US Politics: Judge Dread

[Martell Spy]

 

 

Senators digging in for last stand in Kavanaugh confirmation fight

POLITICO spoke to five people inside and outside the White House involved with the Kavanaugh nomination process.

POLITICO spoke to five people inside and outside the White House involved with the Kavanaugh nomination process.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/30/kavanaugh-response-senate-confirmation-854297

Quote

 

“There’s no walking this thing back,” Steve Bannon, the former chief White House strategist, said in an interview Sunday night. “You get Kavanaugh, you’re going to get turnout. You get turnout, you’re going to get victory. This is march or die.”

Democratic activists, meanwhile, reminded voters over the weekend to keep the pressure on three Republican senators — Jeff Flake of Arizona, Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine — who they noted had so far agreed only to a delay but could still vote to confirm Kavanaugh.

The aggressive pro-Kavanaugh push, however, comes as White House officials and a separate, external war room that has been formed around Kavanaugh — including Bill Burck, a former counsel to President George W. Bush, as well as Leonard Leo, executive vice president of the Federalist Society — are fighting what some of them conceded to be an uphill battle in which time is not on their side.

“Seven days is an eternity,” said a Kavanaugh ally, noting a growing concern that phony allegations might surface. “No good things can happen to Kavanaugh in that time except for calling the vote.”

 

 

 

[OldGimletEye]

3 hours ago, Martell Spy said:

The Republican Party Abandons Conservatism

The conservative virtues remain real virtues, the conservative insights real insights, and the conservative temperament an indispensable internal gyro keeping a country stable and sane.

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/republican-party-conservative/571747/

 It just seems like the Republicans can never find a true conservative.

Maybe he's like brigadoon or something. He arises out of the mist about every 100 years or so and then poof he's gone.

[SweetPea]

Prosecutor Rachel Mitchell has released her report. It's worth reading through her notes to see how extremely weakly Dr. Ford's accusations are supported by evidence, with many contradictions, and key events missing from her memory. 

[mormont]

Um, I think neither the excitable Tweeter nor you have properly read that document. 

The prosecutor says that the evidence would be insufficient to prosecute in a court of law, because that's the only judgement she's qualified to make. She then immediately undermines herself by going further, and says it doesn't meet the preponderance-of-evidence standard either. But she acknowledges right up front that neither of these legal tests are the test that's actually relevant to whether Kavanaugh is a fit and proper person to be appointed as a SC justice.

This does not qualify as 'exonerating' Kavanaugh. Nor does the later tweet by the same 20-year-old kid you're using as a source, suggesting that the prosecutor believes Ford's claims to be 'potentially fraudulent', have any basis in fact - that kid would be well advised to take that tweet down. He's young, but that level of naivete is dangerous. If, apparently, not uncommon. 

In other words, the report - if genuine - does not approach the actual question at hand: do these allegations, and crucially Kavanaugh's reactions to them, show that he is not meeting the standard to be appointed as a SC justice? That standard is, or at least it should be, very much higher than the standard at which someone would be allowed to walk free from court. Don't you agree? 

It's worth reiterating that even if Dr Ford's allegations cannot be substantiated, Kavanaugh's reactions to them are in themselves utterly disqualifying. His reactions have displayed immaturity, bad temper, open partisanship, lack of honesty, lack of concern for others, disrespect for Senators, evasiveness, entitlement, and generally a concern only for how this might stop him from getting a thing he wants. He has shown the world that he hasn't the temperament to be a dog catcher, let alone a SC justice. 

[OldGimletEye]

14 minutes ago, mormont said:

snip

I will add one other thing here.
Would that prosecutor make a decision to prosecute or not prosecute without a competent law enforcement agency making an investigation first.
I doubt it.
It would have been nice if the FBI had investigated the matter from the get, rather than the Republican Party sandbagging on the issue.
And then once, again, there is the matter that the majority of Republicans simply don't give a crap whether Kavanaugh is or is not guilty. That says a lot about that sorry ass party.

[SweetPea]

31 minutes ago, mormont said:

Um, I think neither the excitable Tweeter nor you have properly read that document. 

The prosecutor says that the evidence would be insufficient to prosecute in a court of law, because that's the only judgement she's qualified to make. She then immediately undermines herself by going further, and says it doesn't meet the preponderance-of-evidence standard either. But she acknowledges right up front that neither of these legal tests are the test that's actually relevant to whether Kavanaugh is a fit and proper person to be appointed as a SC justice.

Well, it's a good thing then that she is not talking about whether Kavanaugh is a worthy person to be appointed as a SC justice. She's talking about whether or not he sexually assaulted someone - and concludes that the evidence pointing in that direction is extremely weak.

Quote

This does not qualify as 'exonerating' Kavanaugh. Nor does the later tweet by the same 20-year-old kid you're using as a source, suggesting that the prosecutor believes Ford's claims to be 'potentially fraudulent', have any basis in fact - that kid would be well advised to take that tweet down. He's young, but that level of naivete is dangerous. If, apparently, not uncommon. 

I don't care about the 20 year old kid at all, I only used his tweets because I didn't have a direct link to the document. I agree, he says things that aren't backed up by the report.

Quote

In other words, the report - if genuine - does not approach the actual question at hand: do these allegations, and crucially Kavanaugh's reactions to them, show that he is not meeting the standard to be appointed as a SC justice? That standard is, or at least it should be, very much higher than the standard at which someone would be allowed to walk free from court. Don't you agree? 

It's worth reiterating that even if Dr Ford's allegations cannot be substantiated, Kavanaugh's reactions to them are in themselves utterly disqualifying. His reactions have displayed immaturity, bad temper, open partisanship, lack of honesty, lack of concern for others, disrespect for Senators, evasiveness, entitlement, and generally a concern only for how this might stop him from getting a thing he wants. He has shown the world that he hasn't the temperament to be a dog catcher, let alone a SC justice. 

Anyone who criticizes his temperament and "immaturity" should be deeply ashamed of themselves. Have you no sympathy at all? People are throwing money at Dr. Ford for being a brave hero (she's received over $700k now in donations).  Everyone's talking about how her life was destroyed, how she's received death threats and so on. Do these people not care that the same thing has happened to Kavanaugh? Do they not care that for two weeks almost every news outlet was talking about him probably being a rapist? How he had to explain to his young daughter that he has not committed sexual assault?

I don't blame him one bit for losing his temper, nor do I think this disqualifies him from the SC. This was an unprecedented deeply personal attack and a smearing of his character. This is not a situation he would have to deal with while working as a SCJ.

[David Selig]

The Republican prosecutor hired by the Republican senators concludes that the Republican nominee is totally innocent. Shocking revelation. 

[Morpheus]

Don’t forget, they only pulled her when she started getting into some potentially damaging areas so they could stroke and caress him and let him be petulant ass to the other side. His temperment does matter, because the majority party would not have let anyone treat them the way he treated the Dems. His behavior can just as easily be interpreted as guilty man who still feels entitled. As for his character, once again, he is shit even before the alleged assault is factored in, a pathological liar, perjurer, partisan hack, “Brett Kavanaugh, good man” is a myth. 

Also, again, this is a job interview, not a criminal trial. “Beyond a reasonable doubt” has no bearing at all, in fact, in a job interview, just the opposite is true, even a hint of potential wrongdoing can lose you a job. The fact is you cannot say with confidence that he did not do these things.

[Larry of the Lawn]

3 hours ago, SweetPea said:

Prosecutor Rachel Mitchell has released her report. It's worth reading through her notes to see how extremely weakly Dr. Ford's accusations are supported by evidence, with many contradictions, and key events missing from her memory. 

Half of the stuff that's listed as "she was unable to remember" wasn't even relevant.  For example, asking her if the polygraph was recorded on audio or video or both. 

On top of that, this doesn't completely exonerate Kavanaugh, it just explains that it would be difficult to charge him with a crime.  

And again, the political bs is that THIS ISNT A CRIMINAL TRIAL, FOR FUCKING 100TH TIME.  Combined with the White House now limiting the FBI investigation, this has become, in Kavanaugh's words, a political hit job.  

[Larry of the Lawn]

1 hour ago, SweetPea said:

Well, it's a good thing then that she is not talking about whether Kavanaugh is a worthy person to be appointed as a SC justice. She's talking about whether or not he sexually assaulted someone - and concludes that the evidence pointing in that 

No she's not.  She's talking about whether or not there's enough evidence to press charges.  Reading comprehension fail on your part.

And no I have no sympathy for someone in Kavanaugh's position.  

[Mexal]

4 hours ago, SweetPea said:

 

Prosecutor Rachel Mitchell has released her report. It's worth reading through her notes to see how extremely weakly Dr. Ford's accusations are supported by evidence, with many contradictions, and key events missing from her memory. 

And? Mitchell didn't do an investigation. She didn't try to corroborate her claims or interview different potential witnesses. She didn't question the accused or poke holes in his memory. She treated the victim as the accuser and she did it in 5 minute increments in a public hearing. Not to mention, half the shit in there doesn't matter and has absolutely nothing to do with her telling the truth about being sexually assaulted by Brett Kavanaugh. If you read that and think "this was a thorough investigation by an independent investigator" then fair enough but to me, that reads like a partisan argument to discredit Ford by a Republican prosecutor from Arpaio's county who was hired by the Republicans specifically for this task because they couldn't do it without looking like 11 angry old men beating on a woman.

[mormont]

2 hours ago, SweetPea said:

Well, it's a good thing then that she is not talking about whether Kavanaugh is a worthy person to be appointed as a SC justice.

Well, then, we agree that the report is irrelevant and your initial post, and much of this one, are pointless. 

Quote

Anyone who criticizes his temperament and "immaturity" should be deeply ashamed of themselves. Have you no sympathy at all?

I mean, anyone who reads my posts, I would like to think, understands that I am quite a sympathetic person. I have a good deal of sympathy for Dr Ford, for example. Do I have much for Kavanaugh? Not really. If I think about how I would feel in his shoes, I come to the conclusion that while I would feel a good deal of stress and unhappiness, it would not justify behaving the way he has done.

Nor does my sympathy, or the lack of it, affect whether his behaviour is disqualifying. The man basically threw a tantrum during his evidence. He is being considered for one of the most high-pressured jobs in the world. If he can't handle this situation, he can't handle the job. 

Quote

How he had to explain to his young daughter that he has not committed sexual assault?

This is just begging the question. Obviously, anyone who believes Kavanaugh is guilty doesn't feel sympathetic about this, because they believe he was lying to his daughter. 

[DMC]

1 hour ago, mormont said:

He is being considered for one of the most high-pressured jobs in the world.

Well, I wouldn't go that far.

[maarsen]

1 minute ago, DMC said:

Well, I wouldn't go that far.

He's applying for a cash for life position. Now his past life as a drunk, torture advocate, and serial sexual assaulter is derailing his chances. There is some stress in his life.

[Martell Spy]

1 hour ago, mormont said:

Well, then, we agree that the report is irrelevant and your initial post, and much of this one, are pointless. 

I mean, anyone who reads my posts, I would like to think, understands that I am quite a sympathetic person. I have a good deal of sympathy for Dr Ford, for example. Do I have much for Kavanaugh? Not really. If I think about how I would feel in his shoes, I come to the conclusion that while I would feel a good deal of stress and unhappiness, it would not justify behaving the way he has done.

Nor does my sympathy, or the lack of it, affect whether his behaviour is disqualifying. The man basically threw a tantrum during his evidence. He is being considered for one of the most high-pressured jobs in the world. If he can't handle this situation, he can't handle the job. 

This is just begging the question. Obviously, anyone who believes Kavanaugh is guilty doesn't feel sympathetic about this, because they believe he was lying to his daughter. 

Was it a tantrum? Or a calculated partisan and tribal call for support? I'm not sure on the answer to that, but it could well be the latter. 

Either way, why would I be sympathetic? If it's the latter, it's a very cynical ploy. If Kavanaugh wanted me to believe him, he wouldn't have spoken that way. He's saying he doesn't give a damn what I think. He only cares what the President and the Republican Senators think.

Invoking Clinton and conspiracy theories is just not a good approach to gain sympathy from your audience, unless your only audience are Trumpite faithful.

[DMC]

5 minutes ago, maarsen said:

He's applying for a cash for life position. Now his past life as a drunk, torture advocate, and serial sexual assaulter is derailing his chances. There is some stress in his life.

My point was I wouldn't describe the actual job of SC justice as one of the most high-pressured in the world - in part because they indeed essentially enjoy tenure for life.

[Martell Spy]

Trump administration sues California over net neutrality law
The decision sets up a high stakes legal bout between the Justice Department and the nation's most populous state.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/30/doj-sues-california-net-neutrality-854298

Quote

 

The Justice Department is suing California to block a recently signed law restoring net neutrality rules that the Federal Communications Commission discarded last year, setting up a high-stakes legal bout between the Trump administration and the nation's most populous state.

The announcement comes immediately on the heels of Democratic California Gov. Jerry Brown’s decision to sign the bill into law. Brown had until midnight on Sunday to approve the measure, which was passed by the state’s legislature in August.

 

 

[argonak]

1 hour ago, Martell Spy said:

Trump administration sues California over net neutrality law
The decision sets up a high stakes legal bout between the Justice Department and the nation's most populous state.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/30/doj-sues-california-net-neutrality-854298

 

And there's the "States Rights" party my friends.   Hilarious.  Their paid assasination of our internet is threatened so they're happy to go all federalist now.  This is why the SC is so damn important to them.  If they can pack the court with their utterly corrupt and without honor ilk, they'll be able to do whatever they want from here on out.  

But they are so incompetantly evil its completly transparent to anyone with half a brain.  Too bad so few of my fellow americans are even that blessed.

[Zorral]

A major reason the DNC is filled with recalcitrant idiots and consequentially, the nation is a rethug disaster that the Dems don't / can't / won't do anything to remedy, because to do so would require changes in the structure of the party, starting at the local levels, that include, most importantly, control over who even gets to run for offices and seats -- which this story shows means candidates the Dem voters themselves want to run and whom they support.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/30/nyregion/democrats-brooklyn-county-committee-seddio.html?

Quote

 

Cheers broke out, setting the tone for Thursday’s chaotic meeting of the Kings County Democratic Committee, where newly elected members, backed by insurgent progressive groups, sought to exert control during the group’s first gathering since the September primary.

The raucous meeting at Kingsborough Community College lasted nearly six hours.

But in the end, every vote and every decision came down to one man: Frank Seddio, the Democratic leader in Brooklyn.

This was mainly possible because of a proxy system that is targeted for reform, and allows committee members to fill out proxy cards before meetings, ceding their votes to other members. . . .

. . . . “We really saw that come to a head. We saw party insiders take advantage of intentionally obscure rules to continue to disenfranchise people and exclude them from the process by way of sprinting through an agenda that wasn’t made public,” she said.

. . . . Still, in Brooklyn, progressives argue that proxy cards continue to prop up the establishment.

Last week, however, Mr. Seddio came under fire after his team sent out misleading fliers. The letters urged committee members to turn over their votes to Mr. Seddio, whose name was preprinted on the proxy, and included the names of elected officials supportive of the effort. But Mr. Seddio never got permission to include some of the officials’ names — some of which were spelled wrong.

“The level of incompetence in trying to be unethical was ridiculous,” said Doug Schneider, a district leader in the 44th Assembly District, whose name was misspelled. Mr. Schneider never gave his support to Mr. Seddio’s effort. . . . 

 

In my own locale, the Dem party broke with the state to a degree, which has been happening in various spots around the state, labeling themselves "independent Democrats" and allied with some of the smaller parties that get on the ballots here, such as the Working Families Party.

 

[IheartIheartTesla]

Imma take a break from the Kavanaugh coverage and note something about the Senate race in Tennessee. According to 538s model, the polls only have Bredesen up by a little, but the 'fundamentals' (such as they are) favor Blackburn. With this in mind, according to them Blackburn is at 60% chance to win in TN. So this is one of those places where the claim is that the partisan lean of TN (~23 points) will overwhelm the lead in the generic ballot, so that the polls may be off by ~ 3 points.

Seems to be one of those few cases where there is an explicit case that the polls are off. Guess we'll have to wait and see....