I didn't comment on the proof.
I commented on you downplaying a sex crime as just boys being boys.
Kavanaugh Vote Now in Jeopardy
- Thread starter DaShuckster
- Start date
- Status
I commented on you downplaying a sex crime as just boys being boys.
If this is all BS and Kavanaugh is the victim of, in his words, 'a smear campaign,' don't you think it's time for the FBI to take a few days and look into these allegations?
If the truth is on their side, isn't this the most prudent action to take at this point?
If the truth is on their side, isn't this the most prudent action to take at this point?
A few days, sure. What’s to stop another accusation in a week. Then another week. Then another week. It sure as hell seems like these are being lined up so that they each take as much time as possible and each claims it’s own time in the spotlight. Avenatti’s waiting too. He could come out with it. Why is he waiting?
It would put the public's mind at ease if we could clear the name of a supreme court justice.
So you're saying Trump should just dump him at this point?
Or are you taking the Grassley approach and just shut your eyes and cover your ears and "bull through this"?
Or, at some point see that this might just be a political charade and refuse to entertain it anymore.
So, you’re saying that you would support people being fired or removed from consideration solely on the basis of people making claims against them whether they are founded or not?
No, Kavanaugh deserves an FBI investigation to address these issues. To move forward without one is in no one's best interest - particularly Kavanaugh's.
The only "evidence" that the FBI can uncover at this point is just the testimony of people who were present, which we already have. What additional evidence do you believe can be discovered in an investigation, whether its the FBI or local authoriries?
Well, Kavanaugh's friend could be interviewed for one thing. Same with Ford's husband and therapist.
And let's not forget the Yale alums who had been privately talking about Kavanaugh's various 'misdeeds.' If the New Yorker can follow up on them, so can the FBI -- and with much more clout.
The FBI has legal restrictions to what they can investigate and how they go about it. They investigate crimes. For that to happen, there needs to be a credible enough accusation to meet the standard of reasonable suspicion. Given that everyone that these two women have named as witnesses to their allegations have all denied it, do you think that there is enough admissible evidence to raise to the standard of reasonable suspicion?
If this is about a background investigation, they may interview or not. Given that the witnesses that both accusers mentioned all issued statements through their attorneys that stated it didn’t happen, what more do you want the FBI to do?
If this is about a background investigation, they may interview or not. Given that the witnesses that both accusers mentioned all issued statements through their attorneys that stated it didn’t happen, what more do you want the FBI to do?
Total bullsh*t. If the FBI can be called in to investigate Anita Hill's allegations against Thomas, they sure as hell can be called in for the assorted allegations now being charged against Kavanaugh.
I’ve answered this a number of times. That was two federal employees that potentially violated federal laws. That is right in the FBI’s wheelhouse.
The guy doesn’t read the posts he’s respond to. He invents his own narrative and responds to it
And literally every example you gave would be considered heresay by a court and dismissed.
This is not a court case, this is a job application in front of the American People.
Yes, if this was weeks ago. Feinstein purposely waited until this was almost over. And that's why. No one is talking about that.
Then there's the lawsuit and other things that spouses were involved in, those things alone make her wholly not impartial -- beyond the political alignment and role. At some point, that has to be pointed to.
That 1-2 is where the Democrats lost me. In any other case of accusations, this would have been 'tossed out.' But we've decided that anything like this is a "war on women." Sigh ... no, it's called politicking to an extreme level, and this woman's accusation should have been 'tossed out' giving her own issues, and the very late timing.
This is where women need to stand up and start holding each other accountable. Just like they should have when Hillary Clinton said, "Every woman should be believed by default." Until women hold each other accountable, it's this non-sense that is alienating people.
Women hurt women the most. That's the problem. Men are now holding each other accountable, like I did in my youth (and was hated for it). It's time for women to step up as well. This whole 'situation' where you have the Huffington Post with signed letters from people who graduated from the same high school some 25 years later is just a joke at this point.
This is most certainly a court case. A supreme court case, in fact. Are we to expect our SCOTUS justices to pass judgements on heresay?
Where accusations can fly, and the call to withdraw his nomination has started. Oh, BTW, not a single person of the four (4) Ford herself named will confirm her story, in written testimony that is going on-record. This includes her best friend. Beyond a 'court of law,' where charges wouldn't be filed, I'd say that's quite discrediting in this 'job application.'
I said it before and I'll say it again, I'm already pissed at Republicans for 'holding up the SCOTUS' opening under Obama. But the Democratic party stooped to a new low. Feinstein purposely waited until the vote was upon them. At best, that's just exposing her politics. At worst, she is guilty of what everyone is pissed at Urban Meyer about.
So, for all those not paying attention ...
- Over 35 years ago
- In high school
- Drunk young women, drunk young men
- No one can not only back the the Accuser's claim ... they cannot even validate there was a party where the Accused was in attendance!
- Not even her best friend of the era
- All have given written testimony to this fact
- The Accuser 'didn't remember' this assualt until 2012 ... 30 years later
- The Accuser is in a very political position counter to the Accused
- The spouse of the Accuser received an unfavorable verdict at the hands of the spouse of the Accused recently
- If this wasn't #metoo, it would have been dropped by now
I'd rather we focus on the men we should. And yes, I've seen the 2nd accuser from college, allegedly similar setting (accuser was drunk too), over 30 years ago. At what point does this end?
Last edited:
Omigawd, those evil Senate DEMOCRATS are...gasp!...playing POLITICS! How despicable!!! Oh, the HORROR of it all.
Pardon me, but these histrionics are coming from the same folks who defended Mitch McConnell when he literally ignored a Presidential SCOTUS nomination for nearly a year without so much as a hearing. Yeah, boy, Feinstein's actions were beyond the pale, right guys?
Now you’re going around in circles. Biden rule, anyone. There are 10 pages in this thread. You’re in almost every one of them. I’m sure you didn’t miss it. So quit wasting our time.
And you totally ignored this (which is why you did not quote it for that reason!!!) ...
Now this is where the Democrats grossly expose themselves ...
Yes! She literally lit the entire #metoo movement on-fire!
Please show me where a Senator or Congressmen (or woman) did the same during Obama?! Where they used class or racist or some other 'identity warfare'?!
It was bad enough when it was political over birth control, when she purposely mis-attributed something to him he never said about birth control -- and even ruled against the people who made that argument too! But now he's a rapist. This is a new low!
BTW, Feinsten is also the same woman who think it's okay to conceal carry, but only for herself, not other women. She is one of the biggest hypocrites in the Senate. There are plenty, but this is the staple of the Democratic party ...
Racial and sexual warfare! This is why a lot of moderates and Libertarians are getting tired of it. And you wonder why Trump won?!
Really!
I'm not ignoring anything. I'm a newbie here but I've been playing this message board game since the early 00's. Places like the Water Cooler should be renamed Hypocrisy Central because the sh*t being spewed is always the same. The only difference over the years is which side of the argument you're on THIS time around.
You can play the "well, what about THEM?" game 'til the cows come home. The bottom line is that 'you reap what you sow.'
Until a new generation of politicians come in who might actually care about our country first and their politics second, it ain't gonna change.
You can play the "well, what about THEM?" game 'til the cows come home. The bottom line is that 'you reap what you sow.'
Until a new generation of politicians come in who might actually care about our country first and their politics second, it ain't gonna change.
You know what you did. You ignored my complaining about Republicans. Why? Your very next statement tells why ...
You're forgetting something. With me, there is no "THEM"! I'm a Libertarian. I despise anyone who is illiberal!
So the Republicans in Congress were out calling Obama's candidate a white supremacist? Or anti-white genocidal threat to society?
There is a huge difference between what the Republicans did, and what the illiberal Democrats are doing.
You're missing my point.
What happened to the candidate Obama put up that wasn't confirmed?
What's going to happen to the candidate Trump put up, especially if he's not confirmed?
Whether it's throwing reporters in jail or destroying the name of Supreme Court candidates, the Democrats have no level they won't stoop to.
And that's why Trump won.
Yes, one reaps what one sows.
There are several politicians in the last 20 years that fit this bill. They all get run out of dodge by not only their peers but by the opposing party.
Im not particularly fond of Kavanaugh because of his rulings, but the character assassination going on is ridiculous. This whole charade is based on nothing more than partisan gamesmanship, not out of concern of whether he is qualified to be a SCOTUS judge. Are we talking about how he has ruled in the past? Nope.
Which is why I've been siding more with Republicans as of late. The Democratic party and US media has gone full illiberal.
It's like watching the worst Fox News analysts gone national.
Had to look this up as you and some of my left-er friends keep throwing out this "rushing" comment. Here's the timeline for other confirmations. This is through full confirmation. Your 60 days was to committee vote and would have been more like 65-70 days without Feinstein's theatrics.
Regardless, after looking at the other confirmations, there's not been some historic rush to this process for Kavanaugh. On the contrary, it's right in line with everyone since Eisenhower. The interesting thing is that the confirmations before Eisenhower were significantly shorter.
Barack Obama (76.5 avg)
- Elena Kagan 87
- Sonia Sotomayor 66
George W. Bush (52.5 avg)
- Samuel Alito Jr. 82
- John G. Roberts Jr. 23
Bill Clinton (72.75 avg)
- Stephen Breyer 73
- Ruth Bader Ginsburg 50
- George H.W. Bush Clarence Thomas 99
- David Souter 69
Ronald Reagan (77.2 avg)
- Anthony Kennedy 65
- Robert Bork 114 (Rejected)
- Antonin Scalia 85
- William Rehnquist 89
- Sandra Day O'Connor 33
Gerald Ford (19)
- John Paul Stevens 19
Richard Nixon (51.5)
- William Rehnquist 49
- Lewis Powell Jr. 45
- Harry Blackmun 27
- G. Harrold Carswell 79 Rejected
- Clement Haynsworth Jr. 92 Rejected
- Warren Burger 17
Lyndon Johnson (96 avg)
- Thurgood Marshall 78
- Abe Fortas 114
John F. Kennedy (16.5)
- Arthur Goldberg 25
- Byron White 8
Dwight Eisenhower (60.6 avg)
- Potter Stewart 108
- William Brennan Jr. 64
- Charles Whittaker 17
- John Harlan 65
- Earl Warren 49
I love that Senator Hirono came out and said that Kavanaugh has no credibility because she disagrees with his ideologies. Interestingly enough, Kavanaugh has a reputation as a textualist, so what does she want his ideologies to be in order for her to find him credible?
As far as I can surmise, your impartial point is that 'those evil Democrats are WORSE than the Republicans???!?!?! There's no level those "illibs" won't stoop to, right? Good to know.
The illiberal tactics used speak for themselves.
When Republicans go for character assassinations using demonizations and similar use of groups, I call them out as well. This includes going after John Kerry in his Church and elsewhere, especially family.
I call out both sides when they use illiberal tactics. Unfortunately the Democratic party has shed its Liberal foundations. It started in 2006, and accelerated in 2010 and definitely by 2014.
The hypocrisy on Russia, and the argument for a, what is essentially, a "Ministry of Truth," scares me, especially with just enough Republicans in agreement too.
Any women out there who were around him as a kid? Maybe we can get a 42 year old allegation. Why stop there? Let’s get an allegation of toddler Kavanaugh being bad.
Maybe his nanny/babysitter can come out and say he exposed and touched himself in front of her when he was 6-months old. Make it more salacious and add that he urinated on her. That'd really tie it to Trump. Even better if she's a Russian nanny.
This new woman admitted that she’s only “come forward” with this accusation because Senate Democrats were wild about finding someone else to smear Kavanaugh with
The American Public is getting sick and tired of all the scandal surrounding Kavanaugh---and this is BEFORE Thursday's circus.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/poll-opposition-kavanaugh-s-confirmation-grows-n911581
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/first-read/poll-opposition-kavanaugh-s-confirmation-grows-n911581
- Status
Similar threads
