The Independent State Legislature Doctrine

[jhu72]

On Kav's star turn:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyl ... b11c745511

"That night, the White House team huddled to figure out what to do next. They consulted with Kavanaugh about whether he would agree to the unprecedented move, and yet one that fit the media-driven moment of the era of President Trump: an on-camera interview to broadcast his version of the story, in his own words. He had already discussed the possibility with his wife, Ashley, and they both quickly agreed. He didn’t need much persuading, according to a person who spoke with him at the time.

It was a pretty easy decision, according to one person with knowledge of the process, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to talk about internal deliberations. Their goal was for Kavanaugh to get his story out in his own words.

The White House discussed several options that night and the following morning. For the interview they considered broadcast outlets as well as the Trump administration’s standby: Fox News."

The only people who consider this meaningful are the Trumpnista. There is no surprise that Kavanaugh would be all in. He is more a political operative than a judge. The conflict of interest that a judge would feel, he doesn't.

I would love to know what all the existing SCOTUS judges think of this. I suspect all but Thomas are firmly in favor of an FBI investigation. If Kavanaugh is confirmed, they inherit all of this. Roberts is no doubt, really looking forward to the turmoil.

Serious question...and I will be as succinct as possible. Why does the behavior of a teenager in HS 30+ years ago, discourage the seating for a SCOTUS judge, when there are clearly no issues with his body of work to date? If they guy is a good judge, he's a good judge, no?

I will not agree that he is a good judge - I will stipulate that he is well educated and learned in the law, a pre-requisite for being a judge in this day and age (not always a requirement in the past). He meets the technical bar. I have no problem with his technical qualifications. Being a judge on the supreme court I think requires much more. That is the point of the Senate hearings. I would very much disagree that there were no issues with his testimony. The democrats raised 3 significant issues, well documented in his record, all pointing to his questionable relationship with the truth, his testimony in previous and the current hearing. His answers were not answers in my opinion. In an earlier time, the majority of his own party would not have voted for confirmation just given that testimony. The behavior of a teenager 30+ years is not what he is being judged on. He is being judged on his overall moral qualities as they appear today, there are now significant questions. He is being judged on his relationship with the truth which was already suspect and is now significantly more suspect. Sure kids do stupid things, adults shouldn't. His behavior in the crucible shows he doesn't think well on is feet, he has trapped himself. So no, I would not vote for him and I haven't even considered his positions on the questions of the day.

There are plenty of other conservative judges.

[holmes435]

Serious question...and I will be as succinct as possible. Why does the behavior of a teenager in HS 30+ years ago, discourage the seating for a SCOTUS judge, when there are clearly no issues with his body of work to date? If they guy is a good judge, he's a good judge, no?

It depends on what someone actually did as a teenager in HS 30+ years ago. Certainly there are differences between being overly aggressive in pursuing a woman vs. drugging and raping them, especially if you came clean about being a bit of a partier in HS and owned up to it.

The other issue is if he is currently lying about it. That definitely should affect whether he is fit for office.

[Bandito]

Serious question...and I will be as succinct as possible. Why does the behavior of a teenager in HS 30+ years ago, discourage the seating for a SCOTUS judge, when there are clearly no issues with his body of work to date? If they guy is a good judge, he's a good judge, no?

It depends on what someone actually did as a teenager in HS 30+ years ago. Certainly there are differences between being overly aggressive in pursuing a woman vs. drugging and raping them, especially if you came clean about being a bit of a partier in HS and owned up to it.

The other issue is if he is currently lying about it. That definitely should affect whether he is fit for office.

Dude. There is no evidence whatsoever to these accusations. Why are you promoting guilty until proving innocent? The third accuser's story is so over the top. So you are saying Kav led a gangrape club in high school? The Dems just sunk themselves.

[Lax Fidelis]

This question is addressed to those who have been closely following the nomination process. An article that I read earlier today stated that Mitch McConnell told Trump to not nominate Kavanaugh. Anyone know why Mitch recommended that?

As for OD ignoring the Senate leader's advice, what's new? A king doesn't need counselors when he's a very stable genius.

[Bandito]

This question is addressed to those who have been closely following the nomination process. An article that I read earlier today stated that Mitch McConnell told Trump to not nominate Kavanaugh. Anyone know why Mitch recommended that?

As for OD ignoring the Senate leader's advice, what's new? A king doesn't need counselors when he's a very stable genius.

YAWN. Isn't it time for the early bird special?

Where's the evidence? Provide evidence. Provide Evidence of wrong doing. There is no evidence of any of these accusations. How stupid are you to believe these women? They hired a porno lawyer to represent them- You know Porn, is practically sex slavery in a lot of cases.

[jhu72]

Chips -- Presumably the strategy for Avenatti is to get enough questions raised so that Senate Judiciary is finally forced to ask for an FBI investigation.

From that perspective, seems like a very effective document.

Would not be surprised if another part of the strategy will be a media interview tonight from the accuser.

Yuck. I guess you're right, but that just makes it sound even more like a political hit job with no facts to stand behind it, which is why it has credibility issues to begin with. I think a more thoughtfully drafted statement would have been more credible and therefore more effective. Maybe it gets the job done anyway; we'll see.

My reading of it is that he is doing a lot of signaling. He threw a number of things into the mix that weren't germaine to his case. He is a mixed bag. He is a diversion. The right can spend their time chasing his droppings. Just think of him as DJT.

[frmanfan]

g, you have to answer this, you're the only one whose legal opinion (here) I put any stock in.

Not that he wants to, but could Trump announce that he is telling Sessions to appoint a special counsel to get to the bottom of all this? Tell Mitch to hold his vote on Monday, if it turns out the special counsel finds out that Kav has been lying to the Senate all along, and he is confirmed, we go ahead and impeach him. But the counsel has total power to investigate the past of anybody, if Kav is telling the truth, a lot of perjury charges are going to show up.

That might just flush out the liars (Kav or the ladies).

[jhu72]

This question is addressed to those who have been closely following the nomination process. An article that I read earlier today stated that Mitch McConnell told Trump to not nominate Kavanaugh. Anyone know why Mitch recommended that?

As for OD ignoring the Senate leader's advice, what's new? A king doesn't need counselors when he's a very stable genius.

This is well documented, White House insiders had leaked this to the press weeks ago, well before the hearings began. McConnell knows a tough sell (confirmee) when he sees one. He is a realist and an SOB.

[seacoaster]

The women of Holton-Arms are telling their own stories to Vanity Fair.

Yes:

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/09 ... -kavanaugh

[Bandito]

We won
You lost
President Trump gets to select the next SCOTUS Justice. You do not
Sit down and Shuddup!

[tech37]

The women of Holton-Arms are telling their own stories to Vanity Fair.

Yes:

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/09 ... -kavanaugh

Nice pic of Gillibrand, Keith Ellison's buddy. No hypocrisy there!

[ggait]

Not that he wants to, but could Trump announce that he is telling Sessions to appoint a special counsel to get to the bottom of all this?

First, note that the Dems and the accusers are all screaming/begging for an FBI investigation. So the last thing that Trump is going to do is call for any kind of investigation.

Second, there's no apparent need for a special/outside counsel. Again, the Dems and the accusers would be thrilled to have Trump's DOJ/FBI do it. The only reason you'd go special/outside counsel is if you thought the DOJ/FBI would be conflicted or otherwise unable to do an objective review.

I think the confirm then impeach gambit is just too goofy to fly. Especially in light of the Garland affair where the SCOTUS went for many many months with only 8 justices.

Seems like everyone knows that BK will not survive an investigation. So the GOP calculus is to drop him and go with another of the two dozen conservative Fed Society types waiting in the wings. Or muscle BK through because they can and damn the consequences.

A locked in conservative SCOTUS majority has been a GOP wet dream since the 1970s and they are within inches of getting that long game objective completed. So it may make total sense to go ahead and just do it. BK would be there for decades -- just like Thomas has been -- and failing to push BK through would nick off the base and evangelicals who could care less about #metoo.

[Trinity]

Trump’s press conference just killed Brett. But the Kurds got 4 questions.

[Trinity]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/suprem ... gh-n913581

Here is #4. From the 90s.

[jhu72]

Trump’s press conference just killed Brett. But the Kurds got 4 questions.

Sure sounded like he is getting ready to throw the virgin under the bus. Would not surprise me.

[jhu72]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/suprem ... gh-n913581

Here is #4. From the 90s.

It's over. He is dead. This is someone he socialized with. I will be surprised if he shows up tomorrow. This is now something I have to believe his wife is aware of -- a serious drinking problem.

Interesting that this is an anonymous Republican source.

[Trinity]

The new charge is from 1998 when Brett was attacking Clinton for Ken Starr.

[Typical Lax Dad]

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/suprem ... gh-n913581

Here is #4. From the 90s.

It's over. He is dead. This is someone he socialized with. I will be surprised if he shows up tomorrow. This is now something I have to believe his wife is aware of -- a serious drinking problem.

Interesting that this is an anonymous Republican source.

Video of Kavanaugh tanked at party found!!

[wahoomurf]

Kavanagh let Hannity and Miller choose FOX NEWS as the proper venue for Kavanagh to embarrass himself If he's such a brilliant jurist and thinker, how did he allow that to happen? Wasn't he aware that FOX NEWS was considered by a few folks, ground zero for committing then covering up sexual crimes?

And I hope he understands that his failure to answer questions about "sexual assault" was bizarre. Either he didn't hear the questions or he doesn't understand the difference between the word/act known by many as "sexual intercourse". While was a late starter, it's an experience that's fairly easy to learn. Surprised he still doesn't understand what that word means.

https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/20 ... EzNzY3OAS2

[DocBarrister]

Normally, five allegations of sexual assault or misconduct would be enough to sink a SCOTUS nomination, but we live in an era in which the POTUS himself has been accused of sexual assault or misconduct by up to 19 women. So what’s a mere five accusations?

DocBarrister