​ 🏛️ ​Official Supreme Court nomination thread - Amy Coney Barrett (2 Viewers)

[toshiba]

So you think Kavanaugh is not going to be on the SC?

If you're asking me ... he will not be on the SC.

I was asking you and thanks for you answer.

If there is not a throughout in investigation into these allegations, I hope you are right,

 

[The Commish]

Not addressing what Kavanaugh did at all.

I'm saying something questionable at some level can be found on anyone. Not necessarily sexual. 

Of course this is true.  It's as true today as it's ever been since this process started.  The key is the bold....as it's always been.  We aren't setting some new precedent here.

 

[toshiba]

Exactly, it is just an attempt to equate all accusations as the same.  Pretty pathetic!

Not at all. All accusations are NOT the same. Most sexually-related accusations have the same initial effect, however.

Lack of a proper investigation and every attempt to keep the original planned votes?  That was the current initial effect, good thing that changed!

 

[parasaurolophus]

I think it would be great if these allegations were investigated and found to be fabricated.

I think that would be awful. 

 

[Doug B]

That said, it's worth remembering why Kavanaugh and the GOP are in this mess. The #metoo movement was started in part because of Donald Trump, leader of the GOP. The degradation of political discourse and our immediate reaction to stories (assuming bad faith, drawing bright lines, getting mad at each other) is because of Donald Trump, leader of the GOP. The blatant, unapologetic deployment of political tactics to engineer the ideological bent of the Supreme Court is because of the Merrick Garland fiasco. They made their bed.

All true. But everyone - all of America - has to lie in that bed now. Who started the mess doesn't matter now that we're well enveloped in it... who's going to end it?

 

[Doug B]

Then you look into what the actual wrong is, and you judge from there. There is a threshold of misconduct which gives your normal American a gut punch. Nobody is going to derail a nominee on trivialities.

I hope you're right. We will see over time.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Agreed. But #metoo is a single bucket without nuance. Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstein get thrown in with Al Franken and Aziz Ansari. Someone on the set of Arrested Development threw Jeffrey Tambor in there for things he said on set. Tambor's accusation didn't really gain traction, but the accusation was made all the same.

This is a flat out lie and betrays quite a bit of ignorance about the movement. 99% of what I've seen from activists seems to keep things in the proper perspective and understands that there are huge differences in the severity of different allegations.  The only people acting like this is a serious problem are those that seem preemptively worried that this might happen.

Just look at the four people you chose as examples.  Ansari will be fine. He's back doing stand-up, and Netflix says he's welcome to come back for another season of Master of None.  Cosby and Weinstein were destroyed, as they should have been.  And you grossly mischaracterize what happened to Tambor. The allegations against him were far more serious than just what he said on set, and spread across both of his recent shows; he was actually fired for stuff he said and did on Transparent, the Arrested Development stuff came after and just further damaged his reputation which is deadly for him because people used to perceive him as a great guy.

Here's the thing: for all this hand-wringing, has anyone had their career damaged in a way that seems unfair or out of proportion to any harm caused after allegations were investigated thoroughly?  I can't think of a single one.

 

[Doug B]

Agreed. But #metoo is a single bucket without nuance. Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstein get thrown in with Al Franken and Aziz Ansari. Someone on the set of Arrested Development threw Jeffrey Tambor in there for things he said on set. Tambor's accusation didn't really gain traction, but the accusation was made all the same.

Square these two statements up for me 

I simply think even the attempt to lump verbal statements into the #metoo bucket was distasteful enough. But yes, it essentially self-corrected in Tambor's case.

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

Agreed. But #metoo is a single bucket without nuance. Bill Cosby and Harvey Weinstein get thrown in with Al Franken and Aziz Ansari. Someone on the set of Arrested Development threw Jeffrey Tambor in there for things he said on set. Tambor's accusation didn't really gain traction, but the accusation was made all the same.

Who is doing this? Are they all in a single bucket in your head?

 

[TobiasFunke]

All true. But everyone - all of America - has to lie in that bed now. Who started the mess doesn't matter now that we're well enveloped in it... who's going to end it?

Why in God's name would we want it to end?

 

[Doug B]

The accusation against Kavanaugh is a specific thing. It's irresponsible and damaging to conversations to propose absurd hypotheticals, paint with a broad brush so that an actual thing gets equated with a reasonable thing, and then say that because of my absurd hypothetical we can't take a real view of an actual thing.

No one's saying this at all.

I'm making a prediction about what tactics are likely to be used against SC nominees in the future. The allegations against Kavanaugh are no less legitimate just because they give future politicians ideas on how to oppose a nominee.

 

[Doug B]

This is a poor attempt to minimize what Kavanaugh did. 

Not addressing what Kavanaugh did at all.

I'm saying something questionable at some level can be found on anyone. Not necessarily sexual

Yes, in this thread about Kavanaugh where you're minimizing sexual assault you clearly aren't talking about Kavanaugh at all.

I can't control what you believe. But, no, I'm not talking about Kavanaugh.

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Here's the thing: for all this hand-wringing, has anyone had their career damaged in a way that seems unfair or out of proportion to any harm caused after allegations were investigated thoroughly?  I can't think of a single one.

Al Franken, probably.

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

No one's saying this at all.

I'm making a prediction about what tactics are likely to be used against SC nominees in the future. The allegations against Kavanaugh are no less legitimate just because they give future politicians ideas on how to oppose a nominee.

Like background checks, vetting, hearings, and a vote to confirm? 

What tactic is new here? 

 

[fatguyinalittlecoat]

Maybe Garrison Keiler too.

 

[Doug B]

How many nominees to district and appeals court get approved each year? How many have been approved this year? Society and the Senate have the full capability to say, "These things are serious and these things are not." It's not like the whole system is going to come crashing down because society and the Senate take a hard and serious look at the specific allegations against Kavanaugh.

You may well be right.

As I said, things seem different now. Nominees to lower courts don't seem to get the same level of vetting or stir up the same level of animus as a SC nominee.

 

[Doug B]

No one's saying this at all.

I'm making a prediction about what tactics are likely to be used against SC nominees in the future. The allegations against Kavanaugh are no less legitimate just because they give future politicians ideas on how to oppose a nominee.

This is already a thing

No doubt about it.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Al Franken, probably.

Maybe if it was just the boob-grabbing pic, but after the other stuff came out I think his time was up.

 

[Mongidig]

I think that would be awful. 

You think it would be better if these lady's actually were sexually assaulted?

 

[Doug B]

Not addressing what Kavanaugh did at all.

I'm saying something questionable at some level can be found on anyone. Not necessarily sexual. 

Of course this is true.  It's as true today as it's ever been since this process started.  The key is the bold....as it's always been.  We aren't setting some new precedent here.

There is something new, I think. It has to do with the collection and dissemination of information in 2018 versus, say, before the Internet age. If a nominee needs to be impeded, opponents have to try like hell and dig deep. It's a lot easier to dig deep today that it used to be.

 

[JIslander]

No one's saying this at all.

I'm making a prediction about what tactics are likely to be used against SC nominees in the future. The allegations against Kavanaugh are no less legitimate just because they give future politicians ideas on how to oppose a nominee.

I know its been said here a thousand times, so here's 1,001;  but GORSUCH.

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

There is something new, I think. It has to do with the collection and dissemination of information in 2018 versus, say, before the Internet age. If a nominee needs to be impeded, opponents have to try like hell and dig deep. It's a lot easier to dig deep today that it used to be.

What does the internet have to do with either of the Kavanugh accusers? Did his "opponents" google up some controversy here? 

 

[Doug B]

I know its been said here a thousand times, so here's 1,001;  but GORSUCH.

Pre- #metoo.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

I mean, even low-level public-shaming stuff (e.g. Ansari's date thinking he was pushy and inconsiderate in bed) would be enough to derail a SC nominee IMHO. You don't have to have anyone accuse anybody of anything illegal.

Notice all the guys that are twisting your words around won't answer my question.   Technically, a high school kid could have pinched a girls ### back in the 80's and by todays standard that is sexual misconduct.  I get that's not what Kavanaugh is being accused of but I am trying to ask the question for larger reference.

If there's a pattern with Kavanaugh then I think he should be disqualified easily.  If it's one accusation with a lot of he said she said then not so much but I'm open based on more details of the accusation.   I find it hard to believe he's a Bill Cosby all of a sudden when no one said a word about him for 35 years.  If we expect better conduct of our judges someone should have spoken up long before the SCOTUS nomination happened.  Now it just looks political.

By the way, everyone is focused on the teenage sexual assault allegations because it sounds worse but him lying under oath should disqualify him faster than some 35 year old allegations, IMO.

 

[Mongidig]

Call your republican senators and tell them to call for an FBI investigation then.

I don't care enough to do that. It's gonna be a conservative judge no matter what. I just think it would be fun to put all the hypocrite finger pointers in their place.

 

[JIslander]

Pre- #metoo.

So?  Cosby's fun started in 2015

 

[Sinn Fein]

There is something new, I think. It has to do with the collection and dissemination of information in 2018 versus, say, before the Internet age. If a nominee needs to be impeded, opponents have to try like hell and dig deep. It's a lot easier to dig deep today that it used to be.

It's just as hard to dig deep, but it is easier to dig wide. 

Typical investigations can dig deep, but not wide, and so they miss things on the periphery. 

Now, in Kavanaugh's case, given his known high school history, perhaps a wider swath was needed...

 

[Bruce Dickinson]

I don't care enough to do that. It's gonna be a conservative judge no matter what. I just think it would be fun to put all the hypocrite finger pointers in their place.

Gosh, I wonder why victims of sexual assault are reluctant to come forward.

 

[Mongidig]

Gosh, I wonder why victims of sexual assault are reluctant to come forward.

36 years later?

 

[Bruce Dickinson]

36 years later?

Gosh, I wonder why victims of sexual assault are reluctant to come forward.

 

[fatness]

Montgomery County investigators confirmed Monday they’re aware of a potential second sexual assault complaint in the county against former Georgetown Prep student and Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

While investigators weren’t specific and spoke on background, they said they are looking at allegations against Kavanaugh during his senior year in high school after an anonymous witness came forward this weekend.

This would potentially bring the number to four women accusing Kavanaugh of wrongdoing and comes after Deborah Ramirez, a former Yale college student, stepped forward this weekend to accuse Kavanaugh of exposing himself to her in college, and after attorney Michael Avenatti tweeted out a message saying he represents a woman with “credible information regarding Judge Kavanaugh and Mark Judge.”

https://mont.thesentinel.com/2018/09/24/supreme-court-nominee-kavanaugh-faces-more-allegations

 

[msommer]

Kavanaugh seems to have two credible accusations.  I think they should move on.  They still need to investigate  the validity of the accusations in the background but for now it’s time to move to another candidate for the job.

Seems the right thing to do.

But this Avenatti guy:  he’s a loose cannon at the moment and is quickly becoming the Alex Jones of the left.

https://twitter.com/MichaelAvenatti/status/1044056219084828672?s=20

Alex jones? seriously?

Yeah, not sure I follow either. Where is his "gay frogs" moment? Has he even been caught in saying something false (yet)? I can't remember anything wrt the Stormy thing at least

 

[Doug B]

What does the internet have to do with either of the Kavanugh accusers?

Accusations get disseminated more quickly and get reiterated many, many more times in people's minds in a short period of time. News like this has more immediate reach and more "punch" than it once did.

It's also easier to find people today than it used to be (e.g. the Yale graduates who e-mailed among themselves and spoke to The New Yorker).

 

[Mongidig]

Gosh, I wonder why victims of sexual assault are reluctant to come forward.

I'd be way more likely to believe her if this happened recently. It's just too convenient for her to come forward now when she had many opportunities over the last 36 years. 

 

[Doug B]

I find it hard to believe he's a Bill Cosby all of a sudden when no one said a word about him for 35 years.

Counterpoint, though: Bill Cosby went decades with nothing being said against him.

 

[Bruce Dickinson]

I'd be way more likely to believe her if this happened recently. It's just too convenient for her to come forward now when she had many opportunities over the last 36 years. 

Gosh, I wonder why victims of sexual assault are reluctant to come forward.

 

[toshiba]

I find it hard to believe he's a Bill Cosby all of a sudden when no one said a word about him for 35 years.

Counterpoint, though: Bill Cosby went decades with nothing being said against him.

 

[Doug B]

Yes, but not in the way that's in your head. It's not a political sabotage of trivial issues. It's a background investigation to look at any real issues.

Seriously. Look into it with the Google. Raising serious issues about someone on a lifetime appointment isn't something that just started 2 weeks ago.

It's not a knowledge deficit. I just think it's different landscape out there today (and in the future) for any given SC nominee than it was for Abe Fortas, Robert Bork, etc.

 

[jonessed]

You have to be kidding me.  She couldn’t recall what happened or if it was Kavanaugh until she consulted with her attorney, Michael Avenatti, for six days. 

 

[Bruce Dickinson]

You have to be kidding me.  She couldn’t recall what happened or if it was Kavanaugh until she consulted with her attorney, Michael Avenatti, for six days. 

Gosh, I wonder why victims of sexual assault are reluctant to come forward.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Accusations get disseminated more quickly and get reiterated many, many more times in people's minds in a short period of time. News like this has more immediate reach and more "punch" than it once did.

It's also easier to find people today than it used to be (e.g. the Yale graduates who e-mailed among themselves and spoke to The New Yorker).

These seem like features, not bugs. 

 

[JerseyToughGuys]

Accusations get disseminated more quickly and get reiterated many, many more times in people's minds in a short period of time. News like this has more immediate reach and more "punch" than it once did.

It's also easier to find people today than it used to be (e.g. the Yale graduates who e-mailed among themselves and spoke to The New Yorker).

I think you are mixing effect with cause here. 

 

[msommer]

Al Franken, probably.

Nah, too many reliable cases of grab ### IIRC

 

[Doug B]

Accusations get disseminated more quickly and get reiterated many, many more times in people's minds in a short period of time. News like this has more immediate reach and more "punch" than it once did.

It's also easier to find people today than it used to be (e.g. the Yale graduates who e-mailed among themselves and spoke to The New Yorker).

These seem like features, not bugs.

Not saying they're bugs.

 

[squistion]

You have to be kidding me.  She couldn’t recall what happened or if it was Kavanaugh until she consulted with her attorney, Michael Avenatti, for six days. 

Avenatti is not the attorney for Ramirez.

 

[Doug B]

@Doug B  I'd step away for 5 minutes and ask yourself, "If a Supreme Court nominee is having his nomination slowed down while the Senate considers a sexual assault against him, and I want to condemn the situation, is this the hill that I want to die on?" Maybe wait until what you fear is going to happen, spurious and trivial accusations derailing a nomination, before you go full blazes condemning the idea.

I do not want to condemn the Kavanaugh situation.

 

[squistion]

From the Twitters:

If Trump has 19 sexual assault allegations and is traveling south at 60 mph, and Kavanaugh has 3 sexual assault allegations and is traveling west at 35 mph, how many more allegations do they need before people start believing women?

 

[Bruce Dickinson]

https://mont.thesentinel.com/2018/09/24/supreme-court-nominee-kavanaugh-faces-more-allegations

So far that’s Ford, Ramirez, Avenatti’s unnamed client, and this person.

How many of these allegations have to be true to disqualify Kavanaugh from the Supreme Court?  

How many more of these allegations have to occur for people who previously believed Kavanaugh was of impeccable character to wonder if he’s worthy of the Supreme Court?

How many of you want Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court no matter what?

 

[Doug B]

How many of you want Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court no matter what?

Of those posting in this thread ... I would think the number can be counted on one hand. Might even be zero now.

 

[jonessed]

Avenatti is not the attorney for Ramirez.

I was being sarcastic with the name.