IF true, this guy is a bigger shit than I thought, and I already had him pegged as the biggest.
The security folks should be put on record immediately. then Kavanaugh should be asked to confirm or deny this, under oath.
The reason is bigger than the incident â if Kavanaugh thought he had any reason to fear Guttenberg, he should say what it is. If his claim is that Guttenberg is lying, that Kavanaugh didnât know who he was â then the nominee should SAY so. Letâs see who the Senators believe â with their votes.
But Occamâs Razor indicates that this is exactly what Guttenberg said â he approached Kavanaugh, offered to shake his hand, and then Kavanaugh publicly disrespected the father of a murdered daughter, for political reasons, because he could.
Thatâs a disqualification for the Supreme Court. Whatâs more, itâs indefensible in a nominee â so, make him defend it.
Under oath.
Since when do witnesses before a Congressional Committee get to decide who is allowed to be in the gallery?
Itâs a disqualification for being an adult human being. Someone send Kavanaugh back to kindergarten: pretty clearly he didnât get it the first time.
I wish I could agree with you but instances of public rudeness, intentional or otherwise, are not and never have been a disqualifying factor for a Supreme Court Justice. And the Committee isnât going to spend five minutes on it.
I donât think much disqualifies anyone from serving on any government body these days. SCOTUS is as corrupt as any of them. This is a group that counts among them Clarence Thomas after all. Felons leave jail for corruption and other crimes and within mere months run for office again and get elected. Trump won the Presidency. Coal lobbyists and anti-renewable energy people run the EPA. Private school advocates oversee public schools. Anti-vaxers run public health departmetnts. And judges focus on bending the meaning of the Constitution to enrich and coddle the one percenters and elect to office people wanting to do the same.
Kavanaugh will fit right in.
You miss my point: itâs not about rudeness, but veracity under oath.
If Kavanaugh sees this as a problem (an open question), he could simply find a visible place to greet Guttenberg, shake his hand, and apologize, along the lines of âI canât discuss any of the issues with you, but as one father to another, my prayers are with you and your family.â Done.
Itâs very likely he wonât do that, for the same reason that he turned on his heel when he realized who Guttenberg was â the distinguishing characteristic of President Trump and his minions (including Kavanaugh) is profound contempt for their fellow Americans.
So Kavanaugh should be called on his claim that he didnât know who Guttenberg was: under oath. Which one would Senators believe? Cuz thereâd be consequences to believing Kavanaugh, particularly when (if) the security staff backs up Guttenbergâs story, that Kavanaugh clearly heard him identify himself.
Which is why itâs the second part thatâs critical â if Kavanaugh KNEW who Guttenberg was, and wanted him removed, thatâs precisely the kind of indication how he would act as a Justice that could (just COULD) mean no Democratic defections â and possibly TWO Republicans.
Especially if he tries to lie about it. Under oath.
Iâm sorry, but none of that is going to happen. Theyâre going to proceed as scheduled. Republicans are determined to get this clown on the bench, and get him on the bench they will.
Consider it as a mere additional confirmation of what we already suspected.
Toss it in the âbasketâ with the rest and keep it handy, one day it will be useful.
The look of contempt and disgust on Kavanaughâs face and preserved for all time was his true self revealed. Not the fucking soccer dad shit with ads carefully selected from women who have nothing to lose and in some cases everything to gain by supporting his nomination. A man with not only zero empathy for those whoâve suffered from his extremist view but actual hatred of those in pain.
What did he say to security to get Guttenberg removed? Because in many jurisdictions making false statements to police for the purpose of having someone detained is a crime.
Itâs inside baseball, but it raises an interesting question about separation of powers â WHO were the âsecurity guardsâ?
In general, the physical security of a Senate hearing is the responsibility of the Capitol Police, while the personal safety of an Executive witness (including a nominee) is the responsibility of the Executive agency â in this case, either the Executive Office of the President or the Department of Justice. (Does anybody know about a SCOTUS nominee?)
Kavanaugh may have asked his security detail to have Guttenberg removed for reasons which the Capitol Police determined were bogus â for example, Guttenberg was evidently in the room at the invitation of Senator Feinstein. So the Capitol cops would definitely have asked Feinstein about removing him â which could be why he wasnât.
Itâs worth hammering on the point: Republican Senators like Collins, Murkowski, Capito, Fischer and Ernst can probably rationalize voting to confirm Kavanaugh based on the idea that he can be trusted.
Until heâs caught lying under oath, IN his confirmation hearing.
Are you kidding? Youâre talking about a court that currently sits a Justice accused of putting public hair on someoneâs drink!!! A public snub wonât stop these Repubs from forcing this guy in⌠and theyâre not even gonna use any lube!
You could change the singular to the plural and have a perfect description of the Republican party.
I guess sticking your hand out to shake and saying your name is THREATENING nowâŚguess Donnie will have to outlaw THAT nowâŚ
The episode is indicative of a nebulous qualification quaintly termed, âfitnessâ.
Robert Bork had a negative score on that scale, despite stellar legal pedigree and history.(Aside from that Saturday Night unpleasantness.)
And if heâll make deliberately false or misleading statements before Congress, well I think we all deserve to know that.
And if heâs before Congress, he need not necessarily be under oath to get into dangerous waters.
Mind you perjury would be preferable.