New SCOTUS Judge II: The Wrath of Kavanaugh

Ziggurat said:
The senate judiciary committee requested them, and she refused. Do you think she will provide them to the FBI and not to the committee? Maybe she would, but I don't think it's out of bounds to expect she won't.
Click to expand...

Good for you. TBD still made a baseless claim.
 
The Shrike said:
I'm totally down with investigation of Ford, Ramirez, and Swetnick, including lawsuit/prosecution if warranted for libel and/or slander. If the GOP really wants us to think that there's an epidemic of false accusations from high school floozies looking for their 15 minutes of fame at the expense of fine, upstanding men like Kavanaugh, then bring it. I'm a fine, upstanding man and I wouldn't want one of these two-bit tarts attacking my reputation.

If Lindsey Graham really thinks that the democrats on the Judiciary Committee concocted this whole thing just to throw a monkey wrench in the process then investigate it. The self-righteous pearl-clutching he did last week might have worked for the base, but if he's serious and he's right then I too would want those bums thrown out of the Senate. Feinstein, Booker, Harris, Durbin – come on, Lindsey. Which one of them did this?
Click to expand...

Bold prediction: No such investigations will ever take place.

Yet, Republicans will continue to shriek about lies, corruption, and conspiracies.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Wouldn't the very fact that they are from the other tribe make them unpalatable to Democrats?
Click to expand...
It wouldn't back in the olden days - 2015 - before tribal lines in the sand were drawn by the GOP. Dems unanimously approved Scalia and Kennedy.
 
Cavemonster said:
Given that many on the right would be happy to destroy Ford on any pretext imaginable, I can imagine a hesitancy to give directly to those same people psychological notes about one's deeper problems and a low level of trust that those same people would treat the documents fairly and thoughtfully in their redacting of unrelated information.

The appropriate recipient of those notes would be the FBI investigators.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't trust Grassley or any of his Old White Moronic cronies on the Senate with my cat's veterinary records, let alone what they are asking for.
 
smartcooky said:
Oooh, Ohh can I answer that please?

Thanks

No such legislation exists!
Click to expand...

I'm not sure there isn't. That said, I'm not aware of a single one. River? Prestige? TBD? Etc? Do any of you know of any? Or am just too partisan to have noticed?
 
smartcooky said:
I wouldn't trust Grassley or any of his Old White Moronic cronies on the Senate with my cat's veterinary records, let alone what they are asking for.
Click to expand...

Cool, cool.

She can give them to Senator Spartacus or Senator Shut Up then!

Not only are they Dems, they aren't even "white"!

(unfortunately they are morons, and you see the report here says that they are extremely dull persons. You see, our experts describe them as appallingly dull , unimaginative, timid, lacking in initiative, spineless, easily dominated, no sense of humour, tedious company and irrepressibly drab and awful. And whereas in most professions these would be considerable drawbacks, in the Democrat party they are a positive boon).
 
smartcooky said:
I wouldn't trust Grassley or any of his Old White Moronic cronies on the Senate with my cat's veterinary records, let alone what they are asking for.
Click to expand...
Orrin Hatch asked how Facebook makes money, if “users don’t pay for your service.” Mark Zuckerberg replied, “Senator, we run ads."

I can relate to Hatch, I'm not that old but it can be hard to keep up.
 
Belz... said:
Coming back to this:



How so? You know the Senators won't be replaced immediately in November, right?
Click to expand...

Do you think this confirmation and hearing influences the election at all? Your answer should be telling.
 
Ziggurat said:
The senate judiciary committee requested them, and she refused. Do you think she will provide them to the FBI and not to the committee?
Click to expand...
Well, lets see, the Senate committee (which was controlled by the republicans):

- Did not call any other witnesses that could back up Ford's story. No calls for Judge to appear, nor any of the other attendees at the party where this incident probably took place

- Did not make any effort to investigate other claims of sexual impropriety involving Kavanaugh

- Did not get the FBI to do an investigation before her testimony, and is only running an investigation now because Flake forced them to

Its pretty clear that the majority of Republicans in the senate do not want the issue investigated properly, and given some of their tactics, I'd be hesitant to share any information with an individual like Grassley.
 
acbytesla said:
I'll answer your question. Who are the rich and powerful employers? See a lot of color in those board rooms do you? How about stockholders? I rest my case. Also, I never said it was only skin color.

I addressed your affirmative actionn question already.

Now answer my question. Name some Republican sponsored legislation where they took the side of workers over their employers?
Click to expand...

Your claim is very weak. You know as well as I do that anyone that would be wealthy would benefit, regardless of ethnicity and sex. But thanks for showing your true racist/sexist attitude. Please, keep thinking its a color or sex thing. While you're at it please explain how two ethnic minority groups hold the highest average income in a country that is so racist. (Indian, and Asian)

None of those laws or policies have color in them, nor sex.
 
You know I miss the days when every political discussion being a broad fight of the very base concept of "The Left/Liberalism/Democrats" versus "The Right/Conservatism/Republicans" was only the subtext and not literally what people are flippin' doing.
 
What Kavanaugh’s Drinking Tells Us About His Credibility

The article makes eight points, with supporting data for each point:

1. If Kavanaugh and his friend Mark Judge were drunk on the day that Ford claims they sexually assaulted her, their denials become less credible.

2. There’s eyewitness testimony that Kavanaugh and Judge were drunk that day.

3. There’s corroborating evidence that Kavanaugh and Judge drank a lot.

4. There’s corroborating evidence that Judge behaved aggressively toward women while drunk—and then forgot about it.

5. Kavanaugh denies ever behaving aggressively while drinking.

6. Kavanaugh denies having forgotten anything that happened while he was drinking.

7. Evidence shows Kavanaugh behaved aggressively while drinking.

8. Evidence indicates that Kavanaugh forgot what happened while he was drinking.
Click to expand...

Then there’s the exchange with Coons in last week’s hearing. It was one of the least-noticed moments in Kavanaugh’s testimony, but it may have been the most telling. The question was whether Kavanaugh had “ever gotten aggressive while drinking.” He could have said yes. He could have said that he had once thrown ice or beer at a guy or that he had once tried to break into a pickup truck. Instead he said no, and he fished for clues. “What are you talking about?” he asked Coons. “… Unless you’re talking about something … that I’m not aware of.”

What was going on in that exchange? There are three possibilities. One is that all the evidence of Kavanaugh’s aggressive behavior—the police report, Ludington’s eyewitness account, and the story told by classmates about the pickup truck—is bogus. The second possibility is that Kavanaugh remembered these incidents but chose to pretend they had never happened. The third possibility is that he didn’t acknowledge them because he didn’t remember them. He forgot what he had done, or he tried to hide it.

That makes it highly plausible that Kavanaugh has done the same with the drunken assault on Ford: If he isn’t falsely denying it, he has forgotten it. The evidence of Kavanaugh’s drinking, aggression, and denial doesn’t prove this conclusion, but it makes it far more plausible than it would be for a random innocent man. Too plausible to put Kavanaugh on the nation’s highest court.
Click to expand...
 
River said:
Your claim is very weak. You know as well as I do that anyone that would be wealthy would benefit, regardless of ethnicity and sex. But thanks for showing your true racist/sexist attitude. Please, keep thinking its a color or sex thing. While you're at it please explain how two ethnic minority groups hold the highest average income in a country that is so racist. (Indian, and Asian)

None of those laws or policies have color in them, nor sex.
Click to expand...

You are totally mis'characterizing my post. My point wasn't as much about racism as it was about power serving power and ignoring the powerless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom