Brett Kavanaugh's new, colder reality

Macduff

Moderator
Apr 2010
97,472
34,191
Pittsburgh, PA
I'm going to limit my response to this both for the sake of time and because of my realization that we just can't agree on all other matters.

Yes, he absolutely is. He's a judge. The way he behaved on national TV was disgraceful. I don't care if you're liberal, conservative, whatever. A judge is not supposed to behave that way, yelling at members of Congress for asking him questions, no matter how aggressive the questions. He totally lost it. He would not tolerate conduct like that in his courtroom from any defendant for any reason. I don't care how justified some people have convinced themselves it is.

It is not a question of justification. It is a question of decorum, of conduct, of being a judge. If he was fully justified, that's cause to let him go on being a federal judge given the extraordinary circumstances. I don't believe it was. I'm still shocked over watching that. Not as a Democrat, not as a registered Republican as I happen to be, but as an American, I remain deeply disturbed that one of our highest ranking jurists is prepared to behave that way.
How should he have responded? Should he have laughed it off?
Here's the truth. There is no response at all that would have satisfied the left except maybe withdrawing his name from the nomination. No matter what he did or said in response, they would have found fault with it. Whatever response he had, the left would have treated it as validation for their smears.

But let's try a thought experiment. The next time someone is in court, let's see them accuse the judge of sexual assault and see how well that works out for them.
 

Singularity

Moderator
Oct 2009
33,692
28,434
Kansas
How should he have responded? Should he have laughed it off?
I've spoken on this matter already. He is a judge, who was under consideration for higher judicial office. We all know what kind of standard of public behavior, in all circumstances, that is supposed to entail. He went far beyond what he was supposed to do and say as a judge.

Here's the truth. There is no response at all that would have satisfied the left except maybe withdrawing his name from the nomination. No matter what he did or said in response, they would have found fault with it. Whatever response he had, the left would have treated it as validation for their smears.

But let's try a thought experiment. The next time someone is in court, let's see them accuse the judge of sexual assault and see how well that works out for them.
A better analogy would be to have someone file accusations against a judge and for another judge to hold a hearing on the matter, which is essentially what happened, except it was the Senate. The Senate follows similar standards of public conduct to any court room. The presiding judge certainly would not tolerate the kind of outbursts that Kavanaugh exhibited during his confirmation process, most of all thinly veiled threats that those in favor of the accuser would come to regret their decision. That was completely beyond the pale and if you don't recognize that I'm not sure what else there is to say.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Babba

Macduff

Moderator
Apr 2010
97,472
34,191
Pittsburgh, PA
I've spoken on this matter already. He is a judge, who was under consideration for higher judicial office. We all know what kind of standard of public behavior, in all circumstances, that is supposed to entail. He went far beyond what he was supposed to do and say as a judge.


A better analogy would be to have someone file accusations against a judge and for another judge to hold a hearing on the matter, which is essentially what happened, except it was the Senate. The Senate follows similar standards of public conduct to any court room. The presiding judge certainly would not tolerate the kind of outbursts that Kavanaugh exhibited during his confirmation process, most of all thinly veiled threats that those in favor of the accuser would come to regret their decision. That was completely beyond the pale and if you don't recognize that I'm not sure what else there is to say.
In other words, he's expected to just sit there and take it while he's accused of being a rapist by people who think they are so entitled to power that they would sink to any depths to keep it.
 

Singularity

Moderator
Oct 2009
33,692
28,434
Kansas
In other words, he's expected to just sit there and take it while he's accused of being a rapist by people who think they are so entitled to power that they would sink to any depths to keep it.
He was supposed to sit there and answer appropriate questions in a manner showing he can handle adversity and difficult circumstances with character and dignity as a judge ought to. He was supposed to behave as any defendant or other party is expected to behave in a court hearing. Had he behaved before another judge in that manner, he would've spent the night in jail. And he knew it, which made his conduct even more absurd and inexcusable.

And, I don't get why you keep using this conspiratorial language. This was no casual matter for Ford, and she certainly was not ordered or arranged to do anything she wasn't prepared to do on her own. She has also paid a significant price for subjecting herself to this kind of exposure, as is typical for a sex scandal of this nature. And she did not shy away from what we should expect of an accuser: Appear in public, under her own name, answer all questions asked. She did what she was supposed to do. She is not a liar. At worst, she is mistaken. But you cannot listen to that testimony fairly and say she is a liar.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Babba
Dec 2006
89,798
69,599
In the Witness Protection Program
In other words, he's expected to just sit there and take it while he's accused of being a rapist by people who think they are so entitled to power that they would sink to any depths to keep it.
Yeah, he should have taken it just like a common Hillary Clinton.
 
Sep 2013
46,512
37,681
On a hill
What was the treatment from the republicans, They interviewed him decided he was not qualified for the Court, and moved on...


They did not try to destroy him, his family and falsely accuse him of crimes

Yes, Republicans do it the right way.... Elections have consequences, Obama was the worst president in us history, and he lost the senate... therefore they said is choice fell short of the standard.

But the Republicans treated Garland with Respect.
I think you made that up.

But even before Obama had named Garland, and in fact only hours after Scalia's death was announced, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell declared any appointment by the sitting president to be null and void. He said the next Supreme Court justice should be chosen by the next president — to be elected later that year.

snip

McConnell was not alone. The 11 Republican members of the Senate Judiciary Committee signed a letter saying they had no intention of consenting to any nominee from Obama. No proceedings of any kind were held on Garland's appointment.
until obama nominated him, he seemed to be just fine with republicans

Widely regarded as a moderate, Garland had been praised in the past by many Republicans, including influential senators such as Orrin Hatch of Utah.
 
Sep 2013
46,512
37,681
On a hill
How should he have responded? Should he have laughed it off?
Here's the truth. There is no response at all that would have satisfied the left except maybe withdrawing his name from the nomination. No matter what he did or said in response, they would have found fault with it. Whatever response he had, the left would have treated it as validation for their smears.

But let's try a thought experiment. The next time someone is in court, let's see them accuse the judge of sexual assault and see how well that works out for them.
derp
 

Djinn

Council Hall
Dec 2007
52,118
39,054
Pennsylvania, USA
Do you really want to rationalize accusing a man of being a rapist in front of the entire country as just politics?
Good quesion. I suppose we would also have to ask whether impeaching a man for lying about an extramarital affair with a consenting adult "just politics?"
 
Sep 2013
46,512
37,681
On a hill
What's wrong with him? He's never going to be on the Supreme Court is wrong with him.

You can't complain about how Merrick Garland was treated after trying to smear a man as a rapist to try to keep him off the court.
You do know that Garland was appointed by Obama long before trump appointed Kavanaugh - right? There was no "after", nor did republicans even give the man the courtesy of a hearing.

But you justify the treatment of Garland as republican tit for tat for events that hadnt happened yet.