(09-18-2018, 01:45 AM)jj82284 Wrote:

(09-17-2018, 10:49 PM)mikesez Wrote: You're correct that this situation is not exactly similar to Merrick Garland. First of all, it's not entirely clear that this is a deliberate delay tactics on the part of Democrats.  It was entirely clear that the Republicans intended to run out the clock on Merrick Garland.  Second of all the Republicans made no specific compalints against Merrick Garland at all.  They never said, "he made such and such decision that we disagreed with" or "he wrote such and such academic paper that we didn't like." They gave him no opportunity to answer any questions.  They gave him no questions  Democrats are at least making complaints about Kavanaugh that are specific to him.

Lol.  Not exactly similar?  One instance was the Senate majority leader using his constitutional role overseeing the senate in the process of advise and consent.  He stated, based on the stance taken by then sitting Vice President of the United States when he was head of the senate Judiciary committee.  Conversely this is a replay of the same disgusting political hit job that plagues certain Republican nominees when the Dems feel like they want to score political points at the expense of someone's life's work.  

As for no evidence, please.  a.) you can call it a stall tactic or a blatant attempt to derail his nomination wholesale.  The fact of the matter is that the Dems see, based on the generic ballot question, that there is an outside chance they could win the senate in November and if they get Kavanaugh pulled then that means that Schumer gets to gavel in a much more moderate even potentially left leaning nominee to fill Kennedy's seat.  b.) This guy has already undergone something on the order of 6 FBI background checks and already been through senate confirmation to the DC circuit court and his name has been out there for a year and this "letter" has been out there for the last 2 months.  It's just a coincidence that the left sat on this until all the hearings were over and we were less than two months away from an election and there is literally no time to in any way give this due process?  I have some swamp land to sell you.  

They Democrats didn't want a real investigation, there's no evidence or testable premise to investigate.  They want this to play out in the court of Public opinion and advance the narrative that republicans are the party of Fred Weatherford.

There's no real connection between what McConnell did and what Biden proposed in 1992. Senator Biden specifically said that they should take up any nomination the day after the election in a lame duck session. McConnell specifically excluded that possibility and in fact intended to ignore anyone Hillary nominated as well if she won and McConnell also remained majority leader.  McConnell created an entirely new precedent of simply not allowing a judge to be added to the supreme Court unless the party of the President and the Majority Leader match.  This is a terrible precedent that is sure to bite us in the future even if it isnt now.

I agree that the letter alleging sexual assault is not really testable in terms of proof, but, like impeachment, Senate confirmation is not a process intended to prove anything.  It is a political process where the judge and jury are the same. The senators don't want to react to stuff that we don't understand, they want us, voters, to be engaged.  They already tried to show that Kavanaugh, about 15 years ago, while working for a President, used confidential documents that his friend stole off of Democrats' computers to give people he liked a heads up on what questions would be asked.  This indicates strongly that he thinks executive officials are allowed to spy on the other political party.  And he played dumb, saying he thought the Democrats wanted his nominees to have advance notice of questions.  Anyone shoukd be able to see the parallels between what he did to serve Bush 43 and what Trump alleges Obama did in spying on his campaign.  This is MUCH more indicative of the type of smarmy, corrupt, nakedly partisan judge he is likely to be, than which parts of which fully clothed girl he and a drunk friend may have groped 35 years ago.  
But the public is fickle.  15 year old female flesh is an easier story to sell.

---

(09-17-2018, 11:33 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote:

(09-17-2018, 10:49 PM)mikesez Wrote: You're correct that this situation is not exactly similar to Merrick Garland. First of all, it's not entirely clear that this is a deliberate delay tactics on the part of Democrats.  It was entirely clear that the Republicans intended to run out the clock on Merrick Garland.  Second of all the Republicans made no specific compalints against Merrick Garland at all.  They never said, "he made such and such decision that we disagreed with" or "he wrote such and such academic paper that we didn't like." They gave him no opportunity to answer any questions.  They gave him no questions  Democrats are at least making complaints about Kavanaugh that are specific to him.

More erudite commentary by our resident True Republican.

Again, asking the wrong questions.
RollerJag only mentioned the process of blacking Garland.  And I agree with him there.
If someone had mentioned anything about Garlands legal opinions, you'd probably see me agreeing that Gorsuch was better to fill that seat.

---

[quote='flsprtsgod' pid='1147627' dateline='1537241621']

---