Official Brett Kavanaugh confirmation thread

Foreign Attorney wrote:

Her allegations of fact are uncorroborated, contradicted, categorically denied, and very lacking in detail.

Not true in any way.

Democrats are lowlifes wrote:

Vote the guy in. Screw the lying liberal hypocritical democrats.

To be real the republicans will try and vote him in regardless (complete political theater) and in contrast if this was a democratic nominee in a democratic controlled house he would have already been withdrawn.

Joe Biden 26 years ago wrote:

Wrong. Clarence Thomas was confirmed in 1990 under Bush. Biden then stated that a new justice should not be nominated during a Presidential election year. McConnell followed the same reasoning Democrats would have followed if they had the opportunity.

Incorrect. Democrats had not intention of chaining the filibuster rule. This entire disaster is McConnell's doing.

Not sure what happened in 1982

But K sure doesn't seem like any judge I've ever been in front of in both temperament and bias

This x100. Too partisan. Too angry. Stupid to make an appearance on Fox News. He doesn't have the right stuff to get a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court.

Huapango wrote:

Kavanaugh comes across as very unlikeable and unfit for the Supreme Court.

notjustametoothing wrote:

This x100. Too partisan. Too angry. Stupid to make an appearance on Fox News. He doesn't have the right stuff to get a lifetime appointment on the Supreme Court.

Huapango wrote:

Kavanaugh comes across as very unlikeable and unfit for the Supreme Court.

He comes across as someone incapable of working with others.

Sniffling wrote:

Kavanaugh essentially stated he does not want an FBI investigation into the sexual abuse accusations.

No he did not. He stated precisely the contrary.

He handled that issue very poorly, he should have repeatedly deferred to the committee’s authority.

They got under his very thin skin.

Sniffling wrote:

Foreign Attorney wrote:

Her allegations of fact are uncorroborated, contradicted, categorically denied, and very lacking in detail.

Not true in any way.

Why do you waste people’s time?

blinded wrote:

Democrats are lowlifes wrote:

Vote the guy in. Screw the lying liberal hypocritical democrats.

To be real the republicans will try and vote him in regardless (complete political theater) and in contrast if this was a democratic nominee in a democratic controlled house he would have already been withdrawn.

Likely true, but what that means is that they are appealing to a different voter base

We don't need "likable" Supreme Court justices. We need ones who read the Constitution and rule based on its meaning and not what maximizes facebook likes.

lawyerguy wrote:

Not sure what happened in 1982

But K sure doesn't seem like any judge I've ever been in front of in both temperament and bias

I have a different experience than you. I practice in the USA at the federal level. However, I have never seen this type of conduct in an official setting

Hardloper wrote:

We don't need "likable" Supreme Court justices. We need ones who read the Constitution and rule based on its meaning and not what maximizes facebook likes.

WE don't need Kavanaugh. Trump as 24 other names to pick from.

Hardloper wrote:

We don't need "likable" Supreme Court justices. We need ones who read the Constitution and rule based on its meaning and not what maximizes facebook likes.

Then you shouldn't want K. This hearing showed that he is completely biased and political and wouldn't do anything based on reading the constitution.

Foreign Attorney wrote:

Sniffling wrote:

Not true in any way.

Why do you waste people’s time?

That wasn't me who posted that.

Others wrote:

Kavanaugh comes across as very unlikeable and unfit for the Supreme Court.

He comes across as someone incapable of working with others.[/quote]

Let's see how you would behave in a similar situation.

Ford looked like she was high and talked like a valley girl. She wouldn't answer a single question without being coached by her lawyers. Kavanaugh was up there alone and defended his integrity well (even though she had months to prepare).

Foreign Attorney wrote:

lawyerguy wrote:

Not sure what happened in 1982

But K sure doesn't seem like any judge I've ever been in front of in both temperament and bias

I have a different experience than you. I practice in the USA at the federal level. However, I have never seen this type of conduct in an official setting

Kavanaugh is not someone you would want trying to debate issues with eight other justices. He is a go-it-alone type.

Sniffling wrote:

Hardloper wrote:

We don't need "likable" Supreme Court justices. We need ones who read the Constitution and rule based on its meaning and not what maximizes facebook likes.

WE don't need Kavanaugh. Trump as 24 other names to pick from.

I didn't post that either.

Hardloper wrote:

We don't need "likable" Supreme Court justices. We need ones who read the Constitution and rule based on its meaning and not what maximizes facebook likes.

At the scoutus level, they are, in addition to resolving conflicts among federal circuits, interpreting what the constitution says. Likability is not very relevant in practice. In fact, more than a few such judges are not personally likable, IMO.

Like someone else said, pure political theater, on both sides. It all reduces to ONE issue:

ABORTION.

asdfasdfasfdsf wrote:

BK's incessant crying and whining will not be positively received by Mr. Trump.

Correct! I prefer the ones who didn't get caught. SAD!