I defend Darwin and The Origin of Species 1st ed. a couple of times a year. Almost always to someone who has never bothered to read the book. Darwin could write engaging prose (Voyage of the Beagle) but Origiin is anything but an easy read. Darwin got the broad strokes of evolution mostly right in the 1st edition...and tended to muddy the waters in subsequent editions. Darwin was never aware of early geneticists. He came so close, but he never read the letter Gregor Mendel sent him. I consider Darwin one of The Great Minds, but his work is a century and a half old.

Well, there is no verbatim transcript of the Huxley-Wilberforce encounter, and the biblical quote is most likely an embellishment.

That was supposed to be a joke... no transcript, didn't happen! Very interesting stuff, though, and I spent a good couple hours reading multiple links and several different accounts written close to the time of the event. One of them:

http://www.victorianweb.org/science/biology/oxforddebate.html

I love the story because I have an direct academic chain to Darwin's Bulldog.

Oh, really!? So you're a dastard, are you!? ;)

Just kidding. It's a word I learned today at that link above. I love history. :)

I still maintain, if Trump thinks he stands a chance in 2020, however remote, his ego will demand to see it through, more to extend his days of freedom than any inner fealty to the nation. If Trump senses all is lost, he'll step aside for Pence, under condition of blanket pardons. Pence has always been the 'establishment man', he did more to carry Trump to his 'massive' 60,000 vote difference of the Electoral College dive over the line than Trump...Pence carried the mulligan nutter fringe. Pence has always pledged allegiance, but is rarely around when Trump steps on his own banana peel. Biden will beat Pence easily too.

The next US election should be decided by people willing to put aside their religious disability and deal with the general health of the nation. It's time to wake up as planet. Religion is in retrograde, there are more people secure in the knowledge that we are made of stars, than there are who believe in some miserable freak using lifeforms as playthings. The time has passed for faith to make smart people sound stupid and the stupid to feel smart.

I'm fed up with all the theocratic idiocy pushing society around.

Mulligans indeed, what utter hypocrisy...

LL&P

I'd say the confirmation success half life is down to one day. There are too many threads unraveling in the press in real time. I don't see how he comes back from this by Friday, if in fact the FBI can now interview witnesses beyond the initial four.

That reminds me of my cherry whiskey party … or, more accurately, of its aftermath.

Ooops. Canadians do have some great whiskey. :)

Here are more pictures of Trump "never" drinking.

https://www.quora.com/How-often-does-President-Trump-drink-alcohol

Some of these "drinks" appear to be water glasses that are similar to wine glasses, though.

Did you hear what Trump said at the presser when he was talking about being surprised about how Kavanaugh was talking about beers so much?

Yes. TS is right, though, Trump is getting worse.

Oh, it made be laugh out loud! I mean, I was laughing with the president, not at him …

I was shaking my head... yet again... at the shameless lies. This won't surprise anyone whatsoever, but Donald Trump is a liar.

He said, and I paraphrase, I don't drink alcohol; never have for whatever reason; it's a good thing - can you imagine if I did drink!

Can you imagine Trump drinking? It's easy if you try:

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/how-social-media-reacted-to-trump-s-claim-he-never-drinks

I've never found anything in print... yet... to verify this story, but it is widely known by people who know these things that Donald Trump is lying about never drinking. There's a widely known tale how Trump was drinking one time and had a few too many strawberry margaritas. Once outside the establishment, Trump began to vomit red and freaked out, became angry and scared, demanding someone call an ambulance because he thought he was bleeding. Poor dumb drunk had to be reminded that it was the strawberry drinks they had consumed and not his own blood.

Surprise... not surprise… Trump lies! :)

The problem isn't Biden's - it is that other countries wouldn't trust some Trumpian clown after Biden …

You know, I never thought of that problem … that Americans could elect someone like Trump again.

Still, that's not an argument against Biden in 2020. Not the least because his choice for running mate would be extraordinary. :)

Still, that's not an argument against Biden in 2020. Not the least because his choice for running mate would be extraordinary. :)

Not if Senator Biden is Trump's successor.

The problem isn't Biden's - it is that other countries wouldn't trust some Trumpian clown after Biden to stick with the agreements Biden repaired. NAFTA, the Iran Deal, Paris, TPP, etc. show that one idiot can undo the good that decades of intelligent leadership can build.

The "Six Year Review" clause is likely to be the first of many America will have to agree to - and long release clauses are likely to be the norm as well.

"link to transcript... or it didn't happen! :p"

Well, there is no verbatim transcript of the Huxley-Wilberforce encounter, and the biblical quote is most likely an embellishment. The quote does serve to emphasize how Wilberforce dismissively gave Huxley a softball pitch, which Huxley (not a great debater by most accounts) proceeded to knock out of the park.

I love the story because I have an direct academic chain to Darwin's Bulldog.

The impact of Trump on the promise of America and on America's future global leadership role need not last decades.

Not if Senator Biden is Trump's successor.

Trust is earned in drops but can be lost by the bucket. The clown show we have for an administration has lost bucket loads already, and are bailing furiously because Donnie Orangeface really has no clue how the World works.

Did you hear what Trump said at the presser when he was talking about being surprised about how Kavanaugh was talking about beers so much?

Oh, it made be laugh out loud! I mean, I was laughing with the president, not at him …

He said, and I paraphrase, I don't drink alcohol; never have for whatever reason; it's a good thing - can you imagine if I did drink!

Heh.

You make some good points. Canadians, generally speaking, are still smarting from being labeled a national security threat wrt the steel and aluminum tariffs that are a separate issue from the USMCA on trade.

As for the impact of Trump's actions on trade and foreign relations, the length and severity of the impact will depend in large part on who replaces Trump. That is why I think Biden is the best antidote to Trump and Trumpism.

I was thinking that this could be an issue that most Americans can agree to - Republican and Democrat, alike.

I think you're exactly right.

If Democrats choose to oppose this simply as part of their overall resistance to Trump, then I suggest they think again.

I suspect you'll have a few that need some attention and make some noise about the details... situation normal... but this one should easily pass. :)

Nice post. Exactly what I wanted... a Canadian to tell set me straight about what it is and isn't.

So, personally, I couldn't care less about this agreement, none of Canada's primary trades have been touched, oil, coal, bitumen, softwood lumber, fisheries, soy, wheat, nat gas, diamond, gold, silver, platinum and plutonium.

Sounds good for our friends to the North.

Also, Trump just jettisoned any chance of cheaper pharmaceuticals for Americans, contrary to what he campaigned on, he added an extra two years to the copy right of drugs against the generic drug companies...who are largely owned by big pharma anyway? So, don't expect prescription prices to fall anytime soon, and so much for draining the swamp...

Well, that sounds about right... Situation Normal... SNAFU; the minions will love it because they'll believe whatever Trump or Fox tells them.

All in all, DRUMFTA is a slightly rushed, somewhat updated version of NAFTA with mild concessions on all sides.

DRUMFTA! *laughs*

It remains to be seen if it's ratified by all legislators involved...because of Trudeau's complete mandate here, he can do what he wants with it for a few years, same in Mexico, the us...not so much, congress may never ratify it.

Nothing the U.S. Congress does surprises me anymore.

Thank you for explaining me this, JTC! It is truly appreciated. :)

Trade is an important factor in international relations, but it isn't all about the 'almighty buck' and the insipid avarice connected to the Pan-American dream.

The bully tactics of Trump regime, and the 'stick-up' mentality of keeping your friends and neighbours to heel by brow beating, and lying about the true nature of the relationship, hasn't sat well in Canada. American's are still well liked and trusted, but the government is loathed. A great many people in Canada see this last few months as nothing short of a double-cross and a knife in the back, especially in light of the fact that Canadians are still dying in your fucking war in Afghanistan because we honoured OUR agreement(article 5 NATO). You can almost take it to the bank, once this ransom demand, NAFTA 2.0 is signed, Canada will be out of the 'Empire Killer' before the ink is dry. I gather also, Canada, UK, New Zealand and Australia have tightened their grip on sharing military intel with the US, expect it to tighten more until Trump and his gang are cast aside, and long after until trust is mutual.

I only point this out because a fish only understands the contents of its tank. From all I have seen, I think the majority of Americans don't quite see or listen to the outside world. I think it's a mistake to assume that in a post Trumpian era the US will be welcomed back into the fold of its previous allies and trading partners. Trump and his MAGA stink will be on America for a generation, luckily, the American people, as I said, are still liked and trusted...It's not like Trump represents the majority.

LL&P

America's international agreements aren't trusted like they once were, it's unfortunate, but true. The prevailing sentiment in Canada is, until the US congress votes on the agreement, it's not worth the paper it's written on.

LL&P

Prescription charges are crazy in the U.S. and importing from Canada is a great option. Americans trust that Canadians have real drugs, so they aren't going to get ripped off, but get much lower prices. The correct solution, as you point out, is to do this through separate legislation, but we all know that both sides of the political spectrum will ensure this doesn't happen. However a simple fix like "let us buy Canadian drugs" is simpler and also there will be a lot of other industries that want the deal to go through and will outspend the drug companies if it comes to that.

I laughed at that - the minute it is guaranteed the clown is thrown out of the White House (it will probably be four years earlier, but they weren't risking the stupidity of the american electorate) they want a mulligan.

I get the feeling we are going to see a lot of mulligans in 2021 - the TPP is an obvious one - the other countries are keeping it warm for us.

Don't get me wrong. If Canada and Mexico both indicate that they want the deal, it will pass, eventually.

But, from the information I've seen and heard, it will result in higher prices on both sides, particularly, as Neil notes, in prescription drugs.

If Democrats take the Senate in November, they can block ratification until they're seated in January. Then they might insist on beneficial changes to the Treaty, or on a side treaty regarding drug prices in particular, prior to ratification.

You assumed that the democrats would be the enemy of the agreement …

Actually, I assumed the opposite.

I can't imagine Democrats trying to oppose this deal on one issue like lower drug prices. Besides, are there not other ways Democrats can fight higher drug prices?

You know that free (and fair) trade throughout North America is critical to the economies of all three parties and that is why Congress will ratify it or suffer severe consequences.

What I meant to ask is why would anyone think their won't be a 2/3 vote in Congress.

How do you see this deal failing "a lot of constituents"?

As far as trade deals go, this seems to be a good one. And, it also has a sunset clause whereby it can be renegotiated in six years.

Why would a majority of Senate Democrats not vote to ratify the USMCA on trade?

Bigly.

LL&P

It could be for other reasons. Famously, Colin Powell made George Tenet sit behind him when he gave his indictment of Iraq to the U.N. - which was possibly the biggest pile of bullshit delivered to that august body by somebody not named Khadaffi.

So it could be that, like Powell, Trump doesn't want sole responsibility for the crap he's spewing. Then, too, loyalty has become an issue lately.

It worked for Powell, incidentally. Anytime anyone sees that picture, they're reminded that Tenet told him that the information was a "slam dunk".

.

I freely admit I'm left-libertarian, but I don't advocate for abortion, religion and ultra governmental intrusion, right-libertarians want guns, god and right to life and zero/little governmental oversight. We share some beliefs, but we aren't diametrically opposed at the core. Were I still living in the US, I'd be an Independent-left leaning.

LL&P

I've always wondered why staff line up behind a President during white how TV sessions. Is it to keep Presidents from running away?

With all respect, I think the problem has solved itself. Not that the problem can't or won't come back.

I'm not suggesting the democrats oppose the new agreement, I'm just pointing out that there will be GOP members of congress who don't want to pay the price of towing the party line at the polls in their own corner of America... You assumed that the democrats would be the enemy of the agreement because of the shambolic political environment the US is in, which is odd to me, given that this very same thing that played out with repealing Obamacare and is playing out now with Kavanaugh.

LL&P

That's easy. It takes a 2/3 vote to ratify a treaty in the Senate, something that's not going to happen unless a lot of constituents are made happy and whole, which by all accounts, this treaty fails to do.

Trump has the power to enter into an informal arrangement with Canada - to abide by the draft treaty until ratification - but if legal challenges arise, the issue will be decided based on the previously ratified treaty, rather than the informal agreement.

You'd almost think that some other power was at play here, and when you think about it in Britain, too, where suddenly, and at our own hands, economic arrangements that were once dependable are suddenly up in the air, and treaties are trashed like parking receipts. Someone not fond of the West, obviously.

One reason is the drug prices. Healthcare is a potent weapon for the Democrats and if they can insist that they need a better deal for Americans on drug prices then they not only make the White House look in the pocket of big pharma, but also wrong foot him on healthcare leading up to 2020.

If the White House tries to renegotiate and fails then the whole "great deal maker" becomes a laughingstock, and if they don't then they look like they are trying to increase drug prices. A nice lose-lose for the White House and a win-win for the Democrats and Americans.

because of Trudeau's complete mandate here, he can do what he wants with it for a few years, same in Mexico, the us...not so much, congress may never ratify it.

I'm curious as to why you think Congress may never ratify it.

I was thinking that this could be an issue that most Americans can agree to - Republican and Democrat, alike.

If Democrats choose to oppose this simply as part of their overall resistance to Trump, then I suggest they think again.

So, personally, I couldn't care less about this agreement, none of Canada's primary trades have been touched, oil, coal, bitumen, softwood lumber, fisheries, soy, wheat, nat gas, diamond, gold, silver, platinum and plutonium. All unaffected, and if the dairy is of the same quality we can get here, who cares...were I a Wisconsin dairy producer, I'd be more worried about the subsidies they get from DC, the grey area for them is the parity, which Canada has no problem with, but the truth is, DC subsidises the dairy industry to be cheaply exported, hence Canada's tariff on the industry, the new agreement seems to imply that DC has to cut the subsidy before six years, or six percent imports of US dairy is realised in Canada...
Also, Trump just jettisoned any chance of cheaper pharmaceuticals for Americans, contrary to what he campaigned on, he added an extra two years to the copy right of drugs against the generic drug companies...who are largely owned by big pharma anyway? So, don't expect prescription prices to fall anytime soon, and so much for draining the swamp...

All in all, DRUMFTA is a slightly rushed, somewhat updated version of NAFTA with mild concessions on all sides. It remains to be seen if it's ratified by all legislators involved...because of Trudeau's complete mandate here, he can do what he wants with it for a few years, same in Mexico, the us...not so much, congress may never ratify it.

LL&P

Avenatti's client isn't the first to point out the culture of group sexual assault that existed among Kavanaugh's crowd. Christine Ford indicated that Mark Judge stayed in the room during her assault. Mark Judge's girlfriend has said that he 'tearfully' described gang rapes that he was a part of to her. The letter sent by Julia Louise Dreyfus at her classmates, students at a girls school near Georgetown Prep, stated that some of them were 'survivors' of similar behavior.

I think this is an area that needs to be fleshed out more. What we're witnessing right now is the exposure of what might be a mountain of past crimes. How many girls/women were assaulted over how many years by how many privileged men? And how many MORE privileged men AND women knew and averted their eyes or covered up?

How liable are any of the bystanders? How liable, now, are any of the perps from over the years?

How many former perps now hold high positions in important places?

How much like Weinstein's Hollywood is the beltway?

The economy has a lot of signs that the rush is tapering. I'm seeing it at my company, and I'm not the only one. McKinsey's Economic Conditions Snapshot shows that executive business sentiment has gone into a tailspin from about +45 to basically zero in six months. These are global figures and emerging markets are being pushed down by a double whammy of a strong dollar and increased interest rates (a lot of emerging market companies borrowed at low dollar-denominated interest rates, so not only are their interest payments increasing, but they are also increasing in their own currency relative to the dollar).

However the U.S. cannot carry the World, and as we force the Fed to react to a sugar rush, we damage our trading partners and everybody loses.

This implies that you have a basic grasp of global economics and don't think that trade deficits are some sort of scoring mechanism in a game of who wins and who loses, like the White House does at the moment.

I'm hoping that Trump is re-elected in 2020 because the economy is doing so well from his policies that even I can overlook everything else, because if I'm there then a lot of people have been lifted out of poverty in the U.S., however every ounce of common sense I have screams that we put our foot on the accelerator, pointed the car downhill and cut the brake cables, and now we are getting excited about how fast we are going.

Source:

https://www.mckinsey.com/business-functions/strategy-and-corporate-finance/our-insights/economic-conditions-snapshot-september-2018-mckinsey-global-survey-results

He goes on to undercut his own argument later in the piece by asserting (sans evidence) that Avenatti - Dershowitz's real target in this piece - might have 'tweaked the story' to make it sound more sensational, and suggests that the attorney-client privilege should be breached based on his hunch. He knows that there isn't actually a Court in this country that would consent to that, he just wants to beat Avenatti up with the insinuation.

In other words, Dershowitz's article belongs less in the arena of legal reasoning, where he has some credibility, and more in the arena of political polemics, where lately, and increasingly, he has none, having long ago thrown in his lot with Israel's hard liners and their right-wing enablers here in the US.

Dershowitz is here writing for an audience of one: Trump. His motivation is obvious - to get and keep access to the White House, so that he can continue to bend Trump's ear on the subject of Israel (a topic on which he would otherwise be unqualified to give advice, save for the fact that he's Jewish).

Moreover, Dershowitz is quite aware that by making this particular argument, he's engaging in the oldest legal counter-strategy in the playbook - blaming the victim in order to divert attention away from the behavior of the accused.

This is because Kavanaugh's defenders cannot bring the most reasonable defense into play: that 'spiking the punch' has been a thing at teen parties since punchbowls and booze were first brought into proximity to one another - catch the third Act of Back to the Future for an example in popular media.

But Dershowitz knows that using that particular defense opens Kavanaugh up to a line of questions that he doesn't want pursued - Kavanaugh's motivation for spiking the punch in the first place.

Avenatti's client isn't the first to point out the culture of group sexual assault that existed among Kavanaugh's crowd. Christine Ford indicated that Mark Judge stayed in the room during her assault. Mark Judge's girlfriend has said that he 'tearfully' described gang rapes that he was a part of to her. The letter sent by Julia Louise Dreyfus at her classmates, students at a girls school near Georgetown Prep, stated that some of them were 'survivors' of similar behavior.

Finally, the 'silence equals assent' argument is just spurious, more of a meme than a basis for serious discussion. How much silence is required before it becomes assent? If Kav's accuser told a girlfriend about it, is she absolved from the sin of silence? Perhaps Dershowitz needs to read a copy of "A Handmaid's Tale" to understand how the issue of silent assent can be abused.

I could, for example, demonstrate the complicity of the Republican Party to everything that Obama did, by pointing out that they all continued to pay their taxes, participate in representative government, and form contracts with the govenment even while he was President. Complicity. Where was the civil disobedience characteristic of a dedicated opposition? Were the streets blocked by sit-ins?

Similarly, the Catholic Church opposes abortion, but have they ever forced the issue? Couldn't they mobilize their flocks to protest, to threaten to shut down nearly half of America's schools and hospitals until Roe is overturned? Is their (relative) silence complicity?

You see? It's ultimately impossible to sustain that line of reasoning. That's what makes it a bad argument.

Sorry this post is so long, but one reason that I haven't responded to this ridiculous argument is that a proper answer requires such depth, otherwise I'd prefer to call it nonsense and move on.

Stephen Fry and Christopher Hitchens... yes, sir... a much more civilized way to debate than the use of firearms so often employed "across the pond."

I get the sense Michale's absence will be short-lived, considering his premise for 'taking his ball and going home' has more holes in it than the fake Swiss Cheese Canada still gets to hike under the new, but essentially, same NAFTA agreement.

Okay, please, Canadians and anybody who this is in their "wheelhouse" who can help me out regarding this new NAFTA deal. Is this more of a substantive change to NAFTA or just a name change and mostly optics? It seems to me like Trump has once again sold his minions one thing and then done another. Is this more window dressing and optics? Help, please. :)

@michale,

best,
JL

I wholeheartedly agree with Joshua, Michale. You should know the both of us extremely well by now. Which means that you shouldn't be making negative assumptions about us when you know better.

Rest up and get ready for the fundraising drive which is coming very soon!

All the best to you and yours ...

WTF? Kumbaya moments with a vicious dictator who runs concentration camps and starve his people. Yet a brave and honest American speaks out and he trashes her.

Neil is totally right! Trump "fell in love" with Kim Jong Un, a murderous thug who puts Christians in cages, and "Evangelicals" in the United States are just fine with that as long as The Donald deports the browns and defends the aggrieved white men like Brett Kavanaugh who are under attack in this country. Sad.

LL&P

I was thinking in the context of the Great Oxford debate of 1860, Huxley vs "Soapy Sam."

Link to transcript... or it didn't happen! :p

*smiles* *bats eyes* *winks*

One growing industry not addressed in the new agreement was Pot (outside the usual legal concerns) https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2018/09/29/canadian-cannabis-dominate-industry_a_23545796/?utm_hp_ref=ca-homepage

Maybe Canada will redress the ongoing overall trade surplus with the US, who knows, Canada might even get it to parity, that is, after all, what Trump claimed he wanted... hmmm

LL&P

I speculate that nobody wants to link to a website that for months has, on the front page no less, said "Substitute 2018 and 2020 where appropriate until site update is completed.", and prominently displays a 2015 Billy Joel song competition.

Who would want to associate with an idea when the movement's website is tragically out of date?

9 regular people are sitting in a diner having coffee, their average income is $50,000. Warren Buffet walks in, now the average income is $800,000,000.

A regular house in America cost $17,000 in 1963, today it is over $200,000.

But, you say, the 9 people are still only worth $50,000 on average, shouldn't you use the median?

And did you factor in inflation when comparing home prices from 55 years ago?

No. And neither did the White House when it announced that wages have increased for Americans since 2017.

The White House tells us that average wages have risen from $894.06 in January 2017 to $937.02 in August 2018.

The con is that the inflation adjusted median wage for Americans as fallen from $876 to $848 - almost a 2% decline.

Contrast this with the 5.73% increase in inflation adjusted median incomes in the last 18 months of Obama's presidency.

This is why the Republicans are not running on the economy beyond the White House - real people are getting worse off. They feel safer in their jobs, but aren't very happy with them.

So, I take umbrage with your 'facts and conclusions', unless of course we're talking about two different women making this accusation.

An aside: Threatening a room in which you have been accused, by multiple people, of spamming and trolling with your discontinued presence is like threatening a dog with another bone if it keeps barking...so best of luck with that.

LL&P

dershowitz doesn't write anything in that article that i disagree with, but i never bought into silence equalling assent. for me, when something (or someone) is not worth my attention i don't bother allocating the brain cells, much less the pixels. time away from here will probably do you good.

best,
JL

The affidavit laying out these allegations is so deeply flawed and so filled with gaps that it would be easy for any experienced cross-examiner to raise doubts about the credibility of the affiant. One critical question is why this young woman would repeatedly return to parties where she claims to have witnessed gang rapes of drugged women.
https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/409032-burden-on-avenatti-to-show-proof-or-face-consequences

I simply refuse to associate with people who accept that a college woman who attends high school gang rape parties on multiple occasions and who parties next to children being drugged and gang raped is credible..

People who think that SUCH actions are irrelevant and that the ONLY part that is important is who this scumbag is accusing...

In other words, people who support the drugging and gang rape of children in order to push a Party agenda...

I simply will not associate with people like that...

As an aside...

LB, you are the **ONLY** one here who rightly called out the lack of credibility of this Sweathog person...

I have found a blog where there are spirited discussions that I think you will like... I sure would like to continue our discussions there if you wish..

You can email me at michale AT em ef see see ef el DOT us if you would like to continue RATIONAL discussions...

As to the rest... With some of ya'all this degradation where drugging and child gang rape is acceptable?? It's about what I expected...

To the very few rest of ya'all??

It's extremely disappointing...

So Trump is channelling Eva Braun now? Anything that gets Jong Un out of those ghastly suits is fine by me. I'm guessing Trump has a thing for short, stocky tyrants shoe-horned into Lederhosen.

If they close their next love-in with a few choruses of 'The Hills Are Alive with Music' or 'The Horst Wessel Lied', we'll know I'm right.

:D

LL&P

WTF? Kumbaya moments with a vicious dictator who runs concentration camps and starve his people. Yet a brave and honest American speaks out and he trashes her.

1 Samuel 23:7.

I was thinking in the context of th Great Oxford debate of 1860, Huxley vs "Soapy Sam."

"indeed it was frustrating beyond belief to be locked out this particular week."

Must be catching...My internet has been down since late Friday and I just got it running again 10 minutes ago. What are the odds of a failed router followed by a new out of the box replacement that also wouldn't work? Cable guy installed yet another on a Sunday evening! Trifecta! I've got to look and see if I'm emitting an ethereal light or something.

Not sure if you folks have seen or can see this political cartoon... https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/world/cartoon-in-response-to-kavanaugh-hearing-goes-viral/ar-BBNKqW1?ocid=spartandhp&fullscreen=true#image=1

Just about sums up all of last week in American politics.

LL&P

LL&P

...and neither would they.

Ba-dump-dump Chh!

Kick, I liked that too, it was a nice, subtle touch.

Because I own nothing on the internet, I'm completely at ease with any additions to my posts.

I think the only question I would have added would be:

"Bret...Am I allowed to call you by your first name? [K..just this once] Bret, it's been suggested by former colleagues of yours that you have a preference, or an 'ideal' look you adhere to in choosing the female staffers in your orbit...is this true? if so, wouldn't you agree this lends credence to the notion that you consider women as objects rather than equals?"

That is one thread that seems to be a constant throughout his career. In all aspects of his life, there is that re-occurring theme, whether it's as a high-school lothario, or a creator of salacious queries to make Clinton squirm during the Lewinski saga up to his wanting women around him of a certain look. He quite obviously, regardless of his protestations to the contrary, believe that women are equal. I will always blame his religious upbringing for that, all major religions see women as not quite as equal to men, they just have extremes as their difference. Muslim and Hindu faiths see women as a possession of a man, Catholicism maintains that the man holds ultimate sway over the reproductive system of a woman...I see no difference.

Were we 'through the looking glass', could you imagine the hue and cry if the female counterparts in this other reality ordered all their men subjected to mandatory circumcision? It probably wouldn't sit well.

LL&P

Agree totally... the issue is his credibility now.

I agree that the FBI investigation will have little effect on how the GOP votes on his confirmation. I just want someone to ask the Republicans if honesty matters any more so we can get their official position on the truth!

Indeed... it's not a bug, it's a feature. The GOP is now the Party of Trump: The Grand Old Prevaricators. Sad.

But didn't you mean to say, when you wrote:

...and her coathanger?

Wow... brilliant.

I have a thought: how much of the FBI findings will we get to see?

Let there be leaks of the 302s. If I hear any leaks (as my word is my bond) I won't hesitate to post them... whether I have the "facts to support" them or not. :)

This, too, would make such a good movie (I wish I could pre-buy shares of the "Mueller" blockbuster).

I too will take shares in Mueller Time IPO… tagline: "I like beer. I like beer. I like beer."

It has (they'd both have) the future of the Nation at stake, a mystery, and a dedicated team of FBI investigators racing the clock. Popcorn time!

I like popcorn. ;)

"Cruz," you say? That is a malediction around these parts. Hold your tongue! ;)

Most notable during the hearing for me was Lindsey Graham's case of the vapors, quite the drama queen.

I know, right!? For a moment there I thought Miss Lindsey might have to resort to the smelling salts. :)

Awesome post, JTC! OMG... I laughed, I cried, I spewed my coffee! You have outdone yourself, sir. :)

I sat, jaw-agape, thinking, that guy has a slappable face in spades... someone please test my theory before he tells Kamala Harris to get his hat and coat.

Yes, sir. I was thinking dartboard... locate my scissors and tape.

I digress. Kavanaugh will quietly withdraw, blame the left-wing conspiracy he inaugurated 37 years ago and salvage his 250k a year job, and retreat back into burbs with his two point five Wife and children of the martyred.

If they take a sufficiently deep dive and request a polygraph, that may yet happen. They can continue to blame the "left" for the series of events, but no one on the "left" made him perjure himself. No one on the "left" assaulted Dr. Blasey Ford or concocted a "doppelganger" twitter farce with a conservative smear factory to blame another classmate of Kavanaugh's; I want the answers to that. I want a FINCEN accounting.

I miss the old days when Trump was at the center of scandal, at least he can be consistently cringe-worthy, without the tears.

So you're saying you miss "Mueller Time" and "99 Bottles of Beer"? Not to worry, JTC, it's not the "wall" he was hoping for, but there's a whole lot more to come down. :)

Why in the hell did you loose your judicial temperament and play the angry victim?

Yes, this! The most damning thing Kavanaugh said, in my honest opinion, was where he invoked the Bible, Hosea 8:7:

You sowed the wind for decades to come. I fear that the whole country will reap the whirlwind. ~ Brett Kavanaugh

Was that a threat or a promise? Do tell, "Bart."

Was it cable news chatter suggesting it might be smart to emulate Judge Thomas' angry "lynching by the man" strategy?

I'm going with "yes."

Did Trump, who has been known to use TV anger with good effect, put a bug in Judge K's ear?

Probably "yes."

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-news/kavanaugh-ford-sexual-assault-hearing/h_b1504fccaafc71fb23fec31ab2885507

Whatever the cause, Democrats had a rare "The Lord hath delivered him into my hands" moment. I hope they don't waste the save.

1 Samuel 23:7... Amen.

The central problem with Kav is that he appears to be a liar.

Yes! And it's a job interview to determine if Kavanaugh should get a lifetime promotion to the highest court in the United States and not a criminal investigation. Having said that, it certainly well could become a criminal investigation if credible evidence is produced from credible witness(es), which is arguably what has already happened with Dr. Blasey Ford.

In addition, Ed Whelan and Chuck Grassley's communications director, Garret Ventry (who subsequently resigned), concocted a "doppelganger" stunt on twitter with the assistance of a powerhouse conservative firm named CRC Public Relations -- the firm behind "Swift Boat Veterans for Truth" -- with the aim of blaming another for the attack on Christine Blasey. Was Kavanaugh involved in this ridiculous stunt where they attempted to blame her attack on "Squi" a.k.a. Chris Garrett? If Kavanaugh wasn't involved in this stunt, which of Kavanaugh's classmates was?

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/21/ed-whelan-kavanaugh-tweets-pr-firm-836405

He failed.

The government does not care what Kavanaugh did as a teenager in the heady atmosphere of the 1980s; however, they are infinitely interested in whether or not he is forthcoming regarding his past and whether or not he is truthful. The issue is credibility. Unfortunately, as is all too often the case, the omerta that surrounds guys like Kavanaugh is a tough nut to crack because to implicate him is an indictment of them.

So there's a week and a slew of 302s forthcoming to allow the FBI to sort this out. Regardless any statements by the Trump administration, they'll go where the evidence leads. Nothing will be off limits in the reopening of the investigation... not his finances, not his classmates, not the corroboration of his latest testimony... nothing.

It makes me wonder if he'll go through with it - I won't be surprised if he withdraws. I'd give it a 50-50 chance.

I agree, and I suspect they'll request he submit to polygraph, and I also suspect he'll decline. The people he wouldn't list on his SF-86 are now up for questioning, and omerta will either hold or fold.

You appear indignant about any questions about your yearbook entry. Why, if you are so dismissive of this line of questioning, did you bring the subject up yourself in your opening statement?

Yes, exactly this! Let me at him, it would go something like this:

You brought it up, "Bart," and I will do the asking of the questions in my limited time, which due to obvious constraints will be asked in rapid fire succession. Please limit your answers to "yes" or "no" and answer with a number where applicable.

[And then let multiple questions about the yearbook fly.]

You've stated numerous times "I like beer." Did you ever consume anything else besides beer during high school? Yes or no, sir. Did you ever consume any grain alcohol like Everclear or similar types? Yes or no, sir. Did you ever spike punch with grain alcohol such as Everclear or similar types? Did you witness any of your classmates? Do you have any knowledge regarding spiking at any of the functions you attended? Yes or no, sir.

Now, turning to your calendar, sir, and these too will be in rapid fire:

* I noticed you numbered and circled your days at the beach. There are 8 numbered and circled days during "beach week" and an additional 8 numbered and circled days for a total of 16 days at the beach during the 4-month period you provided the committee. How many total days would you estimate you spent at the beach during a typical school year?

* How many beers would you estimate would be consumed by you on a typical day at the beach? Any other type of alcohol besides beer? Any grain alcohol such as Everclear or similar types? Any of your classmates? Yes or no, sir.

* Did you ever drink alcohol at the beach to the point of passing out? Did any of your classmates?

* Were any illicit drugs used by you during high school or during beach week? Yes or no, sir. By any of your classmates?

* You mentioned the Rehoboth Police in your yearbook. Were you ever questioned by the police? Detained? Were you ever arrested, sir? Yes or no, sir. Were any of your classmates?

The "headline" vulnerability of course, is the present and potential scope of the high school era accusations. As he retreats into claims of piety and innocence, it becomes easier and easier to show him at least to be a current liar, whether or not he is proven to be a youthful sexual predator, and at worst a felon.

The second vulnerability is his world view forged by his experience as a political operative. While it gets far less media minutes, that's probably his original sin. Everything he did Thursday afternoon flows from that. Throwing a question back at a Senator's face comes from that. Blaming "the Clintons" for the attack on him bubbles up from that.

Regardless of what will be presented by the FBI findings, I think there's a good chance that his public demonstration of his bitter partisan nature is already resonating. That resonance can easily spread among the public, and among too many senators in both parties, for him to ultimately be voted onto the Supreme Court.

Politicians can be street fighters and trash talkers. Justices require moderation and the reticence of a sage. I won't be surprised if various explanations of the phrase "judicial temperament" figure prominently in the coverage across next week.

All of Av's talking points are likely to be found in there, at least those running the rest of the weekend. The menu includes the extent of the accusations, the possibility of a state-level criminal rape complaint, and the certainty of public "testimony" (my term) by his witnesses to felonious acts, in the event they are not included in the "limited" FBI investigation to his side's satisfaction. Everything on his shock and awe menu is discussed. At the end, Joy Reid graciously offered her platform next weekend should his witnesses need it.

Avenatti is a big problem, and a loose cannon, or at least, he plays one on television.

Precisely so. Kavanaugh's over-the-top partisan tirade is exactly the opposite display of temperament that one would've expected from a person applying for the job of Sober Deliberator. "I like beer" isn't even close to the answer that was called for here.

He was obviously coached in this by someone at the Trump White House that (unsurprisingly) believes that belligerency, bluster, lies and demagoguery are a better strategy in this instance than honesty and atonement. His decision to go with that cynical ploy renders his performance all the more deplorable as a result.

If you should happen on a Senator ask him or her this: do you think that Kavanaugh was completely truthful about his yearbook entries? Really?

Lying to Congress is a felony, one that Democrats believe Kavanaugh has committed over and over again, about the torture memos, about the theft of documents from Democratic archives, about the firing of US Attorneys, and now about this.

Back when this issue first blew up, and I compared Kavanaugh's situation to that of Cosby and Weinstein, Michale countered with: there is a difference, and that is that the others exhibited a 'pattern of behavior'.

Well, throughout this confirmation, Kavanaugh has indeed established a pattern of behavior - of lying under oath, of obfuscation, of evasion, and of obeisance to a White House too corrupt to value character over results.

.

Thanks! I can’t help but keep thinking about how Kavanaugh could have responded to these allegations in a way that would have shown humility and compassion towards Dr. Ford even if he says he has no recollection of that night in question. His hostility and dishonesty are not characteristics we want in a Supreme Court Justice. Heck, his response seriously raises the question of whether he is fit to sit on any court!

I agree that the FBI investigation will have little effect on how the GOP votes on his confirmation. I just want someone to ask the Republicans if honesty matters any more so we can get their official position on the truth!

In my day (say, 1973 thereabouts) the 'hippie' smokers and the 'jock' drinkers were distinct groups (except for the Basketball team, which attracted stoners for some reason). Because I was considered a 'funny guy', I was invited to a few drinking parties, which I found both boring and disturbing. My stoner friends, by comparison, were into philosophy, art, underground comics, and music: Herbie Hankock, the Mahavishnu Orchestra, Yes and King Crimson. I could've lost my virginity sooner if I'd have hung with the drinkers (a female friend confided that to me at a reunion), but my intellectual life is richer now because I didn't.

So there's that.

http://www.chrisweigant.com/2018/09/25/president-laughingstock/#comment-128613

Not so strangely, I was thinking back to the halcyon days of high school, dropping first, second, third, fourth and fifth periods to drink and stone. I don't recall the details of any gathering, but then we weren't attacking the girls of the group...

LL&P

Alas, the 5-min rule is necessary due to the large number of senators. 21 people times even 5 minutes equals (with breaks) hours upon hours. Earlier, we had longer sessions with Kavanaugh, and it was absolutely freakin' endless.

I agree about the constant refrain of "FBI... FBI... FBI..." I didn't like it at the time, but I've come around since then.

My reaction to Kavanaugh was that he was a typical frat boy/elitist jock student, who had so often heard the "boys will be boys" refrain that he thought he could get away with anything. But maybe that's just me...

Good point about withdrawal. I could even write his press statement myself: "The damage this has already done to my loving family has proven to be too much, so for the sake of my beautiful daughters, I reluctantly withdraw my consideration for the high court." Complete, of course, with plenty of (crocodile) tears.

And here's one for Michale:

"Your tears seem in no way... crocodilian"
-Fat Tony, The Simpsons

... just because....

Remember when Republicans used to decry the "culture of victimhood"? Yeah, those were the days, eh?

TheStig [4] -

Well, thank you for the kind words! Yeah, it's been a tough week, but I tried to keep (mostly) up to date throughout it...

I appear to be back up and running, and indeed it was frustrating beyond belief to be locked out this particular week, that's for sure!

You added an excellent question, but I believe it is answered by: "an audience of one, at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave."

andygaus [5] -

Yeah, Whitehouse had some good shots at K. I specifically refrained from examining in detail K's answer to both "boof" and "Devil's Triangle", although the rest of the internet seems to have responded. Personally, I felt it was just too much for a family column.

Heh. So to speak, of course...

:-)

James T Canuck [7] -

Nice use of "privus lex," I have to admit. I learned the etymology of the word from Robert Anton Wilson, myself, a long time ago.

To wit: "Privelege" means nothing short of "private law."

You might just enjoy the following:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/opinions/wp/2018/09/27/how-dare-you-do-this-to-brett-kavanaugh/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.0a6ee652f38d

:-)

But didn't you mean to say, when you wrote:

I sat, jaw-agape, thinking, that guy has a slappable face in spades... someone please test my theory before he tells kamala Harris to get his hat and coat.

...and her coathanger?

Heh.

Nice "I am the Eggman" reference in there, too, have to say...

Ooooo! A Monty Python reference, too! For the uninitiated:

LAUNCELOT: We have the Holy Hand Grenade.

ARTHUR: Three!

Heh.

And thanks, as always, for the kind words...

:-)

Steedo [10] -

Yeah, we all live and die by our connectivity... something driven home to me this week for sure...

Balthasar [11] -

Yeah, that's a great question. Expecially when you consider that the FBI will report directly to the White House. And all that talk of a "limited scope" for the investigation...

OK, that's it for now, I'll try to get through last week's backlog of comments later, promise!

:-)

-CW

Are the FBI allowed to find 'missing' witnesses? Like whoever held that party. We know some pretty specific details about the basic layout of the house and its approximate location. If we made a Venn diagram of all of Ford's and Kavanaugh's acquaintances who lived in that area, how many lived in two-story walk-ups with an upstairs bathroom situated directly across from a bedroom?

This, too, would make such a good movie (I wish I could pre-buy shares of the "Mueller" blockbuster). It has (they'd both have) the future of the Nation at stake, a mystery, and a dedicated team of FBI investigators racing the clock. Popcorn time!

:)

LL&P

So climb back down off my back, you impertinent Proles.

"No, no, hell no. My life, my family's lives are in smithereens because of you left-wing wretches asking me about my...my, yes my vestal youth *pause for an upper lip quiver and tear production* Sheesh, only last night my two kids, Hanoria and Whitesonly conducted a prayer session to 'forgive the varlet that his rightly accused their daddy of misdeeds' My wife, Bluntforcefrigid and I are adamant that I believe I have never perpetrated an attack of any sort on anyone I can't remember by name or calendar reference."

What a pile of shit. To make matters worse, and that's a true gift, Kavanaugh then decides he's now interviewing the Democratic members for a gilded seat and all the trappings thereto. I sat, jaw-agape, thinking, that guy has a slappable face in spades... someone please test my theory before he tells kamala Harris to get his hat and coat.

All I took away from the 'bread and circus' of Thursday was, Typical Trump chaos. Hells donkeys, Trump even abandoned his public upbraid of Rosenstein once he realised the extent of the public focus on Ford and Kavanaugh. He'll no doubt save that spectacle for a slow news day, such as they don't seem to happen that often anymore in this 'Yellow matter custard dripping from a dead dog's eye, Crabalocker fishwife, pornographic priestess...Man, you been a naughty girl, you let your knickers down' Trumpian farce.

I digress. Kavanaugh with quietly withdraw, blame the left-wing conspiracy he inaugurated 37 years ago and salvage his 250k a year job, and retreat back into burbs with his two point five Wife and children of the martyred.

Trump will lob another holy-hand grenade at a rabbit dragging the collective attention of a nation down another convenient hole. I miss the old days when Trump was at the center of scandal, at least he can be consistently cringe-worthy, without the tears.

Nice column CW, always more than we dare to dream.

LL&P

LL&P

The questions you would have asked K. are excellent, but
I would like him to answer one more:

Why in the hell did you loose your judicial temperament and play the angry victim?

Was it cable news chatter suggesting it might be smart to emulate Judge Thomas' angry "lynching by the man" strategy?

Did Trump, who has been known to use TV anger with good effect, put a bug in Judge K's ear? If so, was his his motive to help or hinder you?

Or did K. simply lose his cool?

Whatever the cause, Democrats had a rare "The Lord hath delivered him into my hands" moment. I hope they don't waste the save.

Kavanaugh filibustered his way through several answers - some Dems were better at reining him in than others. And the five-minute rule was absolutely rotten as a means to getting to the bottom of anything. It contributed to the overall appearance of a show-trial rather than a genuine fact-finding effort and it should be abandoned.

But in the end the constant return to "why won't you call for the FBI to clear your name Mr. I'm Innocent" was enough to help us live to fight another day.

The central problem with Kav is that he appears to be a liar. His sexual predation may/may not have extended beyond his youth but if it occurred, as alleged, it's one more thing he's lied about. And while he can lie on FOX and, evidently, lie to Senators (since Repubs don't care), he supposedly can't lie to the FBI without penalties. I think he knew this, as did GOP Sens, so they all did what they could to help him avoid the FBI.

And since they all tried so very hard to achieve that, I really have to wonder what they were afraid of. It makes me wonder if he'll go through with it - I won't be surprised if he withdraws. I'd give it a 50-50 chance.