The Independent State Legislature Doctrine

[jhu72]

Collins called the investigation "thorough."

Who knows exactly what the FBI was allowed to do. It seems like the Ramirez claims were given very short shrift and might have been more prove-able than the Ford claims.

Ford's allegations seem to have been given a decent amount of scrutiny -- FBI seems to have talked to Judge and all the other people identified by Ford as being at the gathering. Doesn't mean it didn't happen -- just means (as is often the case) the allegations couldn't be proven. People involved may have been drunk or blacked out (which is essentially unprove-able), folks could be lying, or folks could just not remember from decades ago. It happens.

Although I think Ford's story is more believable than Kav's, I'm surprised Ford's team didn't nail down the location of the house. That's a big hole in her story and you'd think that could have been filled. Wouldn't have been hard to take her on a tour of the inside of the houses that Timmy, Squi, etc. lived in at the time and see if it lines up.

Ronan Farrow or someone else will presumably do that eventually.

Since none of us know, seems to me that the fact that Susan Collins, someone who is a swing vote and definitely not a Trump fan, is telling/credible when she says "very thorough."

I would believe Collins if I were inclined to believe the people who are controlling the flow of information. Which I am not!

[MDlaxfan76]

Anyone on here have an issue with kids getting drunk and stupid in their youth (other than whatever danger that may have been for themselves or others)?

Anyone on here want to claim they themselves never did anything stupid and/or dangerous, especially when adolescent and drunk?

I don't hear either from any posters on this thread.

At least on this thread, that's not the standard anyone is saying we should hold people accountable to, whether for President or for SCOTUS or for Senate, or whatever job.

Just be honest about your youthful mistakes. Learn from them. That's the standard.

For instance, people get TS security clearances all the time who've done various things earlier in their life that are embarrassing...but they need to be honest and open about those errors and not be at risk of repeating them or be potential blackmail targets.

For a SCOTUS position we should, at a minimum, expect 100% integrity and respect for the oath taken to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Fail that test, though, and move on to the next nominee.

Define youth? Adolescent , I understand, but if I did something stupid at age 55, but live to 95, forty more years, is that considered my youth?

Why should stupid things be the playground of only the under 30 crowd

I think you know the answer to your question, as does everyone else.

But let me get a bit more scientific, the insurance companies don't consider us to be as big risk of doing stupid things once we get to age 25. Before that, the brain scientists tells us that the young brain is not yet firing on all cylinders, hasn't reached maturity. And the insurance folks have the data to back that up.

We make "dumb" mistakes because we don't process risks as well as do later on. Add alcohol to the mix, and this is obviously going to be impaired even further.

That doesn't mean we should give everyone under 25 a pass on bad behaviors, but we should at least understand why those behaviors and decision processes are more frequent at those ages and especially so under the influence of alcohol or other substances.

The question for a guy Kavanaugh's age is whether he can be truthful about his mistakes, can he be sorry for any damage he's done to others whether intentionally or inadvertently, and has he cleaned up his act with the perspective of maturity?

But lie about your past transgressions? Disqualifying.

[tech37]

Collins called the investigation "thorough."

Who knows exactly what the FBI was allowed to do. It seems like the Ramirez claims were given very short shrift and might have been more prove-able than the Ford claims.

Ford's allegations seem to have been given a decent amount of scrutiny -- FBI seems to have talked to Judge and all the other people identified by Ford as being at the gathering. Doesn't mean it didn't happen -- just means (as is often the case) the allegations couldn't be proven. People involved may have been drunk or blacked out (which is essentially unprove-able), folks could be lying, or folks could just not remember from decades ago. It happens.

Although I think Ford's story is more believable than Kav's, I'm surprised Ford's team didn't nail down the location of the house. That's a big hole in her story and you'd think that could have been filled. Wouldn't have been hard to take her on a tour of the inside of the houses that Timmy, Squi, etc. lived in at the time and see if it lines up.

Ronan Farrow or someone else will presumably do that eventually.

Since none of us know, seems to me that the fact that Susan Collins, someone who is a swing vote and definitely not a Trump fan, is telling/credible when she says "very thorough."

I would believe Collins if I were inclined to believe the people who are controlling the flow of information. Which I am not!

That's my point. I think that she has had the same doubts as you.

[Bandito]

Anyone on here have an issue with kids getting drunk and stupid in their youth (other than whatever danger that may have been for themselves or others)?

Anyone on here want to claim they themselves never did anything stupid and/or dangerous, especially when adolescent and drunk?

I don't hear either from any posters on this thread.

At least on this thread, that's not the standard anyone is saying we should hold people accountable to, whether for President or for SCOTUS or for Senate, or whatever job.

Just be honest about your youthful mistakes. Learn from them. That's the standard.

For instance, people get TS security clearances all the time who've done various things earlier in their life that are embarrassing...but they need to be honest and open about those errors and not be at risk of repeating them or be potential blackmail targets.

For a SCOTUS position we should, at a minimum, expect 100% integrity and respect for the oath taken to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Fail that test, though, and move on to the next nominee.

Define youth? Adolescent , I understand, but if I did something stupid at age 55, but live to 95, forty more years, is that considered my youth?

Why should stupid things be the playground of only the under 30 crowd

I think you know the answer to your question, as does everyone else.

But let me get a bit more scientific, the insurance companies don't consider us to be as big risk of doing stupid things once we get to age 25. Before that, the brain scientists tells us that the young brain is not yet firing on all cylinders, hasn't reached maturity. And the insurance folks have the data to back that up.

We make "dumb" mistakes because we don't process risks as well as do later on. Add alcohol to the mix, and this is obviously going to be impaired even further.

That doesn't mean we should give everyone under 25 a pass on bad behaviors, but we should at least understand why those behaviors and decision processes are more frequent at those ages and especially so under the influence of alcohol or other substances.

The question for a guy Kavanaugh's age is whether he can be truthful about his mistakes, can he be sorry for any damage he's done to others whether intentionally or inadvertently, and has he cleaned up his act with the perspective of maturity?

But lie about your past transgressions? Disqualifying.

You keep on saying he lied. He has not lied about anything. Dr. Ford is the liar here and Kavanaugh is the victim. Everyone knows this. With your logic, Obama was unfit for the presidency, a man I can almost guarantee you thought was God's gift to this country. He drank a six pack before classes, smoked weed and snorted cocaine. You are a hypocrite and are fixated on the false narrative Brett lied. The FBI investigated and found nothing of the sort. You need to move on

[jhu72]

The FBI admitted they do not go back prior to your 18th birthday

It is now pretty clear the FBI investigation was not intended to do a meaningful investigation and the fault lay with the White House. Only 10 people interviewed, and only 6 known to the public. Those known to the public were, with the possible exception of Mark Judge, not likely to have added anything substantial to the information already known. The other 4 are more interesting, probably Kavanaugh's mom, his wife and two daughters.

Collins called the investigation "thorough."

I will believe it is "thorough" when they (the republicans / trumpnista) release all of the reports to the public, all 7 claimed to exist, including the 302s and I review this myself, and I find it "thorough". But they won't do that, the republicans have too much to hide. They know and have known about Kegnaughs drinking problem. They many also have known about his questionable behavior with women and have been trying to sweep this all under the rug.

Let it go jhu72. I suppose you all are now going to smear the FBI....pot meet kettle Maybe if Comey says it's all good, you'll reconsider your position about a grown man that drank alot as a youthful knucklehead.

No one I have seen has blamed the FBI. Certainly I don't. I blame the lack of thoroughness on those who had the power to control the direction of the investigation -- the White House and republican Senate leadership.

[Bandito]

The FBI admitted they do not go back prior to your 18th birthday

It is now pretty clear the FBI investigation was not intended to do a meaningful investigation and the fault lay with the White House. Only 10 people interviewed, and only 6 known to the public. Those known to the public were, with the possible exception of Mark Judge, not likely to have added anything substantial to the information already known. The other 4 are more interesting, probably Kavanaugh's mom, his wife and two daughters.

Collins called the investigation "thorough."

I will believe it is "thorough" when they (the republicans / trumpnista) release all of the reports to the public, all 7 claimed to exist, including the 302s and I review this myself, and I find it "thorough". But they won't do that, the republicans have too much to hide. They know and have known about Kegnaughs drinking problem. They many also have known about his questionable behavior with women and have been trying to sweep this all under the rug.

Let it go jhu72. I suppose you all are now going to smear the FBI....pot meet kettle Maybe if Comey says it's all good, you'll reconsider your position about a grown man that drank alot as a youthful knucklehead.

No one I have seen has blamed the FBI. Certainly I don't. I blame the lack of thoroughness on those who had the power to control the direction of the investigation -- the White House and republican Senate leadership.

They did 6 FBI background checks on the man and an investigation and found nothing. You need to move on. Take up a hobby or something. Red Wave is coming. GOP Senators need to stay near their security details. Liberals are dangerous people and there will be riots, assaults and crimes committed once Kav is confirmed.

[youthathletics]

The FBI admitted they do not go back prior to your 18th birthday

It is now pretty clear the FBI investigation was not intended to do a meaningful investigation and the fault lay with the White House. Only 10 people interviewed, and only 6 known to the public. Those known to the public were, with the possible exception of Mark Judge, not likely to have added anything substantial to the information already known. The other 4 are more interesting, probably Kavanaugh's mom, his wife and two daughters.

Collins called the investigation "thorough."

I will believe it is "thorough" when they (the republicans / trumpnista) release all of the reports to the public, all 7 claimed to exist, including the 302s and I review this myself, and I find it "thorough". But they won't do that, the republicans have too much to hide. They know and have known about Kegnaughs drinking problem. They many also have known about his questionable behavior with women and have been trying to sweep this all under the rug.

Let it go jhu72. I suppose you all are now going to smear the FBI....pot meet kettle Maybe if Comey says it's all good, you'll reconsider your position about a grown man that drank alot as a youthful knucklehead.

No one I have seen has blamed the FBI. Certainly I don't. I blame the lack of thoroughness on those who had the power to control the direction of the investigation -- the White House and republican Senate leadership.

Slow your roll there fella.....Ole' bag of bones Feinstein had plenty of time to make sure this was all buttoned up, behind the scenes, for their eyes only back in July.....but she took a calculated risk, she jeopardized women and marginalized Dr. Ford, you have to see that with non-partisan eyes.

The Left and Jeff Flake got what they asked for, an external investigation, primarily to speak with Mark Judge and Swetnick , the FBI did just that and then some. Listen
I agree with you, to an extent, I kinda wish the investigation went on for months, and we actually dug up the skeletons out of Dr. Ford's closet, I honestly do not trust that she was completely forthright with us either; we really know nothing about her....fer criss-sake she deleted all her social media....What the heck

Time to let it go, no prosecutor would take this case, especially with all the (now 7) FBI (latest) findings on this guy.

[seacoaster]

"Since none of us know, seems to me that the fact that Susan Collins, someone who is a swing vote and definitely not a Trump fan, is telling/credible when she says 'very thorough.'"

She doesn't have any experience with this sort of thing, and has never voted against a judicial nominee. She has played a good game of "Look, I'm a moderate, and voice of reason," but has pretty consistently toadied to her caucus and this President when push came to shove. My sense is that she wants the FBI Report to provide cover for her with women voters in Maine, and has cast aside the demeanor and truthfulness issues and hopes, just like the President, that Mainers like Americans will just not care enough about lying, this time from a life-tenured judge.

[youthathletics]

"Since none of us know, seems to me that the fact that Susan Collins, someone who is a swing vote and definitely not a Trump fan, is telling/credible when she says 'very thorough.'"

She doesn't have any experience with this sort of thing, and has never voted against a judicial nominee. She has played a good game of "Look, I'm a moderate, and voice of reason," but has pretty consistently toadied to her caucus and this President when push came to shove. My sense is that she wants the FBI Report to provide cover for her with women voters in Maine, and has cast aside the demeanor and truthfulness issues and hopes, just like the President, that Mainers like Americans will just not care enough about lying, this time from a life-tenured judge.

She also has this hanging over her head...From the TWP on 12-SEPT, Activists raised $1 million to defeat Susan Collins if she votes for Kavanaugh. She says it’s bribery.

[seacoaster]

Yeah, I live up here, right across the border (about two miles from my home) in NH, and read all about it, YA. She wins with 63% of the vote up here. She could be a statesperson and a voice of reason; but she ends up acting all "Margaret Chase Smith," and then rolling over and being with Mitch and the President. Her act is growing old. Take a look at her twitter page, and note the photo at the top:

https://twitter.com/SenatorCollins?ref_ ... r%5Eauthor

The very voters who might someday make her pay for helping to place a hyper-partisan, aging frat boy on the Supreme Court. We'll see.

And of course it's not bribery; in fact, that statement is telling. Opponents mounting a campaign to let a politician know that an issue is important enough to get people that invested in a new Senator is hardly "bribery." And suggesting that it is is simply incumbent hubris.

[jhu72]

"Since none of us know, seems to me that the fact that Susan Collins, someone who is a swing vote and definitely not a Trump fan, is telling/credible when she says 'very thorough.'"

She doesn't have any experience with this sort of thing, and has never voted against a judicial nominee. She has played a good game of "Look, I'm a moderate, and voice of reason," but has pretty consistently toadied to her caucus and this President when push came to shove. My sense is that she wants the FBI Report to provide cover for her with women voters in Maine, and has cast aside the demeanor and truthfulness issues and hopes, just like the President, that Mainers like Americans will just not care enough about lying, this time from a life-tenured judge.

She also has this hanging over her head...From the TWP on 12-SEPT, Activists raised $1 million to defeat Susan Collins if she votes for Kavanaugh. She says it’s bribery.

It is not bribery, it is politics, it is called listening to your constituents.

[jhu72]

The FBI admitted they do not go back prior to your 18th birthday

It is now pretty clear the FBI investigation was not intended to do a meaningful investigation and the fault lay with the White House. Only 10 people interviewed, and only 6 known to the public. Those known to the public were, with the possible exception of Mark Judge, not likely to have added anything substantial to the information already known. The other 4 are more interesting, probably Kavanaugh's mom, his wife and two daughters.

Collins called the investigation "thorough."

I will believe it is "thorough" when they (the republicans / trumpnista) release all of the reports to the public, all 7 claimed to exist, including the 302s and I review this myself, and I find it "thorough". But they won't do that, the republicans have too much to hide. They know and have known about Kegnaughs drinking problem. They many also have known about his questionable behavior with women and have been trying to sweep this all under the rug.

Let it go jhu72. I suppose you all are now going to smear the FBI....pot meet kettle Maybe if Comey says it's all good, you'll reconsider your position about a grown man that drank alot as a youthful knucklehead.

No one I have seen has blamed the FBI. Certainly I don't. I blame the lack of thoroughness on those who had the power to control the direction of the investigation -- the White House and republican Senate leadership.

They did 6 FBI background checks on the man and an investigation and found nothing. You need to move on. Take up a hobby or something. Red Wave is coming. GOP Senators need to stay near their security details. Liberals are dangerous people and there will be riots, assaults and crimes committed once Kav is confirmed.

Prove they found nothing! The FBI is not talking about those 6, nor the most recent. The Senate republicans and Orange Duce are doing all the talking on that point. Let's see the 6 + 1 reports and the 320s filed.

Note: Chuck Schumer this AM said that the republican "characterization" that nothing was found in the first 6 was not true.

[jhu72]

The FBI admitted they do not go back prior to your 18th birthday

It is now pretty clear the FBI investigation was not intended to do a meaningful investigation and the fault lay with the White House. Only 10 people interviewed, and only 6 known to the public. Those known to the public were, with the possible exception of Mark Judge, not likely to have added anything substantial to the information already known. The other 4 are more interesting, probably Kavanaugh's mom, his wife and two daughters.

Collins called the investigation "thorough."

I will believe it is "thorough" when they (the republicans / trumpnista) release all of the reports to the public, all 7 claimed to exist, including the 302s and I review this myself, and I find it "thorough". But they won't do that, the republicans have too much to hide. They know and have known about Kegnaughs drinking problem. They many also have known about his questionable behavior with women and have been trying to sweep this all under the rug.

Let it go jhu72. I suppose you all are now going to smear the FBI....pot meet kettle Maybe if Comey says it's all good, you'll reconsider your position about a grown man that drank alot as a youthful knucklehead.

No one I have seen has blamed the FBI. Certainly I don't. I blame the lack of thoroughness on those who had the power to control the direction of the investigation -- the White House and republican Senate leadership.

Slow your roll there fella.....Ole' bag of bones Feinstein had plenty of time to make sure this was all buttoned up, behind the scenes, for their eyes only back in July.....but she took a calculated risk, she jeopardized women and marginalized Dr. Ford, you have to see that with non-partisan eyes.

The Left and Jeff Flake got what they asked for, an external investigation, primarily to speak with Mark Judge and Swetnick , the FBI did just that and then some. Listen
I agree with you, to an extent, I kinda wish the investigation went on for months, and we actually dug up the skeletons out of Dr. Ford's closet, I honestly do not trust that she was completely forthright with us either; we really know nothing about her....fer criss-sake she deleted all her social media....What the heck

Time to let it go, no prosecutor would take this case, especially with all the (now 7) FBI (latest) findings on this guy.

Who said anything about prosecutions? Not looking for a guilty charge in court. This isn't a court of law.

[seacoaster]

"...there is a big difference between not allowing a vote and what Kavanaugh faced."

Respectfully disagree, Hoo, or agree, but not the way or direction you think.

The Garland business was a remarkable act of extra-constitutional defiance, and an abdication of the Senate's historical role in the process. The Senate majority leader -- elected by the people of Kentucky -- nullified the constitutional prerogatives and actions of a twice elected President. In larger historical terms, McConnell's little bit of shoplifting will loom much, much larger than investigating Kavanaugh, however rough and tumble you think that was. They ignored the basic foundational document.

Elections have consequences? Republicans exposed themselves as frauds on the Constitution, just as they are frauds on the deficit and so many other issues.

[jhu72]

"...there is a big difference between not allowing a vote and what Kavanaugh faced."

Respectfully disagree, Hoo, or agree, but not the way or direction you think.

The Garland business was a remarkable act of extra-constitutional defiance, and an abdication of the Senate's historical role in the process. The Senate majority leader -- elected by the people of Kentucky -- nullified the constitutional prerogatives and actions of a twice elected President. In larger historical terms, McConnell's little bit of shoplifting will loom much, much larger than investigating Kavanaugh, however rough and tumble you think that was. They ignored the basic foundational document.

Elections have consequences? Republicans exposed themselves as frauds on the Constitution, just as they are frauds on the deficit and so many other issues.

+1

[HooDat]

we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

the alternative course for the GOP in 2016 - that the GOP wimped out on - was to hold the vote, and vote no for no reason other than partisanship. I don't see how being a coward (which the GOP was) qualifies as ignoring the Constitution.

would the "stand-up" thing to have done been to hold the vote and let the chips fall where the may? Of course.

is the exact same thing true in the case of Kavanaugh - yes.

But in this case, the dems would have probably lost, so they let lose a smear campaign that I am guessing DiFi knew could not prevail (which is why she held it in reserve), but just might delay things until Nov - and if Ford and Kavs lives got ruined in the process - I don't believe she gave a rats butt.

and this is where I come back to my distinction - no one got smeared or had their life screwed up when McConnell pulled his dirty trick; Kav and Ford did when DiFI pulled hers....

[jhu72]

I see no proof Feinstein did anything inappropriate. I have heard all the supposed evidence from Faux News. Certainly Dr. Ford does not feel Feinstein did anything inappropriate. I have also seen the rebuttal time lines of CNN.


We will indeed have to agree to disagree.

[seacoaster]

A little dose of courage?

https://www.politico.com/amp/story/2018 ... ugh-869443

[Trinity]

Retired SCOTUS John Paul Stevens (R) just popped smoke on Boof Kavanaugh. Unfit.

[tech37]

we're going to have to agree to disagree on this one.

the alternative course for the GOP in 2016 - that the GOP wimped out on - was to hold the vote, and vote no for no reason other than partisanship. I don't see how being a coward (which the GOP was) qualifies as ignoring the Constitution.

would the "stand-up" thing to have done been to hold the vote and let the chips fall where the may? Of course.

is the exact same thing true in the case of Kavanaugh - yes.

But in this case, the dems would have probably lost, so they let lose a smear campaign that I am guessing DiFi knew could not prevail (which is why she held it in reserve), but just might delay things until Nov - and if Ford and Kavs lives got ruined in the process - I don't believe she gave a rats butt.

and this is where I come back to my distinction - no one got smeared or had their life screwed up when McConnell pulled his dirty trick; Kav and Ford did when DiFI pulled hers....

+1

and we really need to find out who leaked Ford's identity...truly, well, deplorable.