Trump announces Brett Kavanaugh as his 2nd SCOTUS nominee.

[89Hen]

Over/under on number of days until Avenatti takes a stroll in Fort Marcy Park?

Clintons aren't in office.


BTW, the comments on his Twitter feed are hilarious.

[Skjellyfetti]

Did I say it should?

I don't know if Kavanaugh is guilty or not. Those on the left saying they know he's guilty are full of shit. Same for those on the right saying he's innocent.

I do think the allegations warrant consideration and shouldn't be dismissed out of hand... we disagree. Ok.

[Baldy]

Did I say it should?

I don't know if Kavanaugh is guilty or not. Those on the left saying they know he's guilty are full of shit. Same for those on the right saying he's innocent.

I do think the allegations warrant consideration and shouldn't be dismissed out of hand... we disagree. Ok.

There are "mainstream" elected US Senators who have clearly stated on the record that the burden of proof is on Kavanaugh to prove his innocence. That is, in essence, guilty until proven innocent. That apparently is the new standard according to the Democrats.

[89Hen]

Did I say it should?

I don't know if Kavanaugh is guilty or not. Those on the left saying they know he's guilty are full of shit. Same for those on the right saying he's innocent.

I do think the allegations warrant consideration and shouldn't be dismissed out of hand... we disagree. Ok.

Your last comment is as hyperbolic as mine.

[Chizzang]

Did I say it should?

I don't know if Kavanaugh is guilty or not. Those on the left saying they know he's guilty are full of shit. Same for those on the right saying he's innocent.

I do think the allegations warrant consideration and shouldn't be dismissed out of hand... we disagree. Ok.

There are "mainstream" elected US Senators who have clearly stated on the record that the burden of proof is on Kavanaugh to prove his innocence. That is, in essence, guilty until proven innocent. That apparently is the new standard according to the Democrats.

Senators and Presidents say all kinds of stupid things...
Does everything Trump say that's not in adherence to the Republic "set a new standard for all Republicans" ?

Thanks for your observation



Republic / Rule of Law

[JoltinJoe]

I have a hard time believing that a physician molested hundreds of gymnasts over the decades and none of them reported it.

/s

I have a hard time believing that a college aged adult woman, who graduated 3 years ahead of Kavanaugh, didn't only not report, but was actually still going to high school parties...plural, more than just one where girls were continually drugged and gang raped by several high school boys on several occasions.

But Baldy, you overlook the part where she said she was so concerned about the punch being drugged, that she stopped drinking the punch at these parties. Does that help you believe?

[93henfan]

SEN. KAMALA HARRIS HAS A LOT TO SAY about Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh: The California Democrat's campaign has posted some 3,600 different Facebook ads about him, according to the social media site’s ad archive.

No other senator appears to be doing as much Kavanaugh-related advertising on Facebook.

Ms. Harris, who serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee, had dozens of active Kavanaugh ads up as of Wednesday afternoon, a day before all eyes will be on the committee as senators listen to testimony by Judge Kavanaugh and one woman who has accused him of sexual assault.

The ads are slight variations on the same message, urging voters to sign a petition opposing Judge Kavanaugh.

https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/campai ... 1537991168

I'm sure she'll have an open mind tomorrow.

[JoltinJoe]

Just for the record, I attended many parties in high school -- and there NEVER was a college student/woman at any of them. College kids don't go to high schoolers' parties. Is there anyone here with a different experience?

She was born in 1962 and graduated high school in 1980. Kavanaugh was born in 1965 and graduated high school in 1983. Which means, at the time of these parties in 1981-1982, she was an adult and he was a minor. Perhaps she should be charged with contributing to the delinquency of minors.

[93henfan]

Just for the record, I attended many parties in high school -- and there NEVER was a college student/woman at any of them. College kids don't go to high schoolers' parties. Is there anyone here with a different experience?

She was born in 1962 and graduated high school in 1980. Kavanaugh was born in 1965 and graduated high school in 1983. Which means, at the time of these parties in 1981-1982, she was an adult and he was a minor. Perhaps she should be charged with contributing to the delinquency of minors.

Racist homophobe!

[JoltinJoe]

Just for the record, I attended many parties in high school -- and there NEVER was a college student/woman at any of them. College kids don't go to high schoolers' parties. Is there anyone here with a different experience?

She was born in 1962 and graduated high school in 1980. Kavanaugh was born in 1965 and graduated high school in 1983. Which means, at the time of these parties in 1981-1982, she was an adult and he was a minor. Perhaps she should be charged with contributing to the delinquency of minors.

Racist homophobe!

I'm sorry. Please don't report my post to the moderators.

[Baldy]

There are "mainstream" elected US Senators who have clearly stated on the record that the burden of proof is on Kavanaugh to prove his innocence. That is, in essence, guilty until proven innocent. That apparently is the new standard according to the Democrats.

Senators and Presidents say all kinds of stupid things...
Does everything Trump say that's not in adherence to the Republic "set a new standard for all Republicans" ?

Thanks for your observation



Republic / Rule of Law

Your JSOesque infatuation with Trump is noted.

Trump says a lot of stupid dumb shit, but these people are supposed to be the sane anti-Trump crowd, right?

[Baldy]

I have a hard time believing that a college aged adult woman, who graduated 3 years ahead of Kavanaugh, didn't only not report, but was actually still going to high school parties...plural, more than just one where girls were continually drugged and gang raped by several high school boys on several occasions.

But Baldy, you overlook the part where she said she was so concerned about the punch being drugged, that she stopped drinking the punch at these parties. Does that help you believe?

Well, she only went to 10 of those parties, so there isn't enough of a sample size to analyze.

[Skjellyfetti]

There are "mainstream" elected US Senators who have clearly stated on the record that the burden of proof is on Kavanaugh to prove his innocence. That is, in essence, guilty until proven innocent. That apparently is the new standard according to the Democrats.

This is a job interview. Not a criminal investigation.

If it were a criminal investigation, prosecutors could compel testimony of relevant witnesses like Mark Judge, for example.

[Baldy]

There are "mainstream" elected US Senators who have clearly stated on the record that the burden of proof is on Kavanaugh to prove his innocence. That is, in essence, guilty until proven innocent. That apparently is the new standard according to the Democrats.

This is a job interview. Not a criminal investigation.

If it were a criminal investigation, prosecutors could compel testimony of relevant witnesses like Mark Judge, for example.

This is a quasi-judicial hearing. The people providing testimony are doing so under penalty of perjury. Do a little research on administrative law and get back to me.




HINT: A job interview does not involve providing "testimony" nor are interviews conducted at a "hearing".

[Col Hogan]

Ivy, joe, i’d Love your legal opinion on this one

Senator Jeff Merkley (D-OR) on Wednesday announced that he's seeking an injunction in federal court designed to stop a final vote on Brett Kavanaugh, asserting an obstruction of his constitutional duty to advise and consent on nominees.

Merkley's filing in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia comes as Senate Republicans vow to push ahead with a vote on President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee in the coming days — and hours before a landmark hearing slated with Christine Blasey Ford, who has alleged a decades-old sexual assault by Kavanaugh.


Merkley's bid for an injunction hinges on the Senate's constitutional duty to provide advice and consent on nominees and charges that he's been prevented from fulfilling that due to the withholding of records on Kavanaugh's past service in the George W. Bush administration.

“The events of the past ten days have only underscored how critical it is that the Senate conduct a careful and comprehensive review of a nominee before giving its consent,” Merkley told POLITICO in a statement.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/ ... ote-843080

[Chizzang]

Senators and Presidents say all kinds of stupid things...
Does everything Trump say that's not in adherence to the Republic "set a new standard for all Republicans" ?

Thanks for your observation



Republic / Rule of Law

Your JSOesque infatuation with Trump is noted.

Trump says a lot of stupid dumb shit, but these people are supposed to be the sane anti-Trump crowd, right?

Why are they supposed to be "sane" and the President not..?
and Your inability to take responsibility for your stupid hyperbole duly noted



Trump doesn't make all Republicans stupid
and few stupid Senators don't make all Democrats stupid

[JohnStOnge]

Guys I just don't think the "why didn't they report it" argument flies. I think it's been fairly well documented that the overwhelming majority of sexual assaults go unreported. I think the study at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10. ... 4802239161, for example, appears to be of good quality. I'd have to buy the article to get the specific numbers but the abstract indicates "...few incidents—including rapes—are reported to the police and/or to campus authorities...." And one can Google around. It looks to me like the overwhelming majority of studies on the issue, if not ALL of them, suggest that most sexual assaults are not reported.

I think conservatives really do damage to themselves when they use that line of argument.

[JohnStOnge]

I guess this is as a good a place as any to mention Trump saying during his press conference that he got 52% of the female vote. At least that's what he appeared to have been saying. He was talking about how he thought women were upset with Kavanaugh being attacked and said he got 52%. As soon as he said it I figured he was confusing the support level he got from White women with support from women overall.

So I checked the exit polling and, sure enough, the estimate is that 52% of White women voted for him. But his apparent belief that women are on his side in this or anything else is delusional. We can use the two most recent polls up at RealClearPolitics such that we can readily see subgroup breakdowns to assess that.

The most recent YouGov poll has 35% of women approving of Trump's job vs. 54% disapproving. The most recent Marist poll has 36% of women approving of his job vs. 53% disapproving. The Marist poll also breaks it down so that, if you do some math, you can figure out that the estimates for WHITE women have 43% approving of Trump's job vs. 48% disapproving. He was estimated to be up by 9 percentage points among White women on election day. He's estimated to be down among White women by 5 percentage points now.

And the Marist estimates for White college graduate women are 38% approving vs. 57% disapproving. White college graduate women voted majority Clinton in 2016. But the exit polling estimate for that was only by 51% to 44%. That was a 7 percentage point gap vs. the current Marist poll estimate's 19 percentage point gap.

No, Mr. Trump, you are not doing well among women. And your press conference performance today probably made it worse,

[Rob Iola]

I guess this is as a good a place as any to mention Trump saying during his press conference that he got 52% of the female vote. At least that's what he appeared to have been saying. He was talking about how he thought women were upset with Kavanaugh being attacked and said he got 52%. As soon as he said it I figured he was confusing the support level he got from White women with support from women overall.

So I checked the exit polling and, sure enough, the estimate is that 52% of White women voted for him. But his apparent belief that women are on his side in this or anything else is delusional. We can use the two most recent polls such that we can readily see subgroup breakdowns to assess that.

The most recent YouGov poll has 35% of women approving of Trump's job vs. 54% disapproving. The most recent Marist poll has 36% of women approving of his job vs. 53% disapproving. The Marist poll also breaks it down by so that, if you do some math, you can figure out that the estimates for WHITE women have 43% approving of Trump's job vs. 48% disapproving.

And the Marist estimates for White college graduate women are 38% approving vs. 57% disapproving. White college graduate women voted majority Clinton in 2016. But the exit polling estimate for that was only by 51% to 44%. That was a 7 percentage point gap vs. the current Marist poll estimate's 19 percentage point gap.

No, Mr. Trump, you are not doing well among women. And your press conference performance today probably made it worse,

Economically speaking women are doing better financially under him. So they're coming out on top. Whether they like it or not, so they should just relax and enjoy it.

[JoltinJoe]

Ivy, joe, i’d Love your legal opinion on this one

Senator Jeff Merkley (D-OR) on Wednesday announced that he's seeking an injunction in federal court designed to stop a final vote on Brett Kavanaugh, asserting an obstruction of his constitutional duty to advise and consent on nominees.

Merkley's filing in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia comes as Senate Republicans vow to push ahead with a vote on President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee in the coming days — and hours before a landmark hearing slated with Christine Blasey Ford, who has alleged a decades-old sexual assault by Kavanaugh.


Merkley's bid for an injunction hinges on the Senate's constitutional duty to provide advice and consent on nominees and charges that he's been prevented from fulfilling that due to the withholding of records on Kavanaugh's past service in the George W. Bush administration.

“The events of the past ten days have only underscored how critical it is that the Senate conduct a careful and comprehensive review of a nominee before giving its consent,” Merkley told POLITICO in a statement.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/ ... ote-843080

The federal court must abstain from entertaining issues pertaining to the internal affairs of congress under the "political question" doctrine. See Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969).

"It is well established that the federal courts will not adjudicate political questions. See, e.g., Coleman v. Miller, 307 U. S. 433 (1939); Oetjen v. Central Leather Co., 246 U. S. 297 (1918). In Baker v. Carr, supra, we noted that political questions are not justiciable primarily because of the separation of powers within the Federal Government." (although holding that the issue in front of them was not a "political questions").

[JohnStOnge]

I guess this is as a good a place as any to mention Trump saying during his press conference that he got 52% of the female vote. At least that's what he appeared to have been saying. He was talking about how he thought women were upset with Kavanaugh being attacked and said he got 52%. As soon as he said it I figured he was confusing the support level he got from White women with support from women overall.

So I checked the exit polling and, sure enough, the estimate is that 52% of White women voted for him. But his apparent belief that women are on his side in this or anything else is delusional. We can use the two most recent polls such that we can readily see subgroup breakdowns to assess that.

The most recent YouGov poll has 35% of women approving of Trump's job vs. 54% disapproving. The most recent Marist poll has 36% of women approving of his job vs. 53% disapproving. The Marist poll also breaks it down by so that, if you do some math, you can figure out that the estimates for WHITE women have 43% approving of Trump's job vs. 48% disapproving.

And the Marist estimates for White college graduate women are 38% approving vs. 57% disapproving. White college graduate women voted majority Clinton in 2016. But the exit polling estimate for that was only by 51% to 44%. That was a 7 percentage point gap vs. the current Marist poll estimate's 19 percentage point gap.

No, Mr. Trump, you are not doing well among women. And your press conference performance today probably made it worse,

Economically speaking women are doing better financially under him. So they're coming out on top. Whether they like it or not, so they should just relax and enjoy it.

There's no evidence that they're doing better now than they'd be doing if Hillary had gotten elected. Things like jobs created and wages have basically been in the same trends as they'd been in for years before.

In any case it is what it is. If only women voted Trump would have had no shot to be elected in 2016. And he would be even worse off in that regard now. A substantial majority of women do not like him at all.

I suspect they think, as I do, that he is absolutely disgusting.

[93henfan]

Economically speaking women are doing better financially under him. So they're coming out on top. Whether they like it or not, so they should just relax and enjoy it.

There's no evidence that they're doing better now than they'd be doing if Hillary had gotten elected. Things like jobs created and wages have basically been in the same trends as they'd been in for years before.

Nope.

[CID1990]

Ivy, joe, i’d Love your legal opinion on this one




https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/ ... ote-843080

The federal court must abstain from entertaining issues pertaining to the internal affairs of congress under the "political question" doctrine. See Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969).

Even absent Powell v McCormack, it should be moot anyway -

he claims being denied his role to "advise and consent"... but the vehicle for that is his vote, which is not being denied


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JoltinJoe]

The federal court must abstain from entertaining issues pertaining to the internal affairs of congress under the "political question" doctrine. See Powell v. McCormack, 395 U.S. 486 (1969).

Even absent Powell v McCormack, it should be moot anyway -

he claims being denied his role to "advise and consent"... but the vehicle for that is his vote, which is not being denied


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, assuming he casts a vote, a court would likely say the matter is moot. He could try to avoid that result by abstaining -- claiming an inability to advise and consent -- but that is a real risky move, because a Democrat abstaining effectively amounts to a vote for Kavanaugh.

[JoltinJoe]

I am pretty much disgusted by this tactic. The other day, I had landed on the conclusion hat Kavanaugh had been a dipshit elistist throughout most of his youth and was not deserving of a seat on the Supreme Court.

But these new bullshit allegations really show just how disturbed and evil the left wing -- the so-called "progressive" wing -- of the Democrat party has become. I can't tolerate being associated with them any more. I'm going to register independent. And the Republicans could run Bill Cosby against Kirsten Gillibrand, and I would rather vote for him.

I might continue to vote for Chuck Schumer, you know, because I live in New York, so my vote doesn't really matter. And I think it would be fun sending Schumer back to the Senate, so he can experience, for eternity, what it's like to be the minority party in the post-nuclear option era.

Hey, Chuck, pulling the trigger on the nuclear option -- you still think that was a good idea?

I honestly thought a Blue Wave was coming but, once again, the Democrats can't keep themselves on the rails. I think many people are saying the hell with the Democrats already. I'm seeing it on my social media feed.