" I'm hoping Blasey Ford remembers a salient detail about Kavanaugh's anatomy and he's forced to drop his pants. "
ROFL. Are you thinking what I'm thinking about Stormy's description of der Fuhrer's mushroom? (I actually think she was trying to get Melania's attention).

sadly - I think we have moved past the point now where what actually happened matters anymore. The accusations have done enough damage that the dems will be successful in delaying confirmation until the mid terms - or force the GOP to push a questionable vote through. It is all just about the politics now. Political payback for Merrick Garland, Pelosi holds the info until the 11th hour. Now they will have an issue with the Thursday plan - add an aggressive fame seeking lawyer. Watch the Dems win the midterm - and we will have an 8 person SCOTUS for 2 years, since no Trump nominee will ever get through a Dem house. What a mess.

What really happened is an after thought now. And the people involved have just turned into pawns.

Poltics is....political. Why lament this fact? It SHOULD nevertheless be relevant what the facts are, despite the political theater. It's still good to discuss what we think is the right thing to do, despite the fog of politics.

I also suspect that the political theater isn't really going to change any votes. If a couple Republicans fail to vote to approve Kavanaugh, it may very well be for reasons of good conscience.

Watch the Dems win the midterm - and we will have an 8 person SCOTUS for 2 years, since no Trump nominee will ever get through a Dem house. What a mess. — Rank Amateur

He could nominate Merrick Garland. He's owed a hearing.

It is all just about the politics now. Political payback for Merrick Garland — Rank Amateur

Well, yeah. You don't get to pull a stunt like that and just expect no repercussions. What's the point in one party playing fair if the other is going to abuse the system at every opportunity?

Strange that the Republicans are claiming that this is just all a big conspiracy hatched by the Democrats. These are the same Democrats who failed to produce a single witness to accuse the first nominee of Trump's for the Supreme Court? A nominee who also happened to go to the same school as Kavanaugh? While it may be true women who come forward to claim that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted them help the Democrats, that's substantially different from stating that the Dems are just intentionally making all this up. Talk about "fake news." It's sad these days that all one has to do is make a false accusation --- that the Dems are engaging in a conspiracy, without a single shred of evidence to back it up.

There are two levels to this. It may not be unreasonable to suggest the Democrats have made some choices driven by politics (such as failing to notify the entire committee of Ford's original letter). I'm reserving judgment on that, but let's assume they were. Optimizing political gain from facts doesn't imply the facts aren't FACTS. Since there's going to be politics being played, I'd rather it be played this way than by making stuff up (as Trump does..almost every day).

The Dems should not have sat back on the information, and that tactic should be condemned. I agree with you that it does not change the actual facts, and is certainly not as disingenuous as Trump constantly making up "facts" out of thin air. But, I am an independent for a reason --- I am sick and tired of our two major parties acting like immature children instead of adults when it comes to governing this country.

Thumbs up. I agree wholeheartedly.

agree - just think this is more about Garland and Roe than fact finding about the alleged assaults.

https://heavy.com/news/2018/09/julie-swetnick/

A sworn affidavit. Risks perjury and losing her security clearance if she’s found to be lying.

Appears very credible. And confirms Kavanaugh's alleged pattern of behaviour. No doubt the right will swing into left-wing conspiracy theory mode. But a proper investigation should easily show her to be lying if she is, so they'll be calling for that, right? No, of course, not. They'll be trying to get Kavanaugh nominated as quickly as possible before it's shown beyond doubt that this is true.

What's striking is the gulf between the stories. Kavanaugh claims he was an innocent virgin who concentrated on Sunday School and his projects whereas the women claim he was a regular drunk, a sexual abuser and an accessory to gang rape. There's no way an investigation won't be able to show one of those two versions of his past to be utterly false. And I'm pretty sure at this point, Republicans in the know, know which one that is.

His alleged behaviour is consistent with a virgin who has repressed his sexuality.

I went to an elite, boys-only Catholic High School in Houston, and I wouldn't be the least surprised to learn of one my rich, entitled classmates doing what he is alleged to have done. Plus, the cliques stuck together, so it would be easy to get a friend to corroborate an alibi.

I went to an elite, boys-only Catholic High School in Houston, and I wouldn't be the least surprised to learn of one my rich, entitled classmates doing what he is alleged to have done. Plus, the cliques stuck together, so it would be easy to get a friend to corroborate an alibi. — Relativist

Really, you were privy to gang rapes of drunk girls, and the typical assailant was wealthy? Fascinating. Kavanaugh must be guilty.

What's striking is the gulf between the stories. Kavanaugh claims he was an innocent virgin who concentrated on Sunday School and his projects whereas the women claim he was a regular drunk, a sexual abuser and an accessory to gang rape. There's no way an investigation won't be able to show one of those two versions of his past to be utterly false. And I'm pretty sure at this point, Republicans in the know, know which one that is. — Baden

I think it'd probably be more important to locate the rapist and the various accomplices, as opposed to someone who supposedly was nearby.

It seems you've concluded he's guilty, so why do we need to have the investigation?

A sworn affidavit. Risks perjury and losing her security clearance if she’s found to be lying. — Michael

Everyone risks perjury if they're found to be lying under oath, so it's doubtful anyone has ever lied under oath except like really dirty looking people who are poor and have nothing to lose.

I think it'd probably be more important to locate the rapist and the various accomplices, as opposed to someone who supposedly was nearby. — Hanover

This topic is about what Kavanaugh did.

It seems you've concluded he's guilty, so why do we need to have the investigation? — Hanover

You really can't work out the answer to that yourself?

I haven't 100% concluded he's guilty btw though I think it's far more likely he is. But *spoiler alert* I would like as many facts to be uncovered as possible in order that we all get as close as possible to the truth of what happened.

It's interesting that depending on what side of the political fence someone is on seems to determine how these allegations are viewed. From the left, this is evidence of a disgusting pattern of behavior, and from the right, this is evidence that some people will go to great lengths to stop Republican nominees.

Who's right? It's hard to tell the difference between genuine belief or disbelief versus political expediency these days. Maybe we can never know because of the amount of time between the alleged events and now. I will say the Reps have shown themselves to be especially slimey these last few years so that counts against them somewhat.

Despite there likely being little evidence to corroborate these allegations, a full investigation is the only sane course of action. We should respect the institution of the Supreme Court enough to do that.

Everyone risks perjury if they're found to be lying under oath, so it's doubtful anyone has ever lied under oath except like really dirty looking people who are poor and have nothing to lose — Hanover

Exactly, which is why this is proof that Trump colluded with the Russians.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/26/kavanaugh-accuser-ford-releases-polygraph-results-showing-no-deception.html

Another nail in the coffin for the Republican smear campaign / conspiracy theory effort.

I don't know if he's guilty or not. I was just saying that reports of his being a virgin during that period don't carry much relevance to me with regard to his innocence.

IMO, he should not be approved if there's a good chance he indeed did any of the alleged acts. I wish there were more discussion on the standards we'd like to see applied, and less on our personal judgments.

sadly - I think we have moved past the point now where what actually happened matters anymore. The accusations have done enough damage that the dems will be successful in delaying confirmation until the mid terms - or force the GOP to push a questionable vote through. It is all just about the politics now. Political payback for Merrick Garland, Pelosi holds the info until the 11th hour. Now they will have an issue with the Thursday plan - add an aggressive fame seeking lawyer. Watch the Dems win the midterm - and we will have an 8 person SCOTUS for 2 years, since no Trump nominee will ever get through a Dem house. What a mess — Rank Amateur

Ah yes, just like the old good times when Obama was President and had his candidates for SCOTUS and the GOP had Capitol Hill.

And if Kavanaugh passes a lie detector test, you'd vote to confirm. If lie detectors weren't bullshit, why do we have jurors?

I'm starting to doubt that it's going to work out for your boy. Three accusers.

Make that four with witnesses.

I don't think lie detector tests are all that trust-worthy. Willingly taking a lie detector test is probably more noteworthy though.

And if Kavanaugh passes a lie detector test, you'd vote to confirm. — Hanover

Obvious non-sequitur.

. If lie detectors weren't bullshit, why do we have jurors? — Hanover

I hope eventually the apparent sexual abuser, who apparently almost nothing will stop you batting for, does get put in front of a jury because with four accusers, conspiracy theories notwithstanding, he very likely deserves to be behind bars.

Willingly taking a lie detector test is probably more noteworthy though. — Maw

Yes, that adds some credibility at least. As does the fact that she now has witnesses who heard her specifically mention Kavanaugh as being the one who assaulted her way before he was being considered for this post.

I hope eventually the apparent sexual abuser... — Baden

There are plenty of good reasons to vote NO on Kavanaugh without defining juvenile behavior as sex crime.

You are corralling too much behavior and too many people you disapprove of into the category of criminal sex abuse. An adult forcing / coercing a child to engage in intercourse is the classic definition of sex abuse. Rape, forced sexual intercourse by an adult on an adolescent or adult, is another definition of sex abuse.

What adolescents do at parties may be appalling breaches of taste, etiquette, good sense, and more but a boy doing what the young Kavanaugh allegedly did to this girl (Ms. Ford) is not a crime and is not sex abuse. It's juvenile sex play. What should be done about juvenile sex play? What should be done is provide adult supervision. Apparently there was none on hand at this famous party. Is juvenile sex play insignificant? Maybe not -- but it isn't a criminal matter. It's an educational issue: teaching juveniles how to engage -- or not engage in sex -- goes for boys and girls both. Once the juvenile becomes an adult, THEN juvenile-style sex play (if that's what the adult was doing) could be criminal.

Let's save the term "sex abuse" for the real thing.

I'm not trying arguing this on behalf of Kavanaugh. I don't want to see him approved by the Senate. What Weinstein did, or Trump did, or what Cosby did, or what a serial rapist did, and so forth is not what Kavanaugh did.

Be against Kavanaugh because he will probably be a very conservative judge, if you want a good reason to be against him.