-04, 09:51, said:

IMO the recent article from the NYT recounting the criminal enterprise that explains the Fred Trump distribution of his wealth to his children and the elevation of David Dennison as favored son is under-reported and under-appreciated in its significance. It is a factual narrative the shows that the U.S. government executive branch is in the hands of the head of a criminal enterprise that includes not only the U.S. president's office but a federal judgeship, as well, and that the criminal enterprise has been in operation for decades.

The article describes the genuine kompromat - Dennison's willingness to use any means, legal or illegal, in order to gain personal wealth and position, someone who counted on family-based Omerta to hide his complicity and then created a fictionalized account to obscure the truth. Is there any doubt that he would have conspired with Russia if he thought it would give him an edge or there were vast profits to be made?

And the Republican party is totally fine with it all.

To be fair, it's probably only ~85% of Republicans and 99+% of Republican politicians.

[ggwhiz]

One of the main sticking points in the renegotiation of NAFTA was the desire of the US to do away with the independent dispute resolution process and have them resolved in American courts.

Trump did not appreciate our tone or the stance of our chief negotiator who upon witnessing the Kavanaugh debacle said: HAHAHAHAHAHA!

[y66]

Another dissenting voice: A former Supreme Court justice [and former occasional DC area club bridge player], John Paul Stevens, 98, said Judge Kavanaugh’s testimony had shown him to be unfit to sit on the court:

Quote

Justice Stevens said he came to the conclusion reluctantly, changing his mind about Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination after the second round of the judge’s confirmation hearings last week. Judge Kavanaugh’s statements at those hearings, Justice Stevens said, revealed prejudices that would make it impossible for him to do the court’s work, a point he said had been made by prominent commentators.

“They suggest that he has demonstrated a potential bias involving enough potential litigants before the court that he would not be able to perform his full responsibilities,” Justice Stevens said in remarks to retirees in Boca Raton, Fla. “And I think there is merit in that criticism and that the senators should really pay attention to it.”

“For the good of the court,” he said, “it’s not healthy to get a new justice that can only do a part-time job.”

Justice Stevens is 98, and he retired from the Supreme Court in 2010. He was appointed in 1975 by President Gerald R. Ford, a Republican, but he voted with the court’s liberal wing for much of his tenure.

Justice Stevens said he had admired Judge Kavanaugh’s judicial work and had written positively about it in one of his books, “Six Amendments,” which proposed a number of changes to the Constitution. One concerned the Citizens United campaign finance case, in which Justice Stevens had dissented.

In the book, Justice Stevens praised a decision from Judge Kavanaugh. Writing for a three-judge panel of the Federal District Court in Washington, Judge Kavanaugh ruled two foreign citizens living in the United States on temporary work visas could not spend money to call for the election of American politicians.

Justice Stevens said he thought that decision was sound. “As a matter of fact, I put his picture in the book to illustrate my admiration for it,” Justice Stevens said. “At that time, I thought he had definitely the qualifications to sit on the Supreme Court and should be confirmed if he was ever selected.”

“I’ve changed my views for reasons that have really no relationship to his intellectual ability or his record as a federal judge,” Justice Stevens said. “He’s a fine federal judge, and he should have been confirmed when he was nominated.”

“But I think that his performance during the hearings caused me to change my mind,” Justice Stevens said, noting that prominent law professors, including Laurence H. Tribe, a law professor at Harvard, were also critical of Judge Kavanaugh’s statements.

Justice Stevens rejected comparisons to the experience of Justice Clarence Thomas, who endured a bruising confirmation hearing in 1991 after being accused of sexual harassment. “There’s nothing that Clarence did in the hearings that disqualified him from sitting in cases after he came on the court,” Justice Stevens said.

Justice Stevens said he disagreed with Justice Thomas in most important cases but found him to be “a decent and likable person.”

“You cannot help but like Clarence Thomas,” Justice Stevens said, “which I don’t think necessarily would be true of this particular nominee.”

[Winstonm]

This, from The Atlantic, appears to be dead on target:

Quote

Trump’s only true skill is the con; his only fundamental belief is that the United States is the birthright of straight, white, Christian men, and his only real, authentic pleasure is in cruelty. It is that cruelty, and the delight it brings them, that binds his most ardent supporters to him, in shared scorn for those they hate and fear: immigrants, black voters, feminists, and treasonous white men who empathize with any of those who would steal their birthright. The president’s ability to execute that cruelty through word and deed makes them euphoric. It makes them feel good, it makes them feel proud, it makes them feel happy, it makes them feel united. And as long as he makes them feel that way, they will let him get away with anything, no matter what it costs them.

https://www.theatlan...e-point/572104/

[barmar]

So is it really the case that Trump inflated his wealth to get into the Forbes list of richest Americans, then hid that same wealth when reporting to the government? LOL

[Winstonm]

 Winstonm, on 2018-July-10, 08:33, said:

The reality is that after the song and dance routine, Kavanaugh will be confirmed because the GOP has been dreaming of this day for half a century and no GOP senator would risk destroying this opportunity to fulfill that wish.

Chalk up one for the cynic.

[hrothgar]

 Winstonm, on 2018-October-05, 12:18, said:

Chalk up one for the cynic.

This is only round one...

Round two starts once the new congress is seated. it will be interesting to see how well Kavanaugh holds up one there is a real investigation.

[y66]

Collins clearly enjoys her role as a fence sitting pseudo moderate which must translate into increased bargaining power for her Maine constituents. How do you quantify the net inflows of federal dollars to Maine during her tenure relative to nearby states represented by Dems?