(10-01-2019 12:49 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  You seem to make several assumptions I do not agree with, such as Kavanaugh lying to the Senate. Has that been proven?

Fair point. Has it been proven to the point that you would accept ... certainly not. If a full FBI background investigation had been run before the 2nd hearing, I think the public would have a lot better understanding. Unfortunately, it wasn't and we don't.

Based on public reporting from other people who knew Kavanaugh in high school and college, you can make the argument that he was just intentionally and grossly misleading when under oath, rather than lying. My personal opinion is that it was disqualifying on the front end, but maybe not impeachable on the backend. I was always surprised that so many Republicans and conservatives went to the mattresses for Kavanaugh. Plenty of other qualified conservative nominees without the baggage that could have sailed through like Gorsuch. I think Republicans and conservatives may have stuck with Kavanaugh just to make it a campaign issue for the democratic senators in red states.

But most of the "lies" boil down to he-said / she-said and he-said / he-said. So if you believe Kavanaugh, then you believe that he did not lie. If you believe many of his former classmates, doormates, etc., then you think he lied. Guess a jury of his peers could decide if that is enough to establish "proof".

EDIT - Of course, I don't want this to obscure my larger point. Don't be a hypocrite. When you are defending a politician's actions, swap out that politician's names for another politician that you hate to the core of your being. If you still feel justified in defending the hated politician, you have a sound argument.