New SCOTUS Judge

Status
Not open for further replies.
Meadmaker said:
Stay tuned. There are actual names and verifiable, or refutable, elements in the New Yorker story. Lots of questions to be asked.


Kavanaugh denies it completely, which once again eliminates one line of argument. It isn't about whether he did something obscene thirty five years ago. It's about whether he lied about it this afternoon.
Click to expand...

Yes, and the ones that Ronan talked to actually denied it.
 
Babbylonian said:
Of course Trump is sticking by his nominee. Rapists are fine with other rapists.
Click to expand...

He's even worse than that:


The man is toxic masculinity personified. If we harass survivors, others will be less likely to come forward is a horrific thought to have.
 
Last edited:
Meadmaker said:
Stay tuned. There are actual names and verifiable, or refutable, elements in the New Yorker story. Lots of questions to be asked.


Kavanaugh denies it completely, which once again eliminates one line of argument. It isn't about whether he did something obscene thirty five years ago. It's about whether he lied about it this afternoon.
Click to expand...

He wouldn't lie to congress under oath would?

I mean, he wouldn't lie even though he has a track record of telling lies to congress under oath.........would he?
 
Stacko said:
He's even worse than that:


The man is toxic masculinity personified. If we harass survivors, others will be less likely to come forward is a horrific thought to have.
Click to expand...

He probably thinks that the death threats against accusers isn't enough, those threats need to be executed to stop future accusers.
 
Update from Grassley:

Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) on Sunday night said the Senate Judiciary Committee, which he chairs, will "attempt to evaluate" new allegations of sexual assault regarding Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

Grassley in a statement slammed Democrats for "withholding information" regarding the allegations.

"Yet again, Senate Democrats actively withheld information from the rest of the Committee only to drop information at politically opportune moments," Grassley said, doubling down on his remarks that Democrats withheld the first allegation against Kavanaugh from Christine Blasey Ford, who went public last week.

He said the Democrats appear to be "more interested in a political takedown" than "pursuing allegations through a bipartisan and professional" investigation.

"Of course, we will attempt to evaluate these new claims," Grassley added.
Click to expand...

Linky.

Grassley has had this weird complaining tone. He seems to be implying the Republicans were not aware of the new allegations.
 
Last edited:
Tsukasa Buddha said:
Update from Grassley:



Linky.

Grassley has had this weird complaining tone. He seems to be implying the Republicans were not aware of the new allegations.
Click to expand...

Umm...

As Senate Republicans press for a swift vote to confirm Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court, Senate Democrats are investigating a new allegation of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh. The claim dates to the 1983-84 academic school year, when Kavanaugh was a freshman at Yale University. The offices of at least four Democratic senators have received information about the allegation, and at least two have begun investigating it. Senior Republican staffers also learned of the allegation last week and, in conversations with The New Yorker, expressed concern about its potential impact on Kavanaugh’s nomination. Soon after, Senate Republicans issued renewed calls to accelerate the timing of a committee vote. The Democratic Senate offices reviewing the allegations believe that they merit further investigation. “This is another serious, credible, and disturbing allegation against Brett Kavanaugh. It should be fully investigated,” Senator Mazie Hirono, of Hawaii, said. An aide in one of the other Senate offices added, “These allegations seem credible, and we’re taking them very seriously. If established, they’re clearly disqualifying.”
Click to expand...

I keep getting drawn back to the fact that they had that letter from 65 women Kavanaugh didn't sexually assault in high school ready the second there was sniff of any of this coming out. How did they think that doing that was better idea than just going with another nominee they wouldn't need to prepare that for?
 
Besides, why should it be a surprise to them in the first place? Didn't they actually do a thorough vetting of the nominee?

If the committee was unaware of these issues, how can it be anything but their failure to properly investigate beforehand?

ETA: Didn't McConnell warn them about this guy, advising them that there were going to be problems?
 
pgwenthold said:
Besides, why should it be a surprise to them in the first place? Didn't they actually do a thorough vetting of the nominee?

If the committee was unaware of these issues, how can it be anything but their failure to properly investigate beforehand?

ETA: Didn't McConnell warn them about this guy, advising them that there were going to be problems?
Click to expand...

McConnell said he was going to be the hardest nominee to get through. Even Yale's law school has been caught up in this scandal.
 
Brett Kavanaugh, pals accused of gang rapes in high school

Lawyer Michael Avenatti told the Senate Judiciary Committee late Sunday that he has multiple witnesses who can say Brett Kavanaugh participated in gang rapes of drunken women during high school.

“We are aware of significant evidence of multiple house parties in the Washington, D.C., area during the early 1980s during which Brett Kavanaugh, Mark Judge and others would participate in the targeting of women with alcohol/drugs in order to allow a ‘train’ of men to subsequently gang rape them,” Avenatti said.

https://www.gazettextra.com/news/na...cle_6fb9a6c7-dd97-5bab-840c-b7c0bc29bedb.html (Sept 23, 2018)
Click to expand...


Pass the popcorn, this is going to be a fun-filled week!
 
Tsukasa Buddha said:
Update from Grassley:



Linky.

Grassley has had this weird complaining tone. He seems to be implying the Republicans were not aware of the new allegations.
Click to expand...

"He said the Democrats appear to be "more interested in a political takedown" than "pursuing allegations through a bipartisan and professional" investigation."



This is rich coming from a man who steadfastly refused to have the FBI investigate the Ford allegations, saying that it wasn't their job to do so.

Newsflash Senator Stupid Oldfart... the "I" in "FBI" stands for "Investigation"
 
Last edited:
Tsukasa Buddha said:
Avenatti isn't revealing everything yet, but here is his response to questions from the Senate staff:

Linky....
Click to expand...
Here's a new CT for you posted in the Avenatti Twitter feed:
Justice Anthony Kennedy suddenly resigned as part of a deal to shield his son from the Mueller investigation, after it became known his son's employer, Deutsche Bank, loaned Trump over 1B dlls for his Russian real-estate project. His son may be involved in cover-up.
Click to expand...

Not very credible given how would Trump shield anyone from the Mueller probe.
 
What's the difference between a GOP "operative" vs a conservative woman voter?

Salon: CNN focus group of conservative women turns out to be comprised of GOP operatives

On Anderson Cooper no less. That's disappointing.
The segment, which aired on "Anderson Cooper 360," shocked many viewers due to the callousness of the women and their disregard for Christine Blasey Ford's claims. ...

A deeper look into the women interviewed show that they were not average Republican voters, as the chyrons suggested. Journalist James Surowiecki reported that three of the women involved were either a GOP political operative or a candidate who ran for office as a Republican.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom