Dianne Feinstein Withholding Letter Accusing Brett Kavanaugh of Sexual Misconduct

[HomerJS]

Hmm, this is interesting. I'm assuming the other "REDACTED" in the room is Mark Judge, and from what's in the letter it sounds like he was actively trying to stop Kavanaugh? That hasn't been discussed much in the news...has it? He's been characterized as a shitty guy and an enabler, but my reading of this letter shows that (if Ford's recollection is true):

a) At some point Mark Judge said "Stop"
b) He jumped on top of Kavanaugh and Ford on the bed, which had the effect of getting her out from underneath Kavanaugh
c) He "scrapped" with Kavanaugh after Ford was loose, which had the effect of letting her collect her things and leave.
d) He was "extremely uncomfortable" seeing Ford after the fact, which means he must have remembered what happened (and might have felt remorseful?)

That doesn't sound like an enabler. For all the media characterization of Mark Judge as an all-around shitty guy, he may have prevented a rape from occurring. Going off the letter alone, it would be impossible to conduct any hearing without Mark Judge present, providing testimony under oath. Ideally, that would be handled by a seasoned investigator (or at least lawyers retained by either Party) and not politicians.

Mark Judge needs to be present.

That's why I want people to actually read it. There is too much detail in this letter and I find her story credible. Add to that see told the story back in 2012 when Kavanaugh was not even in the picture.

This is why all involved parties need to be questioned under oath by the FBI. Don't give me the delay bullshit. It can be done in a few weeks and if Kavanaugh is innocent he will be confirmed before the next SC session.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Now it's one trick pony insults. Cut n paste away.

One trick is more than sufficient to deal with you.

 

[fskimospy]

That's why I want people to actually read it. There is too much detail in this letter and I find her story credible. Add to that see told the story back in 2012 when Kavanaugh was not even in the picture.

This is why all involved parties need to be questioned under oath by the FBI. Don't give me the delay bullshit. It can be done in a few weeks and if Kavanaugh is innocent he will be confirmed before the next SC session.

No one can seem to explain to me why the person who is supposedly lying is pressing for the FBI to interview her, which would expose her to potential felony charges while the guy who is totally telling the truth wants nothing to do with it. Does she really like prison food? Does she want to spice up her life story for an autobiography?

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Yeah I meant Garland. Doing that would help heal wound and get Republicans a 90% version of Kavanaugh along with reforming the rules.

Going back to 60 would force less of an ideologue and a more mainstream candidate which is why Obama chose him.

Going back to a 60 vote confirmation process would take a bipartisan agreement that would take a supermajority vote to change in the future. It might be possible, but not in the hyperpartisan atmosphere we have today.

 

[HomerJS]

No one can seem to explain to me why the person who is supposedly lying is pressing for the FBI to interview her, which would expose her to potential felony charges while the guy who is totally telling the truth wants nothing to do with it. Does she really like prison food? Does she want to spice up her life story for an autobiography?

Even the FBI say liars don't insist on their involvement.

 

[HomerJS]

Going back to a 60 vote confirmation process would take a bipartisan agreement that would take a supermajority vote to change in the future. It might be possible, but not in the hyperpartisan atmosphere we have today.

I think that is a Senate rule they can change when they want. I though that's how it went from 60 to majority.

 

[fskimospy]

I think that is a Senate rule they can change when they want. I though that's how it went from 60 to majority.

Guys, the 60 vote threshold is gone and it's never coming back. Ever. (I for one am very happy about this) Once you violate a norm like that there's no going back.

You can't put that genie back in the bottle and the filibuster's days are numbered across the board. If the senate reinstates the 60 vote threshold all it takes is a 51 vote majority of senators to change it back to 50 the next time it's convenient. There is no way to make it stick anymore absent a constitutional amendment, which isn't happening.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

I think that is a Senate rule they can change when they want. I though that's how it went from 60 to majority.

They can, but why do it if the other party would just change it back, if /when it does change back.

 

[Jhhnn]

I honestly don’t know.

On the one hand, I recognize that the #metoo movement has raised an awareness and reckoning around a systemic problem in our society that’s dismissed victims of rape and sexual assault.

I also recognize there is an incredibly inconsistent barometer by which we express outrage over this topic.

I was also a latch key kid of the 80s. I knew of parties like this and heard the stories of who hooked up with who, to include the girls that regretted it or gained “reputations”. I also remember coaches and other adults, to include some mothers, enabling and validating this behavior. “Boys will be boys”. A decade fueled by growing sexuality in music, comedy movies that literally normalized sexual assault (Animal House, Porky’s, the John Hughes movies), etc. At these parties, there was alcohol, sex was on the menu and kids irresponsibly pushed boundaries.

As for Kavanaugh, this isn’t about sexual assault. This is about Democrats getting payback for McConnell blocking Garland and also to block the nomination of a SCOTUS appointment by an illegitimate President, one that will tip the balance of the court for a generation and potentially protect him from repercussions for his actions.

What this is really about is Trump.

Where do we go from here? An honest conversation instead of political theater would be a great start.

This isn't about Trump. He just picked from the list the Federalist Society sent him. It's about McConnell & the GOP agenda. It's about the means they'll use to implement it. It's about the way they've increasingly abused the system & the people to serve the interests of their ultra wealthy right wing benefactors. Having a SCOTUS that will serve those interests above all others is their goal, make no mistake about it.

That's what you're endorsing if you're endorsing Kavanaugh & the nefarious way McConnell has engineered this opportunity.

 

[Jhhnn]

Guys, the 60 vote threshold is gone and it's never coming back. Ever. (I for one am very happy about this) Once you violate a norm like that there's no going back.

You can't put that genie back in the bottle and the filibuster's days are numbered across the board. If the senate reinstates the 60 vote threshold all it takes is a 51 vote majority of senators to change it back to 50 the next time it's convenient. There is no way to make it stick anymore absent a constitutional amendment, which isn't happening.

I'm sure Putin's boys love it, too. Our own radical right will be free to burn whatever they want when they're in power, like now. Policy will flip flop constantly creating systemic instability. Might as well just give up on foreign policy entirely because we'll have no credibility.

 

[fskimospy]

I'm sure Putin's boys love it, too. Our own radical right will be free to burn whatever they want when they're in power, like now. Policy will flip flop constantly creating systemic instability. Might as well just give up on foreign policy entirely because we'll have no credibility.

Who knew that the only thing supporting US credibility in foreign policy was the filibuster? This is especially impressive considering the limited foreign policy powers Congress has. As for policy flip-flops creating systemic instability how exactly do you think parliamentary democracies are run? You realize there's no filibuster there and it's simple majorities for everything, right? Amazing how the rest of the democratic developed world has avoided collapse for so long!

The filibuster is a governance disaster, turning an already highly undemocratic body into an even less democratic one. The sooner it goes the better.

 

[hal2kilo]

Who knew that the only thing supporting US credibility in foreign policy was the filibuster? This is especially impressive considering the limited foreign policy powers Congress has. As for policy flip-flops creating systemic instability how exactly do you think parliamentary democracies are run? You realize there's no filibuster there and it's simple majorities for everything, right? Amazing how the rest of the democratic developed world has avoided collapse for so long!

The filibuster is a governance disaster, turning an already highly undemocratic body into an even less democratic one. The sooner it goes the better.

Now if we could really just get rid of the senate or change it's format, we might truly have representative government. Such an anachronistic joke. I mean seriously the balance of the supreme court is being decided by a committee with 2 clowns in their mid 80s that were there when the Anita Hill travesty was allowed to happen, and they haven't learned an F'n thing since.

 

[Jhhnn]

Who knew that the only thing supporting US credibility in foreign policy was the filibuster? This is especially impressive considering the limited foreign policy powers Congress has. As for policy flip-flops creating systemic instability how exactly do you think parliamentary democracies are run? You realize there's no filibuster there and it's simple majorities for everything, right? Amazing how the rest of the democratic developed world has avoided collapse for so long!

The filibuster is a governance disaster, turning an already highly undemocratic body into an even less democratic one. The sooner it goes the better.

You really don't get it. Most of the population lives in a minority of states. There always will be a natural majority in the Senate for low population states. Those states are overwhelmingly GOP. And they're selling out America to their wealthy right wing donors.

What was once a feature that protected low population states is now the only tool that more populous states have in the Senate. Think about it.

 

[hal2kilo]

You really don't get it. Most of the population lives in a minority of states. There always will be a natural majority in the Senate for low population states. Those states are overwhelmingly GOP. And they're selling out America to their wealthy right wing donors.

What was once a feature that protected low population states is now the only tool that more populous states have in the Senate. Think about it.

Thus my post above.

 

[fskimospy]

You really don't get it. Most of the population lives in a minority of states. There always will be a natural majority in the Senate for low population states. Those states are overwhelmingly GOP. And they're selling out America to their wealthy right wing donors.

What was once a feature that protected low population states is now the only tool that more populous states have in the Senate. Think about it.

If you look at how the filibuster has been used historically it has been used far, far more often to prevent progressive legislation from being adopted than the other way around. There's a reason why McConnell didn't get rid of the legislative filibuster, he knows it's one of the best weapons the right has.

 

[Starbuck1975]

This isn't about Trump. He just picked from the list the Federalist Society sent him. It's about McConnell & the GOP agenda. It's about the means they'll use to implement it. It's about the way they've increasingly abused the system & the people to serve the interests of their ultra wealthy right wing benefactors. Having a SCOTUS that will serve those interests above all others is their goal, make no mistake about it.

That's what you're endorsing if you're endorsing Kavanaugh & the nefarious way McConnell has engineered this opportunity.

I thought it was fairly well accepted that Kavanaugh was the least preferred of the long game Federalist Society and was only nominated because Trump perceived Kavanaugh as being most advantageous to him personally.

 

[Jhhnn]

I thought it was fairly well accepted that Kavanaugh was the least preferred of the long game Federalist Society and was only nominated because Trump perceived Kavanaugh as being most advantageous to him personally.

So what? He was one of several advanced by the Federalist Society & the GOP wants him, bad. There's no way he'll be an impartial judge of much of anything other than perhaps criminal procedure.

 

[Starbuck1975]

Now if we could really just get rid of the senate or change it's format, we might truly have representative government. Such an anachronistic joke. I mean seriously the balance of the supreme court is being decided by a committee with 2 clowns in their mid 80s that were there when the Anita Hill travesty was allowed to happen, and they haven't learned an F'n thing since.

We have a representative government. Go ahead and change the electoral college and Senate and SCOTUS balance and anything else that triggers you, and all that will happen is the political polarity will shift to new opposing poles. I believe you live in Washington state. Corporate libertarianism versus democratic socialism is the next battleground, which you should appreciate because Amazon and Boeing have a tendency to slap down the “will of the people” in an overwhelmingly blue state regularly. How did that head tax work out.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

Now if we could really just get rid of the senate or change it's format, we might truly have representative government. Such an anachronistic joke. I mean seriously the balance of the supreme court is being decided by a committee with 2 clowns in their mid 80s that were there when the Anita Hill travesty was allowed to happen, and they haven't learned an F'n thing since.

Big surprise, a hate America leftist hates our government and the Constitution and wants it changed to something that gives his side more power.

 

[OutHouse]

Here's a timeline...
1982...something happened.
1983,1984,1985,1986,
1987,1988,1989,1990,
1991,1992,1993,1994,
1995,1996,1997,1998,
1999,2000,2001,2002...she said nothing.
July 25,2003: President
George W. Bush nominated Kavanaugh to the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C Circuit...she said nothing.
2004,2005...she said nothing.
May 11,2006: The United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary recommended confirmation. Kavanaugh confirmed by the United States Senate...she said nothing.
June1,2006: Sworn in by Justice Anthony Kennedy...she said nothing.
2007,2008,2009,2010,
2011...she said nothing.
2012...she "remembered" something happened in 1982 yet she said nothing.
2013,2014,2015..she said nothing.
2016,2017,2018: Liberal activist, Anti-Trump protester
2018: With Kavanaugh's confirmation looming she thinks she should say something.
She's had a degree in Clinical Psychology?
Oh,the irony.
(Copied)

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

After due consideration and with all proper respect I think both parties should go fuck themselves.

The Republicans because they keep screwing the process over and over and the Dems, Feinstein at least, because they threw Ford under the bus as they Anita Hill 25 years ago. Both wanted to remain anonymous but when push came to shove they were used.

This woman is going to have to live with the adverse consequences (and that is what they will be) because her purpose in all this is to use her situation and the Reps will eat her alive now that she's exposed.

Shame on these people. We certainly have the government we deserve because we allow this and more wrongs.

 

[Josephus312]

No "little buddy" here, i'm not your penis.

Don't try to be clever, you'll need to gain at least 20 IQ points to pull it off little buddy.

 

[Jhhnn]

After due consideration and with all proper respect I think both parties should go fuck themselves.

The Republicans because they keep screwing the process over and over and the Dems, Feinstein at least, because they threw Ford under the bus as they Anita Hill 25 years ago. Both wanted to remain anonymous but when push came to shove they were used.

This woman is going to have to live with the adverse consequences (and that is what they will be) because her purpose in all this is to use her situation and the Reps will eat her alive now that she's exposed.

Shame on these people. We certainly have the government we deserve because we allow this and more wrongs.

Both sides!

 

[Starbuck1975]

Both sides!

He’s correct

 

[Jhhnn]

He’s correct

Says the forum King of bothsiderism.