Kavanaugh Hearing

Her voting no on confirmation would be the least surprising of the fence sitters IMO.

It's the oddness of Alaska politics - tribes are fairly strongly opposed to Kavanaugh and Alaska is the one state where, electorally, that potentially matters.

 

If you are a lawyer, you seem to have a hard time understanding what a witness actually is. He wasn't a witness the event, so they don't care what he has to say. If he was actually at the party, then that would be different. This isn't a criminal investigation so unless he was there, it doesn't matter what he wants to say.

Relevant knowledge is not a second or third hand account of something they heard 35 years ago. It is being in the room when it happened. That is especially true now that Difi choose not to share the first accusation with the JC and have it investigated quietly and without public knowledge to avoid someone like Roche trying to throw himself in the middle of a SCOTUS nomination.

Once again, it is a background check, not an investigation, your hypothetical is not applicable.

So you admit one of the witness for the Ramirez accusation did refuse to talk to the FBI? Would have been nice to have subpoena power there to force them to talk, huh?

The witness Ramirez laywers gave were not witnesses, as they were not at the party.

Glad you agree now that it is clear Kavanaugh and Roche do not like each other.

 

He is not there yet. He may get there, but not there yet.

And that was a mildly humorous response even while deflective if not disingenuous.

You claimed the Dems are destroying him.

I asserted that he is destroying himself through all the lying, deflection and aggression. People shouldn't blame others for their own actions. If Kavanaugh doesn't get confirmed he will have done it to himself. Same if he goes on to lose his current appointment.

 

Yeah it isn't the craziest thing I've seen, but I just figured that this FBI probe would give enough cover for all pubs to get on board.

 

The fact that I am a lawyer means I know exactly what a witness is. Do you know what a dying declaration is?

Yes, it does matter what he has to say because he has relevant information learned contemporaneously. By all means, continuing Custering yourself on this hill.

 

Yeah, I thought there was a good chance that Murkowski would flip. Sexual assault occurs significantly more frequently in Alaska than in other states. It's a big issue there.

 

His HS sex life (or lack of), sex terms, drinking... that was always irrelevant. Absolutely right! Never said any different.

You should ask Kavanaugh why he chose to lie about a bunch of irrelevant stuff.

 

Voted to move Kavanaugh's confirmation to the full Senate. Probable vote to confirm but remember McCain voted for cloture on the bill to repeal the ACA then voted against the legislation. Not beyond the realm of possibility (although not likely) that Flake and/or Collins and/or Manchin could do the same on the Kavanaugh confirmation.

 

Murkowski is the odd duck in GOP politics. When she was up for re-election in 2010 she lost the GOP primary and was re-elected as a Republican write-in candidate, in large measure because of Democrat votes realizing the Democratic candidate could not win. Stated differently, I think it may be more likely that the allegations give her cover for voting no than that the FBI investigation gives her cover to vote yes.

 

Game over. Time to get ready for LSU.

 

You mean why you think he *lied* about those things.

I read his answers as being dismissive, perhaps even elusive...precisely because the subject matter was so patently and painfully irrelevant, yet potentially pain causing to ppl. he cared about...

Yet that IS what the Dems focused like laser beams on.

Yet NOW, it's irrelevant.

At least you and I ( and apparently VA81) can agree on that.

Too bad the Lefty power brokers never saw that, nor appear to see it.

 

90 percent chance you're correct, but as Yogi Berra said "it's not over until it's over".

 

Not only am I correct, but what a huge gamble and loss this was by Dems. There will almost certainly be backlash. The American public are not stupid.

 

Agree. Politics is really local in Alaska. The Native American issue was probably the major factor in her decision especially considering that Native Alaskans are an important constituency for her. Slightly off-topic she justified her vote on the tax bill based on a provision opening ANWR to drilling, an issue probably more significant in Alaska than the actual tax provisions of the legislation.

 

this per a FBI agent background checks normally go back 10 years but may go to 18th birthday:

"
Retired Special Agent in Charge Weysan Dun spent 30 years with the FBI.

Scope is usually limited to 10 years, but can go back to the person's 18th birthday. A time frame is also set.

"Normally, you are given several weeks. In this case, it sounds like the re-investigation is being limited to a week time frame," Dun said.

Former FBI agent talks Kavanaugh investigation

 

It's not over - it's not even barely beginning. We're now in an age (via available info, technology) that anyone and everyone can be put out in public and their lives opened up and history (or fantasy of said history) laid bare for everyone to see.

Confrontations in elevators?
Shouting at someone in a restaurant?
Shooting people at a baseball practice?
Intimidation and harassment will be wide open.

Folks - this will become more prevalent and more destructive before it gets better. And, FTR, I am completely aware that this can - and will - happen from both extremes of the aisle. (Pizza parlor/child sex ring). Misinformation. Skewed reporting. All multiplied 10,000X by the miracle of the internet. Tread wisely.

 

Making a mistake on a term or two doesn't mean anything.

But for every single yearbook reference they asked him about he came up with a "choir boy" answer that is disputed by many of his classmates, and in the case of "boofing" and "Devil's Triangle", by commonly known definitions of the terms at the time... definitions that classmates say he and his friends used in conversation.

Then you have his drinking problems reported by his college roommate and other HS classmates who tried to come forward to the FBI.

Then you have the intentional misrepresentation of witness affidavits. Then you have the intentional misrepresentation of his rulings on the Environmental case he discussed.

All of these misrepresentations were done for image. To make him look like somebody he wasn't. They are contrived and they are clearly lies.

Now, he also engaged in dismissive and evasive answers on top of his lies. I can certainly agree with you on that.

 

OaktownGator, post: 10728651, member: 3506"]

You don't say?

Wonder why it's ok for you to take the mere passing suggestion based upon an assumption, personally insulting, but kav, having to defend himself in the public forum from Actual, formal, public allegations to similar effect...is somehow something he should just take like warm tea on a cool day...

Anyway...point made. I shan't pursue that angle further, as I do not actually believe that about you.

Don't agree that he repeatedly lied.

Already explained this to you. He 'owns' the shit the Left projected onto him, he's hung with his own words, and painted as a 'tang hound, and a misogynist trying to rationalize it as minor, no big deal.

Note: this comes AFTER you expressed your feeling personally insulted by my mere glancing suggestion. On a message board. About a person have never met.

Imagine having to actually defend yourself against actual allegations...publicly.

I doubt--nay, know damn well--the gloves are coming off, and you're coming out swinging.

I deduce this from the mere fact that you are presumably a human being, with blood flowing threw his veins, a thinking, working, feeling mind....and upon the belief that you have actually never assaulted a woman.

 

The fact that Kavanaugh was underage when all this supposedly happened hasn't been talked about a lot, but from a legal standpoint at least, it presents a lot of issues. If the allegations had been true and not a total smear, they still deserved to be heard, but in terms of a background investigation into someone's youth, that is outside the norm.

 

And again, if we're going to keep moving the goal posts every 3 hours, no one is going to want to serve on a Federal bench anymore. It will become entirely too easy to concoct a take-down of pretty much anyone.