Sen. Sanders Demands FBI Investigate Whether Kavanaugh Lied to Congress

[bigtree]

Michael Sexton @jmsexton_14m14 minutes ago
'Lying to Congress Is a Federal Crime': Sanders Demands FBI Investigate Whether Kavanaugh Committed Perjury

In a letter to Senate Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) on Saturday, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) demanded that the newly reopened FBI investigation into Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh examine both the serious accusations of sexual assault against him and whether he lied to Congress in his testimony.

"In order for this FBI investigation regarding Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to be complete," Sanders wrote, "it is imperative the bureau must not only look into the accusations made by Dr. Ford, Deborah Ramirez, and Julie Swetnick, it should also examine the veracity of his testimony before the Judiciary Committee."

The Vermont senator went on to call on the Senate to not "constrain" the FBI probe to one week, arguing that a truly thorough probe could take longer.

"If you are concerned with a delay in this confirmation process, remember that Senate Republicans refused to allow the Senate to consider Merrick Garland’s nomination to the Supreme Court for nearly a year," Sanders wrote. "In addition to investigating the accusations made by multiple women, a thorough investigation should include a review of Judge Kavanaugh’s numerous untruthful statements in his previous testimony before Congress."

read more: https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/09/29/lying-congress-federal-crime-sanders-demands-fbi-investigate-whether-kavanaugh?cd-origin=rss

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Sen. Sanders' letter to Judiciary committee:

Dear Chairman Grassley,

In order for this FBI investigation regarding Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to be complete, it is imperative the bureau must not only look into the accusations made by Dr. Ford, Deborah Ramirez and Julie Swetnick, it should also examine the veracity of his testimony before the Judiciary Committee.

The Senate should not constrain the FBI to one week and must allow time for a full investigation. I would request that you inform the FBI that you will not consider their work complete until they examine the truthfulness of Judge Kavanaugh’s statements under oath while testifying before the Senate throughout his career, given the very serious fact that lying to Congress is a federal crime.

If you are concerned with a delay in this confirmation process, remember that Senate Republicans refused to allow the Senate to consider Merrick Garland’s nomination to the Supreme Court for nearly a year.

In addition to investigating the accusations made by multiple women, a thorough investigation should include a review of Judge Kavanaugh’s numerous untruthful statements in his previous testimony before Congress. Specifically:

In his previous testimony before Congress, Judge Kavanaugh was asked more than 100 times if he knew about files stolen by Republican staffers from Judiciary Committee Democrats. He said he knew nothing. Emails released as part of these hearings show that these files were regularly shared with Kavanaugh while he was on the White House staff. One of the emails had the subject line “spying.” Was Judge Kavanaugh being truthful with the committee?

In 2006 Judge Kavanaugh told Congress he did not know anything about the NSA warrantless wiretapping program prior to it being reported by the New York Times. This year an email revealed that while at the White House he might have been involved in some conversations about this program. Was Judge Kavanaugh being truthful with the committee?

In 2004 Judge Kavanaugh testified the nomination of William Pryor to the 11th Circuit “was not one that I worked on personally.” Documents now contradict that statement. Newly released documents also call into question whether Judge Kavanaugh was truthful that the nomination of Charles Pickering “was not one of the judicial nominees that I was primarily handling.” Was Judge Kavanaugh being truthful with the committee?

In 2006 Judge Kavanaugh testified, “I was not involved and am not involved in the questions about the rules governing detention of combatants.” New evidence released as part of these confirmation hearing contradicts that assertion. Was Judge Kavanaugh being truthful with the committee?

Kavanaugh testified before the committee that he did not believe polygraphs were reliable. In 2016 he wrote, “As the Government notes, law enforcement agencies use polygraphs to test the credibility of witnesses and criminal defendants. Those agencies also use polygraphs to ‘screen applicants for security clearances so that they may be deemed suitable for work in critical law enforcement, defense, and intelligence collection roles.’ . . . The Government has satisfactorily explained how polygraph examinations serve law enforcement purposes.” (Sack v. United States Department of Defense, 823 F.3d 687 (2016)) What changed his opinion or was he misleading the committee as to his beliefs about the reliability of polygraph tests?

Additionally, several statements made by Judge Kavanaugh under oath regarding his treatment of women and his use of alcohol appear not to be true. The scope of the FBI’s investigation must include investigating the following statements:

Judge Kavanaugh repeatedly told the committee he never drank to the point where he didn’t remember something. He also denied ever becoming aggressive when he drinks. However there have been many reports from those Judge Kavanaugh attended high school, college and law school with that contradict this assertion. Was he being truthful with the committee?

Judge Kavanaugh testified he treated women “as friends and equals” and “with dignity and respect.” Numerous entries in his school yearbook would seem to contradict this. Was Judge Kavanaugh’s statement to the committee truthful?

Judge Kavanaugh claimed that he and Dr. Ford “did not travel in the same social circles.” Dr. Ford said she dated Chris Garrett, referenced as a friend in his yearbook. In fact she testified Garrett introduced her to Kavanaugh. Was Judge Kavanaugh’s statement to the committee truthful?

Kavanaugh claimed he did not drink on weeknights but an entry on his calendar for Thursday July 1 states, “Go to Timmy’s for Skis w/ Judge, Tom, Pj, Bernie, Squi.” Kavanaugh clarified to Sen. Booker that “Skis” referred to beer. Was his original statement to the committee truthful?

A fundamental question the FBI can help answer is whether Judge Kavanaugh has been truthful with the committee. This goes to the very heart of whether he should be confirmed to the court. If a thorough investigation takes longer than a week, so be it. First and foremost, we need the truth.

Sincerely,

Bernard Sanders

[MineralMan]

1. Say, thanks for chiming in Bernie!

I was wondering if we'd hear from you.

[KPN]

12. Guess you weren't listening right after Kavanaugh's selection was announced or any of the

many times Sanders has addressed Kavanaugh's nomination and fit since. Don't let your bias show please.

[MineralMan]

13. I must have missed that somehow.

There was a lot going on with the principals in this from the Judiciary Committee. I stand corrected. Probably someone posted it here and it slipped past my awareness.

On edit: I did find a couple of posts in the Bernie Sanders Group and one in Video and Multimedia. I don't visit either place on DU. So, I suppose I can be excused for not being aware of Sanders' public statements on this.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

92. Bernie's been all over this from the beginning... no surprise there.

[angrychair]

20. All due respect

Your characterization is unfair. He has been talking about it and supporting Dr. Ford from the very beginning.

While any negative criticism is fair and justified against that very small pocket of extremists that claim to endorse his agenda, Sanders is a reliable Democratic friend and ally. His career voting record on the Democratic agenda is better than most Democrats. Has he said or done controversial stuff in his career I don’t agree with? Sure. Find me a Democratic leaning political figure that some other Democrat doesn’t have something negative to say about them and I would be shocked. No one can be everything to everybody.
In the trump era, only three other senators can claim a better voting record against trump, he votes against trump agenda 88.3% of the time. The best is Gillibrand, she votes against trump’s agenda 90.9% of the time. That this vile asshole would be given a vote his way even 12% or 9% or any percent of the time is to much for me. Trump is a rapist and a traitor and should be given nothing at all.

[MineralMan]

24. Well, his statement have not appeared here prominently.

He has been overshadowed by Democrats who sit on the Judiciary Committee. Democrats who have the seniority as Democrats to attain seats on that pivotal committee.

So, his statements have not been noticed by me. I did a search, though, and found a couple of posts in the Bernie Sanders Group, from which I was blocked for a very long time and do not visit, and the Video and Multimedia Forum, which I also do not visit.

Bernie Sanders is not a Democrat, so he doesn't have senior positions in many committees. He has steadfastly refused to identify himself with the Democratic Party, so his voice is muted in situations like this, where party membership plays a large role. That is his choice.

For that reason, I did not see his commentary on this issue. I don't go looking for statements from Bernie Sanders. I consider him to be a third party sort of guy with only minor influence on the business of the Senate. I did not see any posts about his comments in the General Discussion Forum. While there may have been such posts, I did not see them.

Good for him for supporting Dr. Ford and for commenting today on the FBI investigation of Kavanaugh. I did notice that, because someone posted it in GD. What impact it will have, I cannot say. He is not in a position to participate in the Committee hearings or decisions. So, I'll make note of it and return to my perusal of posts about people who are in such a position. Democrats. I don't follow Bernie Sanders much, although I'm grateful that he normally votes with the Democratic Caucus in the Senate. I wish he were a Democrat, though. Then, he might have a seat on the Judiciary Committee. Meanwhile, my own Senator, Amy Klobuchar, has such a seat and was influential in the hearing, making pointed comments and eliciting an insult from Kavanaugh. I'm proud of her for that.

I'll watch for Bernie's future comments that people post in GD, though.

[angrychair]

32. I appreciate the measured reply

I know that some here just don’t like him and never will, regardless of his contributions to the Party.

I will say though that he has had and currently has several committee memberships and was chair of the Senate Vetern’s Affairs committee for 2 years. He currently is the chair of Senate Democratic Outreach committee and minority leader of the Senate Budget Committee.

Look, I would like him to be a Democrat too but that isn’t his thing but in the end it matters little. His lifetime voting record on Democratic Party planks is better than most Democrats and his voting record against trump is better than most Democrats.

Let me close by being VERY clear, I would NOT endorse a Sanders run for President in 2020, I think he is doing fine where he is at.
As of right now, if pinned down on the person I’m looking into the closest? My money is currently on Senator Kamala Harris.

[MineralMan]

35. I have admired him as an Independent Senator.

I'm grateful for his support of Democratic bills. I think he represents Vermont quite well. I even supported him in his primary race for some time. However, I have never really considered him to be part of the Democratic Party, which is my party of choice. I do not see him as some sort of savior or as someone coming to the rescue of anything. He is the Independent Senator from Vermont. Beyond that, he sometimes plays other roles.

His opinion on the Kavanaugh matter is not surprising, but carries no weight at all, beyond his single vote on the floor. In that matter, he is no Amy Klobuchar.

[mr_lebowski]

103. A fair assessment with which I agree MM (nt)

[Hortensis]

38. No need to go looking for him when cameras are on Democrats,

just go where the cameras are.

For some reason, maybe it's another Parkland student thread right now, I'm remembering the event Parkland students held with senior Democratic house and senate members on the steps of the Capitol last March. For some reason I forget the students specifically chose not to invite Senator Sanders.

But all of a sudden there he was, pushing through the crowd from the back up onto the stage complete with his own cordless megaphone -- so he wouldn't have to actually wrestle the one a congresswoman currently using away from her. She was literally in the middle of an anti-gun speech when interrupted by this incredible display of boorishness and deception.

Yes, I'm not a big admirer. Neither were these students he dissed so spectacularly (fixed them for excluding him!). Pushing him off the stage was out of the question, so they had to wait for him to leave before proceeding.



Did I say I'm not an admirer already? Oh, yes. I did.

[MineralMan]

42. Well, Bernie Sanders had a period during which he was a prominent

person in the news. That period ended when he lost the nomination to Hillary Clinton. Now, he is back to being the Independent Senator from Vermont again, the position he held before all that.

He's on the same level, more or less, as any other Senator. Being a Senator is a very prestigious thing, and worthy of respect and note. But it doesn't guarantee influence in a specific matter. With regard to the Kavanaugh confirmation, any Senator on the Judiciary Committee far outranks him in the public interest and in influencing the process.

Senator Sanders' time in the spotlight has passed. It will not return. He's an interesting person, an erstwhile firebrand, and represents Vermont quite well, I'm sure. He's Vermont's Amy Klobuchar, but Amy's on the Judiciary Committee, so she's on the news right now.

Few people get the notice of a US Senator, but even that is no assurance of power or influence.

I like Bernie Sanders. He's not a player in this particular process, though. Not in any way. He has opinions about it, but few are listening. There are much louder voices on this issue.

[Hortensis]

46. I liked him fine when he was the one with an "I"

before his name in group photos and before his place in history became footnotes in books about the election of Donald Trump and consolidation of national power by the white nationalist party.

[MineralMan]

51. Well, that's all old news. Bernie's no longer in the news.

Time marches on. As you say, it's a footnote in history now.

[George II]

172. To be honest, I was born in Brooklyn not far from where he was born, about 6 years after he was....

....and have lived in CT about 80 miles from Vermont for the last 31 years, and I never heard of him until about three years ago when he decided to run for president.

And I've been closely following politics since I was a teenager.

[Gothmog]

111. I was very impressed wiht Booker, Durbin, Harris and Kloboshar

Coons worked some real magic but he was helped by some very strong performances by the other Democrats.

I pay attention to Blumenthal, Durbin, Harris, Feinstein and the other democrats who have been very effective

[Eliot Rosewater]

167. How did he get in this discussion? I would say sigh but what is the point.

[Gothmog]

169. sanders did nothing meaningful here but wants credit

[calimary]

153. I totally get that, MineralMan. I hadn't seen much about it either.

And I ‘m here a lot.

But Bravo to Bernie Sanders for taking a stand on this. I think he’s right.

[Autumn]

29. You must have missed his earlier statements. nt

[MineralMan]

31. If you read my replies, you will see that, yes, I did miss them.

Apparently, they were posted in the Bernie Sanders Group, which I do not visit, or in the Video and Multimedia Form, which I also do not visit. Senator Sanders is not prominently in the news regarding the Kavanaugh hearings because he has no seat in the Judiciary Committee, and is not a principal in this investigation and confirmation process.

I am following the proceedings closely, but am focused on those who are in the front row, like Amy Klobuchar, one of my state's Senators. You may have noticed her on the news, because she is on the committee.

Bernie Sanders, due to his not being a Democrat, does not hold prominent positions on major committees. That is his choice. His demands of the FBI have no authority and very, very little weight, but he is welcome to make them. They will join the comments of others who are not directly involved in the proceedings. He will have a vote, if Kavanaugh's confirmation comes to the floor of the Senate. But that's the limit of his involvement.

I do not follow Bernie Sanders on any regular basis. I see posts about him if they are posted in GD, and sometimes comment on those posts. But, he is not of much interest to me, since he is not a Democrat and thus has little influence on Senate matters. I consider him to be only of minor interest at this time.

Thank you for replying to my post.

[bigtree]

36. I'll say this

...Sen Sanders is not without influence in the Senate.

If you watched Flake's opportune moment yesterday, you may have seen Sen. Coons using his own influence and relationship with the republican Senator to engineer this delay and investigation.

That's the role Sen. Sanders will likely pursue behind this public 'demand' and declaration. It's really the essence of what they do when they leave the glare of the cameras and press send on their editorials to the dailies.

Yes, Coons was on the committee, but that doesn't mean that these committee members aren't listening to voices outside of that club.

It simply does not make any sense at all to invent or deepen cynicism about our political allies. Especially when they are pressing right along with us in the defense of our democracy from this anti-democratic republican opposition.

[MineralMan]

37. No cynicism, but Bernie Sanders isn't a player in the Kavanaugh confirmation

process. You mention Coons. Well, he's on the Judiciary Committee. So are others. They are players in this.

Bernie is just a Senator with one floor vote. His vote is as important as that of any other Senator, but no more important. Bernie is just one Senator. His demands regarding investigations carry zero weight, just like every other Senator who is not on this committee and who has no role in this decision at that level.

Does he influence other Senators? That depends on the issue in question. Right now, with regard to the Kavanaugh confirmation, I'd say he has no real influence. He's not of interest to journalists covering the story. If he were, we'd be seeing him. Someone posted a couple of links above. One was to Vermont Public Radio and the other to The Hill.

Bernie is out of the loop on this. What he has to say about it is only of interest to a few.

Right now, it is those Senators who are on the Judiciary Committee who are of real interest. You mentioned Coons. I mentioned Klobuchar. Right now, they carry much more weight in the matter than the Independent Senator from Vermont. What they say is news. What Bernie says is not, frankly.

So, you'll pardon me if I don't take his "demand" all that seriously. Nobody in positions of authority will, either. He's just not "all that" with regard to this.

[bigtree]

44. you're going an awful long way to dismiss him. I think it's unhelpful

...I heard someone say something about unity.

I must have misheard.

I think his efforts outmatch your cynicism, but that's much of what we do here, so...

[MineralMan]

50. Not really. I normally have very little to say about Bernie Sanders.

He's no longer of that much interest, frankly.

However, this post brought him up again, with regard to the Kavanaugh confirmation, a topic that interests me very much. I've posted a great deal on it. So, I commented in this thread. You took me to task, as did a couple of others, so I replied to those comments as well.

You may have noticed that my primary position is that Bernie Sanders really has no role in the Kavanaugh confirmation, other than as one floor vote. That is a fact. it's not a slur on him. It is simply the fact of the matter.

Personally, I no longer consider Senator Sanders a particularly major political figure. He's just another senator now, and one not even affiliated with a major party. He's no longer getting press coverage by the major media outlets. He's just not all that influential at this point, and I doubt he ever will be again.

I still like him. I thank him for his support of the Democratic Caucus in the Senate. I appreciate his service. But, stories about his making demands about investigations are simply inconsequential, really. He has no standing to make such demands, other than being one of 100 Senators.

Does he endorse either of my state's Senators? By a fluke, both are up for election this year. I don't believe he has mentioned either of them, but then again, I doubt they have sought his endorsement. I doubt his endorsement would matter much in Minnesota in 2018. One of them is in the news right now, because she's on the Judiciary Committee and comports herself very well. The other, Tina Smith, is the replacement for Al Franken and is running again, because she has to to remain in the Senate. She's a very progressive Democrat, but nobody really knows her, due to her short tenure in office. She'll probably win in November, and then we'll begin to hear more about her. Sadly, we lost Al Franken. I don't think Bernie begged him to stay on in the face of false accusations that seem awfully minor right now.

You think Bernie is important. I do not. I think his time in the spotlight has slipped past and will not return. We disagree, I suppose.

[bigtree]

54. who really has 'standing' with the republican committee members?

...not our party, not in any perfunctory way.

The influence I'm speaking of is something neither you nor I can qualify with any certainty.

Still, I maintain that there's as much of a chance of Sanders influencing the votes of his republican counterparts, as any Democrat on the committee. It remains to be seen what influence he can manage from his decades-long experience and relationships with other members who will vote, out of committee, perhaps, at some point.

You say no, he won't matter. I say possibly. It's well and proper to disagree, but I don't accept that he has less 'standing' for that role, than others. Your cynicism strains credulity .

[MineralMan]

58. Bernie carries no weight with any Republican on that Committee.

Neither do most of the Democrats, frankly. Coons managed to influence Flake, it seems, but that's a fluke, really.

Bernie works no magic. The Parties are where the influence lies. There are only a few Senators who will buck their party. Sanders has no party, but is well-identified as siding with the Democrats, except when he doesn't. I don't think he's going to change the floor votes of even a single Republican in this matter.

What you call my "cynicism" is nothing of the sort. It's opinion based on following this stuff for a very long time. You can discount it, if you which. That's of no consequence to me. Nothing depends on what I think, except what I think.

[bigtree]

62. the committee has already voted out the nomination to the floor

...the fight is with the whole Senate now.

I find it hard to believe you know much of anything about what influence Sen. Sanders has. It's just not in the wheelhouse of those who reflexively express cynicism about the senator.

[MineralMan]

66. Yes, it is, although we may see

the committee again when the results of the FBI investigation come in. I expect that, actually.

[bigtree]

71. I think, more likely, there will be a move to circumvent the FBI investigation

...by McConnell, in a few days, short of the week proposed. At that time, I believe he'll attempt to move to vote.

The hope I think we have is, of course, a recalcitrant third republican to vote against Kavanaugh. Or, we may see further evidence force a withdrawal of the nominee, either by republicans or the nominee himself.

[MineralMan]

73. Perhaps. However, I think that vote would fail.

He won't call the vote unless he has the votes. That's certain. Except for one possibility: If an agreement is reached with the White House to dump Kavanaugh, he might call the vote, knowing the confirmation would fail. That would let Kavanaugh's nomination die without personally withdrawing or having Trump withdraw the appointment. Some face might be saved.

Now, that's a possibility, considering the habits of Republicans.

[bigtree]

75. good reasoning

...appreciated.

[MineralMan]

78. Thanks.

There are all sorts of machinations that go on in Congress. I can see that as an available option. Who knows? It could be the option that gets chosen, actually. I'd be slightly surprised but not that surprised.

[David Truth]

87. Do Democrats Welcome All Voters

As a registered independent I tend to vote democratic and I respect many Dems in office....
but I feel there are some short sighted folks on this site who resent and take advantage of Sanders and other Independet voters. In a general election we have as much "weight" as either of the entrenched parties who share power only because our archaic system prevents a third party from developing.

[bearsfootball516]

88. I respect your opinion, but I don't know how this will go over here.

It's not a website for independents who tend to vote Democratic. It's for registered Democrats who always vote Democratic.

[revmclaren]

89. As a brand new poster pushing third parties here on DU,

I think you made a wrong turn somewhere... IMHO.

[MineralMan]

90. Sure. I'm not running for anything, though.

[uppityperson]

100. Did you read the Terms of See you agreed to? Here's the link, find at the bottom of every page

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice

Democratic Underground is an online community for friendly, politically liberal people who understand the importance of working together to elect more Democrats and fewer Republicans to all levels of American government. Constructive criticism of Democratic politicians, party officials, and public figures is welcome and encouraged, but we expect our members to follow our forum rules and participate in a manner which promotes a positive atmosphere.

Members are not expected to hold across-the-board progressive opinions on every single issue, but we do expect members to be generally progressive and to support Democrats at election time -- remember that and respect it when posting. Harsh, divisive, partisan attacks against Democrats or progressive values (from the right or the left) are not welcome here.

But above all, we want our members to be friendly to each other. The vast majority of our members are thoughtful people who care about issues, and most of us can handle a different opinion if it is shared in a respectful way. No matter where you stand on the political spectrum, a little human kindness goes a long way toward smoothing over our differences and making this place feel like a community....(more)

[marble falls]

102. Have you checked out Jackpine Radicals? We're Democrats supporting Democrats here.

[revmclaren]

107. Oh MIRT... Clean up on isle 87...

[Gothmog]

112. I also have been following these issues for a very long time and I agree with your analysis

I like the real world and I know that to make change one has to deal with real world

[Hekate]

53. MM's posts seem more like accurate observations than cynical statements.

MM is being thoughtful and explanatory, if a little wordy.

At least it seems so to me.

[bigtree]

56. I'm sure he's happy you agree

...

[MineralMan]

63. I don't depend on others to agree with me.

That's not why I post here.

[bigtree]

72. I'm still trying to figure out the purpose of your posting in this thread

...not really focused on why you come to DU to do what you do.

[MineralMan]

76. My purpose? To comment on the original post, of course.

That is why I reply in threads always. I stick my nose in all sorts of threads because I have something I want to add to the thread. My motivations are no more complex than that. If others reply to me, I reply in turn, out of a sense of responsibility to reply. If I get no replies, a single reply in a thread is often my only contribution.

I come to DU to discuss political issues. I find politics fascinating, even in detail. I'm a prolific poster, because I'm a very fast typist and am always happy to offer my thoughts.

I'm very easy to figure out. What I say is exactly what I mean.

[Gothmog]

113. I enjoy your posts and I agree with your analysis

[MineralMan]

64. I am a bit wordy, aren't I?

I type too quickly, I think.

[Hekate]

67. Lol. Just not cynical as a general rule.

[MineralMan]

69. Skeptical, at most, usually.

[George II]

99. What influence is that?

[Gothmog]

110. I also want to know

[sheshe2]

128. I am curious as well.

Hmm.

[Gothmog]

109. Is ths latest demand based on another sanders magical voter revolution?

Last edited Sat Sep 29, 2018, 09:49 PM - Edit history (1)

Exactly how will this demand and declaration process work in the real world. Sanders has not sponsored or passed any significant legislation in the real world. You seem to think that sanders has some sort of magic where he can issue some sort of "demand and declaration" and this event would cause millions or billions or maybe trillions of new voters to rise up and demand that the GOP take sanders seriously. Sanders campaigned solely on the concept that his proposals would be magically adopted due to a magical voter revolution. Without that magical voter revolution, even Sanders admitted that his platform could not be adopted https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/robert-schlesinger/articles/2016-04-15/bernie-sanders-bad-delegate-math-and-fantasy-revolution

Thus more broadly, his attempt to delegitimize a swath of voters lays bare a fundamental inconsistency of the Sanders campaign: One of his basic answers about how he's going to accomplish his aims – whether winning the Democratic nod, winning the general election or enacting his agenda – is the forthcoming revolution. His super-ambitious agenda will prove to be achievable substance rather than unicorns-and-rainbows fantasy, he said Thursday night, "when millions of people stand up, fight back and create a government that works for all of us, not just the 1 percent. That is what the political revolution is about. That is what this campaign is about."

Magical thinking does not work in the real world. Sanders has failed to adopt any meaningful legislation in the real world including in his own state. If sanders' magical "demands and declaration" are so powerful, maybe sanders should see if he can pass single payer in his home state.

I am glad that sanders is involved but I doubt that the GOP will pay any attention to sanders. The GOP has been ignoring sanders demands for a long time and I do not think that anything has changed. Again, if a declaration and demand by sanders is so powerful, then why have the GOP ignored all of sanders' prior demands and declarations???

I do not understand how magic works. If a "demand and declaration" has some magical power, please explain how it works. I note that so far these new magical voters have yet to appear and so far the real world has felt free to ignore sanders' prior demands and declarations.

I like the real world even though magic does not work. The GOP has never listened to sanders in the past and I am struggling to understand what is different.

Again, I am glad that sanders has finally taken a position but I doubt that the GOP will pay any attention to this position. History seems to be on my side. If I am wrong about magic, then please let me know why

[bigtree]

124. I heard exactly the same criticism of those who demanded they delay the vote

...and get the FBI involved.

Can't be done, they argued. So much effort on cynicism that folks forget the dynamics of politics. Nothing happens without pressure, and the more applied, the more chance we have of moving the object in our favor.

Politics isn't a static enterprise. It's nebulous and dynamic. Indeed, the political forces will often not bend to the will of the people without strong activism and advocacy. Politicians can be pushed. Elections are a breath away, and republicans are as cowardly as they are craven.

[Gothmog]

126. But if sanders has magical powers, why has he not got at least one major bill passed?

Sanders had nothing to do with the FBI investigation according to all reports. What did sanders do here? The GOP has never paid attention to sanders in the past and sanders had nothing to do with the latest developments.

The delay and FBI investigation is due to the efforts of other Democrats and sanders had nothing to do with result. I have seen no evidence that sanders made any contribution to these results.

Please explain how Sanders magical powers work? If a demand from sanders have any power, then why has sanders never used this magic to pass even one major bill? If sanders had the magical power to make a demand, then he should have used this magical power in the past.

In the real world, magic does not work. I would love to know why you think that the GOP would pay any attention to a demand from sanders. The GOP have never paid any attention to a demand from sanders in the past and I would love to know why the GOP would start caring now.

[bigtree]

130. I'm quite certain

..these criticisms are just reserved for Sen. Sanders.

Most senators and reps who have weighed in with proposals and letters to the Judiciary in opposition to Kavanaugh have been met here with praise, not this ridicule about 'magical powers.'

Sen. Sanders has as much chance and opportunity to influence this process as anyone in our party. More to the point, he's certainly not an obstacle. He's an ally in this fight, which NONE of our Democratic senators can effectively influence alone.

[Gothmog]

134. You claimed earlier that sanders has a magical power of "demand and declaration"

I have not seen any evidence of this so-called magical power or evidence of the magical voter revolution that sanders used to sell his silly proposals and platform. Sanders claimed that his silly platform was reasonable because millions or billions or trillions of new voters would rise up and force the GOP to be reasonable. sanders has zero major legislative accomplishments in the real world because magic does not work. If sanders can use magic to generate million or billions or trillions of new voters, he should have already used this power.

Sanders had no influence on the FBI investigation because magic does not work in the real world. Again you are the one who described sanders magical power of “demand and declaration.” If this power really works, then sanders should have used it to achieve at least one legislative accomplishment

I am glad that sanders has finally stepped up but sanders does not deserve any credit here. Senators Booker and Harris had far more impact. Senator Coons came through. I do see that sanders had any impact but I may not understand how magic works.

Please explain why any republican would start listening to sanders now after ignoring sanders for decades. Could you also explain sanders magical voter revolution? Sanders campaigned on this but I never understood how this piece of magic works. The real world is nice but magic does not work in the real world

[bigtree]

135. now you're projecting. Arguing with your own premise about a derogatory phrase I've never used

...you can do all that without my participation.

[Gothmog]

144. So you agree that sanders had nothing to do with the FBI investigation

Sanders has not pass any meaningful legislation in the real world. I never took sanders seriously because all of his proposals required a magical voter revolution where millions or billions or trillions of new voters would magically rise up to force the GOP be reasonable. Sanders admitted that without this magical voter revolution, his proposals could not be adopted I do not believe in magic and so never considered sanders to be a serious candidate

You may want to reread your posts. The premise of your OP is that sanders needs to be given credit for the FBI investigation and that a magical “demand and declaraion” by sanders would make a difference. I do not believe in magic and never understood sanders magical voter revolution. I was hoping that you would explain how sanders made any difference in the Judiciary Committee and how this magic would work.

I doubt that republicans pay any attention to sanders on this issue. Again, if sanders did have magical powers, I would have urged sanders to use such powers to get even one piece of major legislation adopted.

[bigtree]

160. you have a baiting style and seem intent on projecting your own derogatory language about Sanders

...onto whatever I write. I did not use the term 'magic,' and have not said anything of the sort. This is an ugly effort by you which has continued into a second day. If you continue to bait me, you will be talking to yourself on this thread.

The 'premise of the op' is that Sanders has done this thing. I did not editorialize or interpret his demands, other than to correctly point out to you that politics is nebulous and dynamic. It feeds on the type of cynicism you're projecting here.

I don't have any interest at all in participating in this. You should find someone else to debate 'magic' with you. You took your shot, you should move on. I'm not biting.

[Gothmog]

170. I do not believe in magic and so I never took sanders seriously

sanders entire campaign was based on a magical voter revolution where millions or billions or trillions of new voters would rise up magically and force the GOP to take sanders' proposals seriously. Your OP seems to imply that members of the GOP would be taking sanders rants seriously because he had the power to make a "demand and declaration" that would force the GOP to act. I am still curious as to how this process works in the real world without the aide of magic.

I guess that magic is not real and that there is no chance that the GOP will be paying attention to sanders' "demand and declaration" in the real world. This also explains why sanders has never sponsored and pass any meaningful legislation in the real world.

The real world is a nice place even though magic does not work. If you think that sanders' "demand and declaration" is meaningful, then that is your right. I never took sanders seriously because I do not believe in magic and it appears that magic does not work.

[sheshe2]

125. Hard to read what you can't see.

OT

I blocks
ed.

I love Oscar too. Trashed~

[George II]

131. Bazinga!

[sheshe2]

132. ;)

[Nanjeanne]

59. He has been all over Twitter and FB since the beginning.

[MineralMan]

60. OK. I follow him on neither venue.

I'm also all over Twitter and FB. I'm betting you don't follow me, either.

[Nanjeanne]

65. No I don't follow you. I typically don't follow anyone but journalists or politicians. But

then I wouldn’t assume you haven’t been supporting Dr Ford from the beginning.

[MineralMan]

68. My political writing appears only on DU.

On Facebook and Twitter, I'm all about business and personal contacts. I deliberately keep politics off those venues.

[Nanjeanne]

85. Then I guess it makes sense 5at I haven't much of a clue about what you are up to.

[MineralMan]

104. Well, I post frequently. If you don't read frequently,

You might not be familiar with me

[still_one]

83. We are lucky to get the agreement we got, and it would not have happened without Flake

[Me.]

2. Now?

[MineralMan]

4. Well, better late than never, they say.

I wondered why we hadn't heard from Bernie before now. At least he has finally added something to the conversation.

[JonLP24]

6. He's been calling for a FBI investigation all week

Trashing thread.

[bigtree]

11. because that's totally the most important issue here

Sen. Sanders Calls For Judiciary Committee To Postpone …4 days ago

Sanders: Kavanaugh accusers 'have risked their lives to come forward' ... 3 days ago

[dem4decades]

3. Unfortunately Bernie the Republicans don't care.

Last edited Sat Sep 29, 2018, 02:19 PM - Edit history (1)

[Hekate]

5. A little late to the party, but thanks anyway

[Fred Sanders]

41. This Thursday he is basing his request on was the Friday before the Independence Day long

weekend.

I hope he checked out if school was let out on that a Friday, June 2, 1982...not uncommon for an undergraduate school/college.

[beachbum bob]

7. be interesting if this goes forward...BUT when democrats take over in January in the House they can

and if lying was done, be the basis of impeachment and removal from whatever judgeship he has

[Thrill]

8. He clearly lied when he said he didn't watch Ford's testimony

.

[Hortensis]

9. Just in case our Democrats on the Judiciary Committee forgot.

No doubt their timing will be according the strategy they're implementing, but who can say they not might ultimately have just...forgotten this little detail.

[NurseJackie]

17. I know, right?

Just in case our Democrats on the Judiciary Committee forgot.

I know, right?

but who can say they not might ultimately have just...forgotten this little detail.

I'm sure it's comforting to them to know that someone has their back, and is there to guide them through these unfamiliar and uncharted waters.

[ehrnst]

79. Very considerate of him. (nt)

[dchill]

10. "First and foremost, we need the truth."

And there you have it.

[spooky3]

14. I agree with him on this. nt

[OnDoutside]

15. Kavanaugh was captain of the Ski team too....

[irresistable]

16. the indoor team

[bigtree]

19. used to carve the powder on Devils Triangle

[OnDoutside]

21. It's downhill from there !!! 😁

[George II]

18. Hmmm, his letter was sent out today, a day AFTER they already decided to conduct...

...the FBI investigation, and he's highlighting the day on Kavenaugh's calendar that was pointed out several times at yesterday's meeting of the Judiciary Committee meeting.

Very interesting.

[angrychair]

25. So?

I reliable Democratic Party friend and ally, who was out nearly in the beginning in support of Dr. Ford, comes out to push the issue in the press and all he gets is trashed for it.

I’m not here to debate the past election, only the facts: when it comes to voting the Democratic Party agenda and voting against trump’s agenda, very few can claim a voting record as reliable and in line with Democratic Party planks than Sanders.
We seem more than willing to give certain people a pass when they voted to confirm DeVos and other even more unqualified people to cabinet positions or vote in favor of things that trump wants but seem unwilling to give a person that 99% of time is our friend and ally any benefit of the doubt at all.

We seem more than willing to apply “big tent” politics to red state Dems and even republicans when they work against Democrats but piss in the face of a guy that has caucused with Democrats is entire career.

[Autumn]

30. Bernie is calling for more of an investigation into his previous lies to Congress.

Not just the one sanctioned by Trump and the pukes. I can see how that would upset some people.

"If you are concerned with a delay in this confirmation process, remember that Senate Republicans refused to allow the Senate to consider Merrick Garland’s nomination to the Supreme Court for nearly a year," Sanders wrote. "In addition to investigating the accusations made by multiple women, a thorough investigation should include a review of Judge Kavanaugh’s numerous untruthful statements in his previous testimony before Congress."

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

95. Facts don't matter when it comes to dissing Bernie.

[Autumn]

96. Nothing he ever does will be good enough for some.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

118. Nope... so much for the "big tent".

[Hassin Bin Sober]

127. .

[Autumn]

193. That is so familiar.

[LanternWaste]

192. That particular sentiment seems to apply to all sides equally.

The important thing though, is to direct it towards one, and only one side... else objectivity may begin to rear its inconvenient head.

[lapucelle]

115. Senators Durbin and Leahy began calling for such an investigation back in July. N/T

[Autumn]

117. That was in response to his lies in his 2007 confirmation hearing

for his current job as a judge on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, where he denied having any involvement in formulating the terrorism detainee policy while working in the Bush White House.
Bernie's current call is in response to his recent lies in this confirmation hearing is how I read it.

Senators Sanders, Durbin and Leahy are bulldogs on these things.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/kavanaugh-documents-could-answer-decade-old-question-whether-he-misled-n891436

[lapucelle]

145. And since July 2018, establishing Kavanaugh's untruthfulness

has been a linchpin of the Democratic strategy to keep Kavanaugh off the Supreme Court. This is not a new tact, even if some were not aware of it.

On Wednesday, September 26, I received an email from the junior senator from Vermont. He wanted subscribers to know that there's new stuff for sale in his online store. The email didn't mention the Kavanaugh matter.

Given the historic nature of the hearing that was coming on Thursday, the focus of the email (new merch!) struck me as shockingly tone deaf.

[Autumn]

146. Really? I haven't seen much of that, even right after the hearing when his lies were fresh.

How shocking! A politician sending out e mails selling merchandise , that must be a first !

I don't do the emails. The fact is I rarely bother to check my email . Since the 24th I have seen him discussing the Kavanah matter, on line, FB and elsewhere. People who don't follow a politician will miss what they say about current events.

By the way, if people aren't aware of Dems calling out lies what good is that? Maybe they should do it more publicly and loudly. Posting the links to those events might help. As some of our DUers say, people who don't follow a politician may miss those things.

[lapucelle]

152. Knowing what was going since July and in the recent hearings

is more a matter of following news events rather than "following politicians".

Memeorandum and Real Clear Politics are good sites to check in on if one wants to know what all sides are saying.

[lapucelle]

155. A politician hawking (unrelated) merch the day before an historic hearing is a new one for me. N/T

[Autumn]

159. Well we are in uncharted territory so whatever works. Nothing wrong with Dems and their allies

fund raising is there? As long as they are out there pointing out the scummy tricks and lies of Republicans I'm fine with it.

[lapucelle]

162. I'm sure there are many politicians whose key interest is building up personal campaign coffers,

whether the money is needed for 2018 or not.

[Autumn]

164. Yes there are, I can't think of an elected Dem winner or loser, who doesn't build up their

campaign funds. Any politicians who doesn't build up their war chest is a fool who will lose, it takes a lot to run for any office. Gotta have it to win it. We do want to win and take the House and the Senate right?

[lapucelle]

166. Of course we want Democrats to take the House and the Senate in 2018.

Similarly, we want a Democrat to win the White House in 2020.

I'm sure it goes without saying that most in the DU community have great respect for anyone who is raising money for Democratic candidates in the 2018 general election.

[George II]

149. I got one like that on Wednesday, too. The subject line for mine was:

[New] Medicare for All Gear in the Bernie Store

Nothing about Kavanaugh until last night (Saturday) at 6:58 PM.

[Gothmog]

158. Who is suprised by this?

[Autumn]

163. Everyone who believes Dems and their allies shouldn't raise campaign cash?

Some seem to think that's wrong. Some of our politician hold private or open campaign dinners, some send out letters soliciting donations, some post on their web sites a link to donate and some send out emails, on a regular basis. Our Politicians need to have cash to campaign, we won't win without it.
You know Act Blue raised over $10 million on Friday alone to help get Republicans out of office.

[Gothmog]

168. You do know how Actblue works?

I am a treasurer for a PAC and I deal with Actblue a bit. I have donated more this cycle than I did in 2016. Actblue does not raise money for candidate but act as a payment center for candidate. Actblue merely processes and remits (slowly at times) money to the candidate or PACs raising money. Actblue takes a commission for their services.

I try to give money directly to candidates or the local coordinated campaign or state party directly to avoid the Actblue commissions. Candidates like Actblue but really like to get checks instead. One of my clients have given $200,000 to various democratic congressional candidates and he also uses checks.

As for solicitations, I have deleted 60+ solicitations just this morning. Yesterday I deleted more than 100 email solicitations. I have been a maxed out donor and so I get a ton of e-mail solicitation donations.

I am not big on candidate merchandise. I prefer to donate cash and I do not care about silly merchandise.

[Autumn]

171. Yes I do know how it works, I have donated to it. I also bought from Hillary's campaign swag

Last edited Sun Sep 30, 2018, 03:41 PM - Edit history (1)

in 08 and Bernie's Swag in 2016, I maxed out to the Bernie campaign and now donate directly only to candidates that I choose to donate to. You may not like merchandise, but that's your issue, many other do like it. It helps the candidates and people who complain, well, that says more about them than Hillary, Bernie or any other Democratic candidate who is working to stop the republicans.

[Gothmog]

178. Again Actblue is a mere conduit

You can donate to Actblue directly if you want (as a treasurer of a PAC, I get a number of requests from Actblue) but most people use Actblue to make a donation to the candidate. You are not donating to Actblue but you are making a donation to a candidate using Actblue as a conduit. Actblue did not raise $10 million for candidates. These donations were raised by the candidates directly and citizens used Actblue as a conduit. It is true that Actblue processed $10 million in donations for Democrats but it is not correct to claim that Actblue raised $10 million

As for the $10 million in donations on Friday, today is the last FEC reporting cutoff before the midterms and most candidates have been busy. The Kavanaugh delay may have helped donations but these donations could also be due to the FEC reporting deadline and the blue wave. I know that several congressional candidates are pushing hard to see if they can qualify for the DCCC Red to Blue program.

[Autumn]

186. On Friday they collected over 10 million dollars. So I used the word raise, I used the wrong word

I assume people on DU are smart enough to know how it works.

[Gothmog]

188. You were wrong twice

Last edited Mon Oct 1, 2018, 10:00 AM - Edit history (1)

You use the same wrong terminology twice. It was clear to me that you were rong both times. Again the term collected is still wrong. The donations were made to candidates but processed by Actblue

I have worked on a number of campaigns and been the treasurer of a couple of PACs. I know how the process works even if you do not.

I am sorry but you keep getting the concepts wrong

[Autumn]

190. Make it three things I got wrong, responding to you was one. Have a wonderful day.

I hope to god you never have a stroke and find that words escape you.

[Gothmog]

191. Have you considered getting out into the real world and working on a campaign?

You could learn how the real world works if you get out and work on some real campaigns. Sitting in a finance meeting can be painful when you have to hear the candidate find out that he does not have the money needed.

I broke down last night and used Actblue to give a candidate some more money last night due to the fundraising deadline and got my son to contribute. In both cases we donated the funds to the candidate and Actblue merely processed the contribution. The concept that this congressional district may be in play is amazing

Again, the real world is a nice place and you could learn how things work in the real world if you actually work on some campaigns. For example if you are a sponsor for an event where a Presidential candidate will attend, then you have to submit your information to the Secret Service.

I am glad that I was able to clarify how Actblue works in the real world

[George II]

180. Guess what? At 1:15 I got ANOTHER email asking for a contribution to reach "a few modest goals.....

.....we have to reach as part of his re-election campaign for the US Senate."

Out of curiosity, I thought I'd look up where he stands financially on the FEC.gov website.

It turns out that as of July 25 he has $8,013,016.00 cash on hand.

Now, after the Vermont primaries his republican opponent, H. Brooke Paige, withdrew his candidacy. The republicans chose the man he beat, Lawrence Zupan (who only got 9,383 votes in the primary) as their candidate.

As of July 25, Zupan had $6,438.00 cash on hand!!!!

So, I'm curious what those "modest goals" are since he already has $8M more than his opponent?

[lapucelle]

181. "Hey again...Jeff Weaver here"...

I got the same email, George. Maybe the merch in the shop isn't flying off the shelves.

[George II]

182. Good one!

[TreasonousBastard]

23. OK, but so what-- that's the least he should do. My Senator Gillibrand has been calling for...

Beery Brett to step down pretty much since the beginning.

My other Senator, Schumer, is being accused by Fox of causing chaos in the hearing room.

This is welcome, but not necessarily newsworthy. And does not go nearly as far as simply saying from the hearing alone, Kav does not have proper judicial temperament.

[greymattermom]

26. So what happens when a Senator sends a letter to a committee?

Do they have to respond? Can they ignore letters like this?

[George II]

28. The committee usually does ignore it.

[NurseJackie]

55. I just read someone's comments calling this "grandstanding" or "theater"...

... that will have little-to-no genuine impact or effect on the process one way or the other. I guess it does get him "on the record" as being in support of something that's already happening and maybe his supporters will like that?

[George II]

98. I loved this scene from Hamilton:

?itemid=5429659

[peggysue2]

27. Yes, thank you, thank you . . .

Captain Obvious. We appreciate your support now that the wind has taken a favorable turn.

Impressive!

[Autumn]

33. Who are the politicians calling for an investigation into his previous lies to Congress?

"In addition to investigating the accusations made by multiple women, a thorough investigation should include a review of Judge Kavanaugh’s numerous untruthful statements in his previous testimony before Congress."

[peggysue2]

40. There you go!

Makes all the difference in the 'late to the party' statement.

Sorry, you'll need to spin faster on this one.

Perhaps you missed the continuing comments from Kamala Harris, Cory Booker and Richard Blumenthal among others who have called for further investigations into an array of questionable comments From the Start of this debacle.

I appreciate Bernie's support but tailcoating after the barn door has opened is not the same as ramming the door repeatedly until it falls down.

Just isn't.

[bigtree]

47. you don't really seem to appreciate his support

...but he might just be of some help.

That would be a blow to cynics, I believe.

[peggysue2]

70. Call it what you will

I appreciate all voices of support in this matter. Just don't think Bernie Sander's letter and request deserves a Pop-Pom Party when the entire Democratic Party and particularly those Dems on the Judiciary Committee have pushed for a thorough investigation and release of documents from Day 1.

Doing the heavy lifting and taking a bow are two very different things.

[bigtree]

74. I hardly think the op (or responses) are a 'pom-pom party'

...that's just silliness.

Where's this 'bow' you're talking about? Where is all of this nonsense you're projecting on this correct effort of Sen. Sanders?

It's not in the op.

[Autumn]

94. If his name is mentioned or anything posted about him that's a 'pom-pom party'

[Autumn]

93. So are there others calling for a current FBI investigation into his previous lies to Congress?

We all know that some have pointed out his lies during this debacle but who is currently joining his call for an FBI investigation into his previous lies? Like the OP, I may have missed some people who might have done that.

[peggysue2]

105. You're beating a dead horse, Autumn

Whatta you say we give it a rest?

For myself? I'm done here.

[Autumn]

106. Figured as much.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

119. I think Bernie was the 1st to lead the charge on this. Certainly no reason to criticize him for it.

But, hey, as the saying goes... never let a good opportunity to bash Bernie go to waste.

[Autumn]

121. So true. It's expected.

[lapucelle]

114. The senior senator from Vermont.

Senators Leahy and Durbin started calling for the investigation of Kavanaugh's truthfulness starting in 2007.

https://www.salon.com/2018/09/08/brett-kavanaughs-perjury-avalanche-50-years-in-the-making/

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/07/how-kavanaughs-last-confirmation-hearing-could-haunt-him/565304/

[sheshe2]

138. 2007?

Hmmm

[lapucelle]

143. Leahy and Durbin had questions about Kavanaugh's veracity

during and after his confirmation hearings for a seat on the federal bench. That's the reason why Democrats on the judiciary committee fought for the release of documents related to Kavanaugh's years in the Bush White House.

Showing Kavanaugh to be untruthful was a unified Democratic judiciary committee strategy before we learned of Dr. Ford's letter. Republicans stonewalled the release of documents that would have helped establish the potential perjury.

[Autumn]

147. The hearing the other day was very public. He lied several times, under oath.

The Republicans can't stonewall what was openly done on TV. The Dems won't have to fight for the release of the proof for those lies. That should be just as damaging as if they got the documents from 2007. I look forward to seeing them go after him for his perjury while under oath .

[lapucelle]

148. The prior hearings were public as well, and Democrats on the committee

were zeroing in on Kavanaugh's potential perjury well before Saturday, September 29. The focus of Democrats has been concentrated on Kavanaugh's veracity for months, not days.

No Democrat invited me via email to buy stuff with their name on it the day before the historic hearing. Evidently, their attention was on more important matters.

[Autumn]

150. The point is, those lies are public, on TV. They don't need permission to use those.

I just can't wait to see what the Dems do with those sound bites.

[lapucelle]

154. The previous lies were public and on TV. N/T

[Autumn]

157. They should use the Republican trick and shout those lies from the rooftops. nt

[murielm99]

34. Better late than never. n/t

[zentrum]

39. Those are the exact right

..key words, Bernie. Lied under oath to the committtee.

[triron]

43. Democratic Senators need to be screaming this. If table were turned you can damn well be assured

Repukes would.

[Brother Buzz]

45. Senator Whitehouse pointed all this out in the chamber to no avail

[bigtree]

48. I think that was my favorite moment.

[treestar]

108. He didn't put the girls' names as they aren't important to him

He's having the "skis" with the guys - the girls are not part of that. They are not the ones he is partying with. Just part of the scene, like the "skis." Something for him to enjoy, not people he is partying with.

[Hekate]

57. My two Senator are actually on that committee & they don't need to "scream." Somehow...

...the intensity of Kamala Harris and depth of experience of Dianne Feinstein seem to be making progress even though they are outvoted by the GOP.

[WeekiWater]

49. All hands on deck.

A lot of people watch what Sanders does. Much of his base is active. Things like this turn into more phone calls, emails, and other forms of activism.

[bigtree]

61. good point about the activism

...political fights are often won on the margins. Bernie's supporters are a huge resource for our party, more so to our effort to keep Kavanaugh from the SC.

"Much of his base is active. Things like this turn into more phone calls, emails, and other forms of activism."

[demmiblue]

80. +1

[red dog 1]

82. + 2

[Alhena]

52. Makes sense, but moderate Republican Senators are controlling this whole thing

and they favored a limited FBI investigation and are unlikely to admit they were wrong.

[BeckyDem]

77. + 1 Go get him.

[Owl]

81. Thank you Bernie!

[Power 2 the People]

97. +1

[red dog 1]

84. Kick for exposure

Thank you, Bernie, thank you, Sen. Whitehouse, thank you, Sen. Harris - thanks to all of you!

Fuck Grassley!
Fuck Kavanaugh!
Fuck Turtle-Man!
Fuck Trump!

[jalan48]

86. Well done. Stronger together!

[dawg day]

101. That was also the get-together that might have been the night of the assault.

Both of the other boys named as being there are on his list.

[RhodeIslandOne]

116. This thread is going about as how you'd predict.

Anyway, thank you to Senator Sanders for speaking up while we have Democratic senators who are hiding from the media and waiting to see how other people vote on this sex offender so they can be on "the winning side".

[Autumn]

122. I would love to see all our Dems out there pointing out every lie he told while

he was under oath in that hearing the other day. They need to really hit it home.

[George II]

151. What? Which Democratic Senators are "hiding from the media" waiting to see how other people vote?

I can't think of a single one! That is insulting to our 47 Democratic Senators.

[RhodeIslandOne]

173. You're right

Joe Manchin's condemnation of Kavanaugh's behavior has been inspiring.

Oh wait.....Joe? Oh, Joe?

[George II]

174. You didn't address the question.

[RhodeIslandOne]

175. I absolutely did

Senator Sanders comes out strong against Kavanaugh and you shit all over him. Why?

Meanwhile Joe Manchin is literally waiting to see what Feckless Flake and Dumbass Collins do.

Who knows where Heidi is. Put her face on a milk carton

The least you could do is praise the red state Dems like Tester and Jones and McCaskill who are ACTING LIKE DEMOCRATS AND SAYING NO FUCKING NO TO KAVANAUGH.

Instead you are shitting on Bernie and demanding I show respect to people who will vote for a rapist as long as their vote doesn't change anything.

[George II]

176. The question was:

Which Democratic Senators are "hiding from the media" waiting to see how other people vote?

All you did was post a sarcastic comment about Joe Manchin. He's been VERY visible during this Supreme Court debate, including this from September 28 - shortly after Flake called for an FBI investigation (not the day AFTER the investigation began)

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-court-kavanaugh-manchin/senate-democrat-manchin-joins-flakes-call-for-fbi-probe-of-kavanaugh-idUSKCN1M82KD

And there are other statements by him over the last week or two.

So now we're down to 46 Democratic Senators - which ones are "hiding from the media"?

[RhodeIslandOne]

177. What a quote from Heidi

http://www.grandforksherald.com/news/government-and-politics/4505784-heitkamp-undecided-kavanaugh-after-sexual-assault-hearing

Heitkamp said Ford was “believable but we have the strong denials by Kavanaugh.”

Oh, wow. Glad you were watching from the bunker, Heidi. "Strong denials" that ripped YOUR party.

[George II]

179. "MY party"? Not your party?

Plus, you forgot to include the rest of the quote:

“We’re going to have to weigh the credibility of each one of those statements,”

But, contrary to your initial contention, inasmuch as Heidi Heitkamp was interviewed by a North Dakota newspaper, she's obviously NOT "hiding from the media".

Now we're down to 45 Democratic Senators, so I'll ask again - any of them, as you put it, "hiding from the media".

[RhodeIslandOne]

184. You're the one who asked for forty some senators

Thankfully, almost all are acting like Democrats. NO to rapist Brett!

You're the one who seems upset at the independent also acting like a Democrat.

I'm done playing your game.

[revmclaren]

183. 'YOUR' party???

Careful...your slip is showing!



All at DU!

[RhodeIslandOne]

185. I was referring to HER, not standing up for what is supposedly HER party

Kavanaugh should have immediately been disqualified and escorted from the room when he began ripping MY/OUR PARTY with his wild conspiracy theories, thus ending his farcical nomination.

I'm not kowtowing to wing nuts like a couple of fence sitters.

[revmclaren]

187. Understand...

Sorry about the reply. On a hair trigger right now.

Too many sleepless nights. Really getting to me!

[RhodeIslandOne]

189. I understand

I am stressed every day I wake, a battle between depression and rage over this shit.

[EffieBlack]

120. Nice to see you, Bernie

Where’ve you been?

[bigtree]

123. not having a place on the Judiciary Cmte., I'd expect Sen Sanders to do the opposite expected of him

...by his critics. He's done what the majority of Democratic senators have done and not made himself the focus of the crisis.

Suggesting that he's late to the defense of democracy (opposition to Kavanaugh) is at extreme odds with the facts.

More to your inference, though, Sen. Sanders has pinned a point of opposition which only occurred a couple days ago. Kavanaugh just testified, his nomination voted out the floor Friday. This isn't late, it's timely.

I can well imagine his detractors railing against him for granstanding, if he did manage to assert himself in an overt way in these proceedings, but he has correctly deferred to the Democrats on the committee, as the majority of Democrats who are also not on the panel have done.

I'm not surprised, though, to find critics playing the other side of his options to level this nonsense about his lateness to the cause. It's pathetically the only thing detractors can manage to say in response, but, where's the real concern for this nomination in focusing ire on Sanders?

It's false ire, at that. Sen Sanders has been in this fight since it began. As I said to another critic, above, I really don't expect detractors to know much of anything about what Sen. Sanders is actually doing. It's just not in the wheelhouse of those who reflexively express cynicism about the senator.


07/09/18
Sanders Statement on Supreme Court Nominee

06/27/18
Sanders Statement on Justice Kennedy

…4 days ago Sen. Sanders Calls For Judiciary Committee To Postpone

... 3 days ago Sanders: Kavanaugh accusers 'have risked their lives to come forward'

[George II]

133. Gilibrand isn't on the Judiciary Committee either, she's been very vocal and visible all week....

...as have several other Democratic Senators.

[EffieBlack]

136. Funny how "Bernie alone can fix it" turns into "But but but Bernie CAN'T do that! He's only

Last edited Sun Sep 30, 2018, 07:58 AM - Edit history (1)

one little ole senator with no power at all. But he DID put out a statement” when he’s challenged to actually DO something.

[bigtree]

137. that's not in this demand

...you're projecting a primary dispute onto this effort.

All senators opposed to Kavanaugh are 'challenged to do something.'

Sanders is damned if he does here, at the same time folks are damning him for not doing something or the other in a timely way.

Curious what other Dems not on the committee are doing that stands in such drastic contrast with his efforts. To my veteran political eyes, Sanders is working as an ally in this fight, alongside other notable efforts from Democrats.

Also looking for even a hint of that actual fight in these cynical responses to this very correct and timely demand.

[Bluepinky]

142. Some posters criticize Sanders no matter what he does or doesn't do.

If Sanders doesn’t come out in support for something on the Democratic platform, he gets criticized. If he does show support, he gets criticized (for grandstanding or waiting too long). He can’t win, either way.

I think he contributes a lot to the Democratic Party, not only by being a strong ally and voting with them most of the time. But he has a loud voice and brings a lot of issues important to progressive Democrats to the forefront, especially minimum wage, income inequality, universal healthcare. And some of his criticisms of the Party are valid.

[betsuni]

139. +1

[UCmeNdc]

129. Brett Kavanaugh does not deserve to sit on the Supreme Court.

Brett Kavanaugh’s actions and behavior has shown a man that will lie and manipulate facts.

[Jersey Devil]

140. I knew there was something missing from DU this week but couldn't put my finger on it

This is it! Another I love/hate Bernie string. I use them as page spacers to group other posts so that I can navigate the page more easily without using bookmarks.

[QC]

165. These threads are also great for updating the ignore list. n/t

[Ijustgot_here]

141. UH OH!!! Now we're TALKING!

PER-JURY!!!!

[Gothmog]

156. Sen. Mazie Hirono was amazing during this hearing

Link to tweet

[bigtree]

161. she absolutely was

...but this is a thread about a letter Sen Sanders wrote the Judiciary.

You should, perhaps, start your own thread on that, instead of trying to divert from mine.