Kavanaugh and his sexual assault allegations

130 posts / 0 new
Last post
Misfit Misfit's picture
Kavanaugh and his sexual assault allegations
Pondering

The woman who will testify at a Senate committee hearing Thursday has given the panel sworn statements from four people that aim to back up her allegation that she was sexually assaulted by U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh in the 1980s, while lawyer Michael Avenatti has produced details about a new allegation by another woman against the judge.

Three women have now accused Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct.

Avenatti identified his client, Julie Swetnick, on Twitter and posted an email to the committee, as well as what he said was a sworn declaration from the woman outlining her allegations against Kavanaugh.

"In approximately 1982, I became the victim of one of these 'gang' or 'train' rapes where Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh were present," she said, mentioning the name of a close friend of Kavanaugh. She did not identify her attackers and said she believed her drink had been spiked in the incident.​

https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/kavanaugh-allegations-avenatti-client-1.48...

We now have a 3rd victim. 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..live hearings questioning ford

link

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..on a 15 min break

eta..on 1/2 hr lunch break

Rikardo

Why are Canadians and Canadian media so interested in this ? 

voice of the damned

Rikardo wrote:

Why are Canadians and Canadian media so interested in this ? 

Why do I know the names of the major players in the UK's Profumo scandal from over fifty years ago?

quizzical

Rikardo wrote:

Why are Canadians and Canadian media so interested in this ? 

 

are you trying to say it's none of our business or asking because you aren't and don't get it?

either one means patriarchy though so your answer doesn't matter.

Misfit Misfit's picture

Rikardo wrote:

Why are Canadians and Canadian media so interested in this ? 

Why is that any of your business what we are interested in?

We don't have to justify to you what interest we take in anything!

the issue is that we are interested, and if you don't like it, then don't read our threads. 

Misfit Misfit's picture

Dp 

 

Misfit Misfit's picture

And yes Quizzical, male violence against women is a global crisis that far too many men downplay and dismiss as being trivial and irrelevant.

The fact that Rikardo doesn't "get it" is quite alarming indeed. 

Misfit Misfit's picture

Oh, and the sexual violence allegations is just one of many reasons why Canadians are interested in this. It is a very dynamic issue which many countries are following very closely and carefully.

Pondering

I think some Republicans came across as Trump clones and that overall they were really ugly in the afternoon. They didn't question Kavanaugh they gave speeches on his behalf and attacked the democrats. At times Kavanaugh was convincing but during questioning it became obvious he was being evasive. At other times he was practically smirking in self-satisfaction. He gave such a theatrical emotional performance one commentator suggested he showed himself to be tempermentally unfit for the job. 

Trumpians will support Kavanaugh. Senators facing mid-terms will be looking to gauge the impact on their re-election chances. 

It was extremely high profile. Apparently it was playing in restarants and at work places. I think Ford's moving testimony will stick particularly with women. In one interview a woman said that she thinks Ford's words will really resonate with a lot of women for example remembering hearing the men laughing, her fear that he might kill her accidently. 

It's hard to predict but I think a lot of women will turn against Kavanaugh and quite a few men too. Someone suggested the Republicans might be willing to lose senate seats in exchange for setting a conservative judge on the bench for the next 30 years.  The senators that might lose their seats may feel differently about it. So many variables. 

Misfit Misfit's picture

And Kavanaugh would not take a lie detector test. He is also resistant to an FBI investigation into his past. This does not make him guilty, but it does make his denials seem a bit suspicious.

if the democrats win the senate and the house, I believe that they can impeach Kavanaugh if more testimony comes out and they get compelling evidence against him.

This is just the beginning of a very ugly mess.

Hurtin Albertan

It's sort of like slowing down in traffic to gawk at a bad accident, in this case a big train wreck, and saying to yourself "Thank fuck this doesn't directly involve me."

For the record I believe Ford. 

The hyper-partisan BS is what interests me the most.  It no longer seems to matter if the potential SCOTUS candidate is qualified or competent, it's all about political grandstanding and scoring cheap political points for your side.

NDPP

Senate Committee Votes on Kavanaugh After Emotional Hearing 

https://on.rt.com/9fcx

"The Senate Judiciary Committee is preparing to vote on Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh..."

josh

The senate vote has been delayed for about a week while the FBI investigates Ford’s charges.  I doubt they come up with anything that will change the equation.  Kavanaugh should do the right thing and withdraw.  But Republicans are not big on doing the right thing.  It will probably come down to two female Republican senators, Collins and Murkowski, as to whether he’s confirmed.

Misfit Misfit's picture

I think they need that senator from Arizona as well to defeat the nomination.

Jeff Flake

Pondering

If Flake votes no, then I think at least one of the women will also vote no. 

I don't think Trump limiting the FBI probe, if that is what has been done, will work. I think it will backfire. The biggest benefit may not be the investigation, it may be the delay giving shakey senators more time to consider. They will be reading all the commentary. Kavanaugh made an ugly spectacle of himself. 

Jeff Flake seems to genuinely want to do the right thing. He has opposed Trump. He won't be running again. If he votes to confirm Kavanaugh it will be the defining moment of his political career forever. For up to 30 years he will feel responsible if Kavanaugh messes up. Kavanaugh purjured himself on the drinking testimony. He could be impeached. Flake spoke of this ripping Americans apart. He seemed genuinely distraught at the politicization of the process. He does take this seriously. I am 80% sure that by the end of the week he will reconsider his vote and withdraw support. 

I don't have a take on the other three swing voters other than I don't think they will move without Flake but they have troubled consciences. 

I think their relationship is akin to the one I have with God. I really really really want to believe and want to believe that heaven is awaiting me I just can't convince myself. 

With time to think it over I don't think they will be able to convince themselves that Kavanaugh was honest or that Ford was somehow mistaken. If they are looking for cover to vote in favor of him then they will find it but if their reservations were genuine I don't see how that can nominate him. It would be condemning the Supreme Court to 30 years of a Trump at best. At worst it could lead to a future impeachment when the Democrats get the power to start proceedings. 

I think they will not be able to get the votes so Kavanaugh will withdraw before the final vote. I give myself a 60 or 70% chance of being right. I want to say 70% but I am not a gambler so I think if I were putting money on it I would be 60% sure. I am getting less certain by the minute. I am at 55% now. 

How does that translate into odds and how do odds translate into how much you pay to bet? Does anyone know? Just idle curiousity. 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

NDPP

What Brett Kavanaugh Really Learned in High School

https://twitter.com/TariqAli_News/status/1045353549943705604

jerrym

josh wrote:

The senate vote has been delayed for about a week while the FBI investigates Ford’s charges.  I doubt they come up with anything that will change the equation. 

It's increasingly looking like it's rigged to come up with nothing. In a normal FBI background check, the agents are allowed to follow leads from one interviewee to find other people with information. Trump says he wants the Senate to look at whatever comes up and that that's their job. The Senate committeee says that that's what it wants. However, the person delegated to give the President's permission to do the background check, which is required, is Don McGahn, the White House Counsel (lawyer), who favoured picking Kavanaugh in the first place over other Federalist Society candidates on Trump's list. He has limited the FBI investigation to three people at the house in which Ford was allegedly sexually assaulted and the second accuser, Deborah Ramirez, according to reports. So far Ford has not had any indication she be interviewed despite requests by her to have this done. There is no indication that the third accuser or any other accusers will be interviewed. 

Trump loves Kavanaugh because he says a president cannot be indicted and impeached - a change from his position when he was a lead attorney in the prosecution of Bill Clinton. In questioning by the Senate committee, he also evaded an answer to the question of whether the president can self-pardon.

jerrym

There is another reason that the Republicans are rushing to get Kavanaugh on the court, no matter how many sexual assaults he has been involved in. On October 5th, there is a case called Gamble vs. United States scheduled to come before the Supreme Court. He would be the deciding vote. Under current law, a presidential pardon applies only to federal cases, not to state cases, even on much the same evidence. This is due to a 150 year-old exemption to the double jeporady clause that says one cannot be prosecuted twice for the same criminal offence. 

“Under settled law, if Trump were to pardon his former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, for example — he was convicted last month in federal court on eight counts of tax and bank fraud — both New York and Virginia state prosecutors could still charge him for any crimes that violated their respective laws,” Bertrand notes.

Here’s the scary part: “If the dual-sovereignty doctrine were tossed, as Hatch wants, then Trump’s pardon could theoretically protect Manafort from state action.” Granted, Manafort’s plea deal includes provisions that may preclude him from accepting a pardon, though that hardly provides much reassurance.

Elie Honig, a former assistant U.S. attorney in New Jersey, explained that “the escape hatch” in current doctrine “is for cases to be farmed out or picked up by state-level attorneys general, who cannot be shut down by Trump and who generally — but with some existing limits — can charge state crimes even after a federal pardon.” Honig stressed that “if Hatch gets his way, however, a federal pardon would essentially block a subsequent state-level prosecution.”

Even more concerning is Kavanaugh’s past statements on whether or not a sitting president can be investigated or indicted. Kavanaugh aided Ken Starr in his investigation of President Bill Clinton in the 1990’s.

“The nation certainly would have been better off if President Clinton could have focused on Osama bin Laden without being distracted by the Paula Jones sexual harassment case and its criminal investigation offshoots,” Kavanaugh wrote in 2009.

“I believe that the President should be excused from some of the burdens of ordinary citizenship while serving in office,” Kavanaugh added. “This is not something I necessarily thought in the 1980s or 1990s. Like many Americans at that time, I believed that the President should be required to shoulder the same obligations that we all carry. But in retrospect, that seems a mistake.”

Putting Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court could potentially expand presidential power to the point of the president being above the law while in office, though it is a constitutionally grey area.

https://hillreporter.com/the-supreme-court-case-fueling-republicans-rush...

voice of the damned

Am I the only person who, prior to a few days ago, had NEVER heard "Devil's Triangle" used to mean either a threesome or a drinking game?

josh

No.

Mobo2000

Rabble commentary on this:

http://www.rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/other-hand/2018/09/kavanaugh-hearing...

"Tuesday’s hearings may have already determined the outcome of the mid-term elections as voters -- especially women -- reacted to the sight of Brett Kavanaugh onscreen, braying about his entitlement to the post. As for Kavanaugh, even if the FBI doesn't get official approval, the smart money is betting that he's under serious investigation right now, from all kinds of organizations, starting with the New York Times and the Washington Post.

As special prosecutor Rachel Mitchell reminded Kavanaugh, there is no statute of limitations on the kind of violent crime that Dr. Blasey Ford described. There may be an indictment hanging over the nominee’s head. In addition, Kavanaugh's repeated denials that he had anything to do with an attack on Dr. Ford when she was younger, may prove to constitute perjury and obstruction of justice. In that case, he could be liable for decades in jail as well as disbarment."

Mobo:   I don't agree with very much of the analysis, if anything, in this blog post.  He's been under serious investigation by the New York Times and Washington post since his candidancy was seen as likely.    I think there is slim to no chance he will be arrested or disbarred, and I think the FBI investigation is window dressing at best, and aimed to find evidence to undermine the women bringing complaints at worst.    I think there is a real risk that Kavanaugh made the correct strategic choice in being angry and combative during his testimony, and this will resonate with American mid term voters, men and women, who are concerned about #Metoo "witchhunts" and unfair processes around sexual assault complaints.     The obvious political machinations around the timing of the release of the letter of complaint and the full media press from CNN and MSNBC on this will rally the Democratic base, but I think there is a real chance this will also energize the Trump base and feed #fakenews for the undecided middle (if there is such a thing in America anymore).

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

I take a somewhat more hopeful view of this affair than mobo. While I agree that the 1 week FBI investigation is unlikely to find anything that will take Kavanaugh down, it could show that he lied to the committee under oath, and that could possibly be enough to swing the necessary votes against him. Longshot, but possible.

Regarding the mid-term elections, I am more inclined to agree with Digby's take in Salon.com.

Digby wrote:

The rhetorical violence of the right-wing response to the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation mess perfectly illustrates the "Don't make daddy mad" tactic of white patriarchy. Powerful white men may allow women and people of color to speak their piece but such people should never, ever think that they get to make the rules. If they refuse to back down when they're told to do so, there will be hell to pay. This is a familiar tactic to people who grew up in traditional, patriarchal families. Mother may complain and the kids will squabble, but when Father has had enough and puts his foot down, everyone must stop or face his wrath, which will be swift and often brutal.

...

The problem with this tactic is that everything is already so crazy and chaotic that these kinds of threats no longer inspire the terror they're meant to. Perhaps this thrills their followers, but it doesn't scare scaring women or people of color anymore. In fact, it's motivating them to remove these out-of-control people from power. They aren't daddies at all. They are spoiled children having a temper tantrum. And they need a very long time-out.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

Kimberlé Crenshaw: How Society Embraces Male Denials, from Clarence Thomas to Brett Kavanaugh

quote:

AMY GOODMAN: So that was 1991. Speaking in Houston Friday night at an event where cameras were not allowed, Anita Hill noted she had watched Dr. Blasey Ford testify, and, quote, “I was struck by the doctor’s openness to say how terrified she was to be there and talk about something that had had a profound impact, and knowing there would be hostility. I was also impressed by how calm she was, how careful she was and how it affected her,” Anita Hill said Friday. Describing Kavanaugh’s testimony, she noted he had projected anger, a lot of aggression and that, quote, “No female candidate for a Supreme Court position would ever have the license” to speak with similar fury.

Professor Crenshaw, you walked in with Anita Hill to her hearing. You accompanied her. So, talk about the parallels now. And this point that Professor Hill also made, that if you were to reverse the disposition of these two people, the rage, the anger, the evasiveness, the attacking judge, if that were Christine Blasey Ford, and Christine Blasey—and Kavanaugh was apologetic, soft-spoken, cooperative, I mean, could you imagine if Dr. Ford acted like Judge Kavanaugh did at the hearing?

KIMBERLÉ CRENSHAW: Well, it’s absolutely unimaginable. And that’s the deeper reality behind sexual harassment, sexual abuse, gender injustice, that it’s not just the acts that happen. It’s the broader context in which men have far more power not only to create harm, but to deny responsibility for the harm they create. And then, equally importantly, I think, that we see happening right now is, when they are called to be accountable for what they’ve done, when something that happened 27 years ago, perhaps in a context in which Kavanaugh didn’t think that there was any social sanction to have to worry about, ultimately catches up with him, what we get is the righteous indignation, the raging, the finger pointing, the blaming of so many people.

Now, the real problem isn’t just that there is room for him to do that, but that his doing that is effective, so many people thinking that, “Well, of course we understand that level of rage.” So, overlooking, basically stepping over Dr. Blasey Ford’s trauma, in a rush to embrace him, that’s the part about this moment that’s so frightening. We’ve seen this kind of anger playing out in the stadiums that President Trump is going to. And I think a lot of us can distance ourselves from that because we don’t see it moving into the halls of power. Well, this kind of sentiment, this “my aggression is justified by my self-defense, even though I’m defending against being held accountable for something that I’ve done,” that’s come now into the Senate, it’s come to the Judiciary Committee, and it may be going into the Supreme Court. This is a very dangerous moment for our society and for our democracy. And it’s important to try to draw the line in the sand at this very moment.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

KIMBERLÉ CRENSHAW: Well, my assessment is that both parties learned a lesson about optics, but not much about substance. I thought that the fact that the Republicans realized that they could not themselves be in the position of interrogating Dr. Ford, and therefore outsourced that responsibility to someone else, was a reflection of their understanding. I also think that the Democrats truly understood that one of the things that went so wrong in the last hearing was that Anita Hill had no support. There was no indication whatsoever that the Democrats actually believed her. And, of course, the Republicans pretty much raked her over the coals. So, we didn’t have either of those things happening this time.

But I think what we still found out is that there is a huge lack of balance between the discursive capital, the ability to speak and be taken seriously, between men and women, and then also between whites and nonwhites. So, those who have more power have a broader range of possibilities. So Kavanaugh can go in and pretty much lose his mind, and people think that he’s still credible, whereas Dr. Ford had to walk a very, very narrow line to be found to be credible. And even after she was found to be credible—I mean, to the extent that even Fox News was saying, “Oh, we think the Republicans are in trouble”—there was just a brief pause, and then Kavanaugh comes in and sheds his tears, and suddenly we’re back to square one again. Last week, Kate Manne called that “himpathy,” where men have more, powerful men have more. And I think this is, effectively, what we saw playing out.

Mobo2000

Michael:   I read the Digby article as an attempt to motivate the Democratic base, not analysis or a prediction.   Same with the Crenshaw article from Epaulo above.   They both jumble all the complexities of sexual assault and misogyny into a big ball where nothing concrete can be said that might persuade people who don't already see it this way already.

From Epaulo article above: 

"when they are called to be accountable for what they’ve done, when something that happened 27 years ago, perhaps in a context in which Kavanaugh didn’t think that there was any social sanction to have to worry about, ultimately catches up with him, what we get is the righteous indignation, the raging, the finger pointing, the blaming of so many people."

This entirely frames the situation, and Kavanaugh's anger, as denial of responsibility for what he has done.   It assumes the accusations are true, her trauma real, and her memories and accounting of events are correct.   Here's how  Jeff Flake describes his interpretation of Kavanaugh's anger:

“I have to say that when I heard him, I heard someone who I hope I would sound like, if I had been unjustly accused,” Flake told CBS’s Scott Pelley. “And to see his family behind him … it was anger. But if I were unjustly accused, that’s how I would feel, as well.”

I don't know the way forward here at all.   There has to be a way for the left to address concerns by people about due process under #Metoo, and there's lots to gain by doing so.   

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

AMY GOODMAN: Do you believe Kavanaugh will be confirmed?

KIMBERLÉ CRENSHAW: I think that one of my lessons that I learned from the Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill situation—we were in the senators’ offices on that last day, and everybody was saying that they had the votes, and we knew for a fact that they didn’t. So, this is going to go down to the wire. Every effort to contact all of the senators, and especially those who may be leaning in the direction of no, should happen until the very last vote is cast.

NorthReport

First it was one woman who spoke out 

Then it was 2

Then 3

It is now 4

And other men there are at least 2

How many More women have to come forward?

This is nonsense and everyone here knowit is nonsense 

That is why now when one woman make an accusation they need to be believed immediately, and we need to end the sexist behaviour both in society and here at babble

Everyone here at babble knows it is nonsense and that it is sexist as well 

 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Mobo2000 wrote:

Michael:   I read the Digby article as an attempt to motivate the Democratic base, not analysis or a prediction.

Well, yeah, it was definitely a defiant claim that white male anger shall no longer lead to compliance by women and minorities, as the power of the patriarchal myth diminishes rapidly. It is also a prediction that the disgusting rageoholic behaviour of Kavanaugh and Graham will be regarded by most voters, and particularly most woman voters, as the childish tantrums that they are. In my opinion, there is no making peace with these people, they must be defeated (electorally, I mean).

Mobo2000

Well, I agree "these people" must be defeated electorally.   And the next set of people needs to be held accountable as well, and also defeated when necessary.  

The people I want the (mainstream media) left to make peace with is not Kavanaugh or Republican politicians, it's the voters putting them in power.     If you see Trumpism as a result of the power of the partriarchal myth, it seems to me it's rapid diminishment is pretty debateable, if electoral success is the measure.    I guess we'll see in November.

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..in my experience struggle on the ground brings, sometimes drags people over to your side. this video is what brought flake to the fbi position.

 Meet One of the Sexual Assault Survivors Who Confronted Jeff Flake & Triggered FBI Kavanaugh Probe

jerrym

MSNBC is reporting that Kavanaugh has been coordinating with his friends what to say to FBI investigators.

Because of public pressure, the White House counsel has been told to expand their investigation to whereever it leads instead of just the original four people (the second accuser - Deborah Ramirez, two friends of Kavanaugh, and a friend of  Blasey Ford, but not Ford herself or the third accuser), according to the New York Times. 

jerrym

A classmate of Kavanaugh at Yale, says after being unable to sleep for four nights, he went public with a description of a drinking night during which Kavanaugh threw a beer at someone who had made a negative comment to him, then started a fight that resulted in one man going to jail. That kind of personality is just what we want in a Supreme Court judge!

Pondering

It would be great if the FBI turned up more information but that is not all the WH was afraid of. Every hour that passes is time for countless elevator scenes like Flake faced. Every day is another day to rewatch Kavanaugh's performance and read articles and think about what they are doing and what they want their legacy to be in the history books. It's more time for protesters to be at their offices and in their emails and phone messages. The pressure on the 4 possible no votes is going to be enormous. 

quizzical
NDPP
epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

..from democracy now headlines

Kavanaugh Protesters Take to the Streets, Confront Senators

Protests against Kavanaugh’s nomination continue to rage across the country. In West Virginia, 17 women gathered inside the Charleston, West Virginia, office of Democratic Senator Joe Manchin Monday, saying they’ll occupy the space until Manchin pledges to vote “no” on Kavanaugh’s confirmation. At Washington, D.C.’s National Airport, women survivors of sexual assault tried to speak with Senator Mitch McConnell Monday as he walked across a terminal, but were ignored by the Republican majority leader.

Protester 1: “Senator McConnell, why do women have to bear their whole soul to you until their whole [inaudible]?”

Protester 2: “How many stories of sexual violence do you need to hear in order to believe women?”

In New York City, hundreds of protesters gathered outside the Yale Club in Manhattan Monday before marching to Grand Central Station to protest Kavanaugh’s nomination. This is Tre Kwon, an activist with the New York State Nurses Association and editor of Left Voice.

Tre Kwon: “Some of us recall from the news Anita Hill 15 years ago. We are here to make sure another Anita Hill does not go down. She was dissected in front of a stony-faced wall of white men. She was humiliated doubly, first with the sexist harassment from Clarence Thomas and again by a system that caps women and does not allow the truth to be heard and does not allow truth to be spoken to power. We are here today to make sure that does not happen again.”

Pondering

The furor continued to reverberate beyond Washington. Harvard Law School sent a message to its students on Monday saying that Judge Kavanaugh earlier in the day “indicated that he can no longer commit to teaching his course in January Term 2019, so the course will not be offered.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/01/us/politics/trump-fbi-kavanaugh.html

Limits on the investigation have been lifted. I think Kavanaugh is a dead duck. I think the sexual assault aspect will be set aside. Kavanaugh will withdraw to save himself on impeachment on his other lies. His career as a judge is at risk now not just a position on the Supreme Court. He will claim the process is too hard on his family so he must withdraw. The GOP will run with that.

I'm not a fortune teller so obviously the above is opinion not fact but I do feel pretty confident. 

epaulo13 epaulo13's picture

josh
Mobo2000

https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/09/28/the-blue-wave-is-awash-with-hypo...

If there is a character who deserves to be assassinated, it’s Brett Kavanaugh. But it takes Fox freaking News to point out the obvious hypocrisy going on for the Democrats. As we wade through days of a rape scandal about Brett, Democrats line up to defend domestic abuser Keith Ellison. Ellison disappointingly coasted to a primary victory in the supposed progressive state of Minnesota. A Star Tribune poll revealed that only 21% of Minnesotans are sure the abuse happened. It’s unclear what else Karen Monahan needs to do to be believed. She has released medical records and text messages.

Bernie Sanders flew to Minnesota to campaign for Ellison, brushing off the accusations before one could finish the word ‘revolution’. Ellison himself evoked the witch hunt, as he said he wasn’t sure who would ‘cook up’ allegations next. The main Minneapolis paper Star Tribune callously labeled Monahan’s accusations as another GOP smear on the black predator. These people really don’t listen to women. It was Democrat Hillary Clinton who coined the term ‘black super predator’.

Kamala Harris, another so-called progressive, told reporters that we should let the investigation ‘run its course.’ The investigation is, of course, internal. In other words, Democratic National Committee. And Ellison is Duputy Chair for the DNC. We’ll see how that goes. Like Kavanaugh, Ellison nabbed himself a female lawyer. Everyone believes a woman who doesn’t believe a woman."

Mobo2000

I thought this was a good blog post, linked by excellent feminist advice columnist Captain Awkward:

http://rolereboot.org/culture-and-politics/details/2018-10-dear-dana-im-...

"

The Kavanaugh nomination feels especially raw for a few reasons — the current president’s record on sexual harassment (i.e. “pro”), the upcoming midterm elections throwing both parties into a frothing tizzy, the constant news coverage of said frothing, and the vortex of social media feels in reaction to all of the above. My own social media feeds have been full of women sharing their stories of being abused and their fears of a conservative Supreme Court and their feelings of stark vulnerability in the face of Kavanaugh’s possible confirmation. Meanwhile, those among us who aren’t strong enough to deal with the pain of the prevalence of sexual assault excuse it away, preferring bold cruelty over the blistering facts that they are both vulnerable to and culpable in perpetuating sexual assault.

The first step to managing is to reframe the current events. Sit down. Breathe. Take a moment and realize that Brett Kavanaugh has fuck-all to do with you and your life and your story. I know that it feels very desperate and crucial at this moment, like if he’s confirmed then no one cares about sexual assault victims and and if he isn’t confirmed then we’ve finally won and women’s pain will be legitimized for the first time, but neither of those is true. Sexual assault victims are currently being seen, and heard, and legitimized in a way never before seen, and that isn’t going to stop. The truth is that if Kavanaugh is confirmed he may make terrible decisions that lead the Supreme Court to undermine women’s bodily autonomy in the years to come, but, also, he may not. I’m not saying that you shouldn’t care about his nomination, but I am saying that living in terror of it isn’t helpful to you, or your allies, or your cause. If he isn’t confirmed it’s likely that another man who shares his same opinions will be nominated and confirmed instead. Should someone who assaulted multiple people be a Supreme Court justice? Fucking of course not, but controlling the outcome of this is outside your, or my, sphere of influence. There isn’t enough time for each of us to move to D.C. and get a job as a lobbyist and make friends with Lindsay Graham so he’ll actually listen when we explain to him that being physically assaulted is a million times worse than being accused of physical assault and, by the way, women are also humans."

 

 

 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

It would now appear that the FBI "investigation" was good enough to provide cover for Senators Collins and Sasse to vote to confirm Kavanaugh. So, he will probably be confirmed Saturday or early next week. However, there is already in existence a record from his testimony in 2 confirmation hearings and emails and other documentation that have been revealed during those hearings. Many people have pointed out that this record contains abundant proof that he lied under oath in both of those hearings.

If the Dems take the house in November, I expect the House Judiciary Committee to begin a more detailed investigation of the things we already know Kavanaugh did wrong, while it's all still clear in everyone's memory. After all, the Republicans were certain that lying about a blow job was enough to impeach Bill Clinton, even the super-smarmy Lindsay Graham. It'll be fun to watch.

Sean in Ottawa

If you think the political divide in the US has been something to see, wait till January.

Just imagine the conflict between Congress and the WH then and the stream of rhetoric and lies that will flow from Trump.

And then what his cult will do - calling it a fake election and all. 

Mobo2000

Do you think it's a lock the Democrats will win the house?

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2018-midterm-election-forecast/house/

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/is-kavanaugh-helping-republicans-mi...

"I’m inclined to conclude there’s actually something there for Republicans — that their position has genuinely improved from where it was a week ago (although, not necessarily as compared to where it was a month ago). But I’m also wary of the idea that this is necessarily a turning point, since it wouldn’t take much — a couple of good generic ballot polls for Democrats, plus a handful of good state-level results in places like North Dakota — to reverse the GOP gains in our forecast. There is truth in the idea that Republicans have had a decent week of polling, but it can also be exaggerated by cherry-picking data that’s consistent with a particular narrative. Finally, it should go without saying that this is still a dynamic situation, and it doesn’t necessarily follow that the party that “wins” the battle over Kavanaugh will benefit electorally. The opposite could prove true. A CBS News/YouGov poll conducted earlier this week found that more voters would be angry than enthusiastic if Kavanaugh was confirmed — but also, more voters would be angry than enthusiastic if Kavanaugh was not confirmed. Whichever party doesn’t get its way on Kavanaugh will have more reason to feel aggrieved — and perhaps more motivation to turn out to vote"

 

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Mobo2000 wrote:

Do you think it's a lock the Democrats will win the house?

Depends what you mean by a lock. I would put the probability right now at about 80%, but a week is an eternity in politics.

josh

Yeah, 80% is about right.  Republicans could lose 6 seats in California alone.  At this point I think we’re looking at a 30-35 seat gain.

NDPP

We shall see...If the Dem win is not as predicted, will you be blaming Putin and Wikileaks again?

Pages