September 28, 2018 at 12:32 am #295436
By happenstance I wound up hearing most of the Senate testimony from both Christine Blasey Ford and Kavanaugh. Ford was impressive and persuasive from start to finish. Kavanaugh surprised me, and at first blush he was convincing, but then he kept the drama queen anguish going a bit too much. Worst he repeated himself again and again as if glued to a script. And then refusing to invite an FBI investigation, that really produced some of the drama of a man shitting his pants in public. Specially Senator Durbin cornering K. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KCBOJZMxNDQ – starts at 2:00, then after 3:00 min, guy does mooshup, pathetic. Spoiled brat that got busted with consequences for the first time. It’s pathetically typical and predictable. These allegations of sexual misconduct aside, the guy doesn’t belong on real court bench, he’s a partisan animal, not a judge.
Here’s a couple interesting background articles,
Helaine Olen, The Washington Post
Published 10:04 am PDT, Monday, September 24, 2018
But there is something else worth remembering, too. Kavanaugh was not only a part of special counsel Ken Starr’s investigation into President Bill Clinton’s relationship with Monica Lewinsky; he was also one of the lead Torquemadas of it – zealous in the pursuit of his goal to the point of cruelty. If Kavanaugh’s nomination survives till Thursday’s scheduled Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, at least one senator should ask him why he thought it was so necessary to ask Clinton such graphic questions about Lewinsky.
Let me be clear: Kavanaugh not only thought Clinton needed to be questioned about his relations with Lewinsky; he also wanted Clinton to be interrogated in the most detailed and specific way possible. He drew up a memo with a series of 10 sexually explicit questions about Clinton’s relationship with Lewinsky. He claimed he wanted to establish Clinton had no defense for his “pattern of behavior.” As a result, “[the] idea of going easy on him at the questioning is thus abhorrent to me,” Kavanaugh wrote in the summer of 1998.
To say that the questions Kavanaugh came up with for Clinton were prurient doesn’t do justice to the gross invasiveness and detail he sought. These queries …
Brett Kavanaugh Was Involved in 3 Different Crises of Democracy
All of which he used to benefit himself.
By Charles P. Pierce, AUG 3, 2018
Of all the perilous nonsense involved in the Great Penis Hunt of 1998, the most singularly indecent episode was the relentless fishing expedition into the suicide of Vincent Foster, the first White House counsel of the Clinton administration. On July 23, 1993, Foster shot himself…
(now 1995) Subsequent investigations failed to stop the onslaught.
In fact, it was this conclusion that was partly responsible for Fiske’s being replaced by Kenneth Starr, who, because he is Kenneth Starr and a hack, opened the investigation again and handed it off to an ambitious lawyer in his office named…Brett Kavanaugh. From <i>The Washington Post</i><i> </i>(emphasis added):
In early 1995, however, Kavanaugh offered his boss, independent counsel Kenneth W. Starr, the legal rationale for expanding his investigation of the Arkansas financial dealings of President Bill Clinton and his wife, Hillary, to include the Foster death, according to a memo he wrote on March 24, 1995. Kavanaugh, then 30, <b>argued that unsupported allegations that Foster may have been murdered gave Starr the right to probe the matter more deeply. </b>Foster’s death had already been the focus of two investigations, both concluding that Foster committed suicide.
“We are currently investigating Vincent Foster’s death to determine, among other things, whether he was murdered in violation of federal criminal law,” Kavanaugh wrote to Starr and six other officials in a memo offering legal justification for the probe. “[I]t necessarily follows that we must have the authority to fully investigate Foster’s death.” …
September 28, 2018 at 12:41 am #295439
- This topic was modified 2 weeks, 4 days ago by Citizenschallenge-v.3.
- This topic was modified 2 weeks, 4 days ago by Citizenschallenge-v.3.
Why Was Kavanaugh Obsessed With Vince Foster?
He needs to explain why he followed right-wing conspiracy theories about the White House aide’s suicide.
By Sean Wilentz
Mr. Wilentz is a professor of history at Princeton.
Sept. 5, 2018September 28, 2018 at 9:27 am #295441
I’m glad to see a topic on this by someone who follow politices. I haven’t been following the “hearings” this week. I’m not saying I don’t believe Christine Ford, it’s just that to me it’s sort of beside the point. If he’s going to considered for Supreme Court, he should be judged on his interpretation of the Constitution, not for something he did over thirty years ago when he was a student. Does he really think that Presidents get a blanket immunity for everything they do while in office, or am I mistaken about that?September 28, 2018 at 10:44 pm #295452
I would have like replying but my post disappears.September 28, 2018 at 11:06 pm #295454
<h1 class=” “>Brett Kavanaugh’s Radical View of Executive Power</h1>
<p class=”subhead”>Trump’s Supreme Court nominee threatens to undermine the Mueller probe.</p>
<p class=”byline”>By COREY BRETTSCHNEIDER</p>
<p class=”timestamp”><time datetime=”2018-09-04T09:36-0400″>September 04, 2018</time></p>
<p class=”timestamp”>Here’s another interesting and a more nuanced read</p>
</footer>September 28, 2018 at 11:09 pm #295455October 1, 2018 at 2:28 pm #295498
Advotacus; I’d like to see high school antics discounted also, but that has to be applied evenly. It obviously is not. And this is not antics. If anyone had done what Kavanaugh was accused of in my High School, it would not just be their future as a powerful judge that would be in question. More like the future of their ability to walk without prosthetic devices.
This could have been settled without Ford’s testimony or any witnesses. As soon as Kavanaugh opened his mouth in his defense he was disqualified. I don’t want a judge on SCOTUS using conspiracy theories to explain things. You wouldn’t have had to listen that carefully to hear him obfuscate the facts, from where he was on weekends and how hard he worked during the week, to his own piece of evidence that said “Party!” on a Thursday night. You wouldn’t even need to listen to the facts to see how he consistently interrupted the Democrats as they asked simple questions, but responded respectfully to his Republican colleagues.October 5, 2018 at 9:53 am #295536
Having looked at some of the coverage since I made that post, I see your point. It’s not a question of nailing him over something his twenty-year-old self did, it’s more about the entire attitude he and the Republicans have about sweeping it under the rug.October 5, 2018 at 11:26 am #295540
I’ve cut back on being sucked into every news item that comes through my feed. It appears some FBI people were leaking information, but it tended to be things like NOT including things they could have, so, what does that prove? I did see something about texts between Kavanaugh and senators about one of the other accusers that allegedly happened before we all heard about them. Again, allegedly, he later testified that he hadn’t heard of these women until it was published in the Times. That would be an outright lie to a senate panel.
But, having not heard that in any mainstream media, it’s hardly worth me even retaining that information. It’s good for nothing except arguing with my crazy uncle. They just voted to move forward. Not much I can do about that.October 8, 2018 at 9:30 am #295563
I agree with you there. One of the reasons I didn’t give a high priority to watching the hearings in the first place is that I knew from the beginning that none of it was going to make any difference. Whatever happened, the Senate was going to vote straight down party lines anyway. They could have had film of Kavannah actually doing it and it wouldn’t have mattered. I listened to a couple of the speeches as they cast their confirmation votes, and the partisanship was terrible. What made me sick is the way Republicans act as if it’s perfectly normal when THEY do it (using their majority to scuttle Obama’s nominee without even giving him a hearing), but when Democrats do it (filibustering to stall Trump’s nominee), it’s evil and un-American. Mitch McConnell was positively gloating when he talked about how Republicans were going to use the whole confirmation hearing against Democrats in the upcoming elections.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.