Curious.

It is probably much more than a problem - like an addiction. Didn't he incur major debt from this? If so that would indicate an addiction.

Normally, government leaders would avoid nominating a person with active, uncontrolled addictions to the highest court. For one thing, such a person is a security risk and can be blackmailed.

These are not normal times. I suspect that Kavanaugh is already being blackmailed by the Russians. He himself brags in public speeches about his drunken exploits. What does Putin have on tape?

1: have you ever sought treatment for alcohol abuse?

2. have you ever sought treatment for gambling addiction?

Whitehouse skirted those in his written questions.

If Kavanaugh comes back somebody has to get him on record on those two points.

As a person who has struggled with addiction and spent almost a year in rehab to deal with it I'd like to know.

Both of those are addiction problems rooted in the same neurological functioning of our brains as any other addiction. You name it - sex, drugs, alcohol, over-eating, shopping, etc. That is not my opinion, that is the opinion of well-know doctors and neuroscientists.

If he actually has an addiction problem and he has sought help then he deserves some credit for that. It's the people who are addicts, still in denial and still abusing that would be an issue.

Now, don't get me wrong. He is absolutely not right for SCOTUS because he's not an impartial jurist. He is a political hack. Under NO circumstances do I want him confirmed.

I recognize your name and respect your posts. This one I just have questions about. I'm not trying to start an argument or flame war. The way I read this post though, is that if a candidate has an addiction problem and has sought help for it that is still a dis-qualifier for the court. As I said, if a candidate has an addiction problem and is not in some sort of treatment/recovery program for it then, yes, absolutely, that would be a dis-qualifier. Do people relapse? Yes, all the time. Does every person relapse? No.

It is my experience that people with addiction problems who have sought treatment are no less qualified for jobs than anyone else. Some of them actually make major changes in their lives and become better people. Clearly, this has not happened to Kavanaugh so I'd put money on him being an addict still in the throws of his addiction. Some of the people in recovery also find Jesus and become right-wing thumpers. Like W. Bush. Those people are not the kind of people I'm talking about who made a positive life change and are not qualified for the court.

My basic premise is: an addict who is in recovery should not be dis-qualified from the court.

Discuss.

That's the point

If your desire is to just get him to lie under oath, I think he's done that.

His lies during his previous confirmations are the most damming thing I can think of. Yes, the assault is horrible and damming. But it didn't come up before now and he lied, under oath, about his partisan involvement with nominees while in the Bush admin. That squarely shows he is a partisan hack and liar for his cause - the continued power of Republicans.

His lies under oath should be as big a deal as the sexual assault.

For it to not be disqualifying. I'm sure you would know better than I how to gauge it, but if someone has been recovered for a few years, I wouldn't hold it against him.

Will disqualify a person for a security clearance. These type of conditions are typically kept secret and therefore make them vulnerable to blackmail.
They also can cause a person to accumulate unmanageable amounts of debt, also making them vulnerable to be turned as an asset.
There is a lot of “depends” in there too. It has to be in the past and the person has to be completely honest and forthcoming of their history. Lying is an automatic rejection.

When it comes to the intelligence services, the CIA is the only agency I am aware of that will consider a agent-candidate with drug use in their past and only then if it is in their past and not current (and being completely honest. Lying=rejection.

Being an impartial jurist is not at all the same as being a spy. I understand that secrets are more of an issue with spies and people who are in clandestine services. So keeping an addiction a secret is a risk to national security. Those problems are very relevant in that case.

The court cases and the financial dealings of the justices on the Supreme Court are public knowledge. They file disclosure reports annually. This should make the possibility of bribery much less of an issue. Not an impossibility, of course.

I feel, and this is my personal bias, that people who have experienced difficult times related to addiction and other family issues are more likely to take a broader view of things than a person who's had a more normal life free of those sorts of things.

The old phrase about "walk a mile in my shoes" is very on target in my opinion.

Wouldn't you rather have a woman on the court who had to face the reality of an unwanted pregnancy, who made a decision about that than a woman or man who never had that issue come up in their lives? No matter if they decided to keep the child or not they certainly have a far better understanding of the issue than someone who never encountered that. Someone who spent all their time in a protective bubble far away from such a decision?

It is the same. People who have had to deal with these things directly are more empathetic when it comes to ruling on health care and laws that criminalize addiction.

remember my password after almost being taken out by "terminal" cancer...(Ecumenist is my original SN). ANYWAY, I have to disagree. Because the Supreme Court is that highest court of the land, I don't believe that any addict, {{treated OR untreated}} should EVER been considered a candidate for the Supreme court.
WHY?
HERE'S WHY: Addicts OFTEN slide back into active use while they're supposedly clean and sober, making terrible decisions, pretending to be in a healthy state before finally getting back onto the straight & narrow. It doesn't cast aspersions on people who've gotten their life back to a healthy track to say that you CANNOT BE CONSIDERED for a set on the court :IF YOU HAVE BEEN AN ADDICT AT ANYTIME IN YOUR LIFE! Take this from someone who comes from a family of people who have had issues with alcohol, presciption drugs, stret drugs, gambling, sex, shopping. etc....NOPE!

The same way that a person cannot be considered for certain jobs if they've been convicted of a crime, even a misdemeanour...

I LOVE my family members who've gotten their lives together & after seeing their struggles, (on BOTH sides) but I have seen the journey they travelled & NOPE, NAH, NO, NON, NAY-NAY, NOT for the Bench ESPECIALLY the Supreme Court. I'm DELIGHTED to read about your success & healing but this is my opinion.

Ford sounds like a formidable witness.

He could have made this go away immediately. "In high school, I made many youthful errors that I now regret entirely. I wish to apologize to Professor Ford and assure her that I have since learned how wrong I was at the time, and assure her that I have matured since those days."

Boom. Done. Nobody actually thinks a 16-year-old is irredeemable.

But he wouldn't say it. He doubled down.

They just won't admit that they can do anything wrong.

are not forgivable.

Especially as he's a judge on the highest court of the land. I know we have a POTUS whose the lowest common denominator as is his family but I'd rather SCOTUS try to be honorable. And it can't be too hard to find a nominee that doesn't have sexual assault in his past.

If you are a republican these days.

Nor will they ever be.

And it's something that the victim will NOT ever simply "get over."

I don't think right-wingers have the capacity to comprehend that, or the empathy.

Not a youthful indiscretion. To be forgiven by society, he'd have to pay his dues in prison.

And lawyered up.

...when Jimmy Swaggart had his moment.

Even has the same barber

to me it shows what scum he is even today.

That moment right there showed us his character. This is not a man who is fit to serve as a Supreme Court justice.

That would be the end.

Remember, the sort of rape described is a vicious violent crime that arises from hostility and desire to hurt someone that way. It's not just a healthy little lust a boy accidentally let slip out of control.

The issue isn't whether a 16-year-old is "irredeemable." It's that most 16-year-old high school boys wouldn't plan and attempt to execute a rape and there's something wrong with those who do.

Interesting rumors, thanks. So perhaps senate Repugs were all prepared to knock down some other big thing? Of course we knew they were attempting to ram him through before something came up.

It's so wrong, though, that just his long-time patterns of malfeasance through work, multiple perjuries, and even possible criminal conspiracy in the theft of those Democratic computer files, weren't enough to shock enough Americans to protest.

We shouldn't need unproven allegations of private behaviors at all.

It is often very surprising just which bit of evidence will get you off; it is not always the exculpatory proof, but sometimes the bit that you thought would be trivial.

said some magic words by the side of the road that helped tremendously. I had driven through a red light with a cop right behind me. For the life of me I had no idea where the light was when he asked me if I hadn't seen it. Turned out the magic words were my guilty admission that I'd been anxiously peeking at him because my license plate was expired and I was afraid he'd pull me over. Noticeable effect on his attitude. Gave me a warning for the moving violation and pleasant recommendation to renew.

Somehow I don't think admitting he planned and attempted to execute a violent rape attempt because he was drunk would have the same effect.

"You can't walk back a categorical denial" -- https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/a23278660/brett-kavanaugh-rape-allegation/

He said he had said he didn't remember it but that he did many things that he didn't remember when he was young and had been drinking, and he apologized I think it would have gone away.

There are a thousand reasons for women not to come forward. Professor Cook tried to remain anonymous. Just look at the door it opened re Anita Hill.

I heard Anita Hill testifying and as everyone now knows it was brutal. Justice Thomas was truly disgusting and the treatment she received was overtly misogynist. But it set in motion a major change in laws protecting women although not nearly enough. It also convinced many women not to come forward. But you can rest assured that most predatory men are repeat offenders.

This asshole has adopted trump's view that you never apologize for anything

You make a good point about being redeemable, but these are different times and he's a judge

Guys like Kavanaugh don't have that level of introspection within them. I'm sure he thought he did nothing wrong then. His level of privilege insulates him from having to look back on things he's done.
Plus, republicans never apologize. It shows weakness. They don't believe in it.

Follow the money. I want to know who paid (or took on) his gambling debts... and what he owes them. Was it some shady GOP donor expecting favors? Or maybe it was the mob? Or perhaps the Russians? Kavanaugh is just the kind of compromised person that all these folks can manipulate and blackmail.

but doesn't a certain POTUS own a casino or three? And isn't he likely to be choosing Kavenaugh in large part because he wants a single specific ruling on a single specific issue?

Quid pro quo?

Again, purely speculation. But not wholly unreasonable speculation, either.

Not unreasonable at all.

Ford is not the only woman Brett Kavanaugh abused. The fact that he got away with it with her just emboldened him.

Sounds like his Yale yrs also included lots of drinking.

His memos about Bill Clinton contain twisted, detailed sexual scenarios that are worthy of a deviant.

this whole nomination stinks to high heaven.

No one is pointing out that he was underage drunk.

My college buddy got busted for underage drinking a month before his 21st birthday, lucky the judge was cool and just fined him and put him on probation for a year.

My other friend had a DUI and it almost prevented him from getting into law school.

This guys only qualification is that he is willing to do the bidding for his corporate overlords.

And lie.

Oh, I hope they are doing a lot of research over the weekend!

There's no way he can show up to the committee again. All the knives will be sharpened now.

Maybe he can't withdraw.

But they're looking for a way that he doesn't have to answer "have you ever sought treatment for alcohol abuse?"

The letter from the other girls would only pertain to prep school behavior so if not Ford is there a second minor victim?

but they also had the letter ready, so if you are right the new charge will be much more serious!

"Sir, there's a rumor about..."

"Here is a pre-signed letter from 65 women saying I didn't rape them"

"Umm.... OK"

nt

Link to tweet

Do you know any normal person who has *never* gambled? Never?

Not one scratch-off, not one lottery ticket?

So we need evidence. His denial can't be proof of his guilt. Knowing who paid off his debt and how the debt accrued would be very helpful.

Did he deny gambling under oath?

It’s a diagnosis used on kids, which in his case is perfect. 😄

an f'ing train wreck,

and in this case there should have been no appointment made by this illegal pResident.

It is disgraceful.

everything we do. Any conduct, even outside of law, can affect our license. In NJ judges and justices are appointed based on merit after vetting by the Bar Association. A guy like Kavanaugh while intellectually qualified, although I hate his judicial philosophy, is dishonest and lacks the moral character to sit on any bench. You don’t need to be a lawyer to have the same opinion but being a member of the profession for 30 years and knowing the standards I am held to, it’s just amazing he is still being considered.

people very unethically in the past, and we believe he's willing to continue. You and he are playing different games in different leagues, almost different worlds.

The investigation of charges raised then that was blocked when he was nominated for a lifetime appointment on the appellate court would have culled him for sure. As it is, please, please let this hubris stimulate shockingly overdue investigation and, if appropriate, removal.

I know a couple people who are borderline.....

frump definitely is.

... I found this meme on a Twitter thread earlier today.

I'm sure there's more to that story too. $200K just doesn't appear and disappear.

or another budding Fixer

by gambling debts.

Trump knows how to pick 'em. I thought Clarence Thomas was bad.

They should follow the money

Kavanaugh told senators that, on the few occasions when he did go to casinos, he recalls playing low-stakes blackjack. He has never received a tax form reporting gambling earnings and never reported a gambling loss to the Internal Revenue Service. Nor has he ever participated in any fantasy sports leagues, and he has never been treated for a gambling addiction.

He's a lying sum bitch. His response is full of holes and very possibly the net that will tangle him up.

because I've also gone to casinos on a few occasions, I did win enough to fill out a tax form on gambling earnings (if you earn 1200 bucks or more in one go (bet, pull of the wheel, what have you) they instantly stop you from doing anything else til they fill the requisite tax forms. I once won 1300+ bucks on one pull of a machine.

I also play in fantasy sports leagues.

But with all of that, the most collectively I've lost in 20 years is maybe 3-4K bucks total...and probably not that much as I win about 40% of the time.

200K dollars? That's some serious gambling.

Birds of a feather flock together.

and the one (so far) to come out is a vicious, pre-meditated, violent, sexual attack on a young woman who as an adult is not involved in any current political administration involvement, then what they are so defiantly hiding must be seriously condemning and criminal.

My guess is the Republican hierarchy knows well what they are hiding.

DIG DEEP.

..I hate McConnell...he is reported as saying something to the effect, "pick literally anybody else" " in reference to Kavenaugh ..(see original post for this comment)

That is the proof, and McConnell knows the truth. Anybody else..anybody else

It totally makes sense that Trump would push him if he was told not to pick him.

"Oppositional Defiant Disorder."

Generally classified as a childhood affliction---but about half of the victims exhibit symptoms into adulthood.

Gotta love the abbreviation: ODD.

Holy crap, this is a thing? I've never heard of it before.

If her story is true I doubt she is the only one out there. Her description is of a violent assault and she was traumatized by something.
Kavanaugh denies it, but if he was blind drunk he could easily not remember. The whole thing stinks. The GOP trying to ram rod him onto the Supreme Court with a lifetime appointment? Without doing due diligence? Throw in the abortion stuff, his opinion that the President can do anything and a gambling problem to boot? Can't we find somebody better?

(Minus Sandra Day O'Connor).

?5

has a nice big gambling problem.

Gosh, we're in good hands now!

This is all distractions from the fact he
LIED TO CONGRESS!!

if any Democrat appointed to anything ever had a FRACTION of what this guy has




We are so past our expiration date, because of these filthy fucking traitors.

RIGHT NOW rump is declassifying how we spy on our enemy so the enemy can see it and so he can save himself.


If we were a steak on the BBQ we would be burnt to a crisp, let alone DONE

But I hope the truth comes out on this NAZI

Can you expand on #3?

...which was published several times WITHOUT KKKavanaugh's name. He was not added to the list and advanced to the top of the list of potential SCOTUS nominees until research by Don McGann and others showed that he favored increased presidential powers and decreased presidential liabilities. In other words, tRump* is hoping that KKKavanaugh is his "get out of jail free" card.

Really is this the BEST we can do for scotus?

I'd love for her to follow up on this.

Like before it's too late.

:kick:

"3. Ford isn't the #metoo they were expecting, there's a different story out there they're waiting to drop "