If Merrick Garland Was On The Supreme Court We Wouldn't Be Hearing About Dr. Ford Today
If the Democrats take over Congress, there will be impeachment proceedings against Judge Brett Kavanaugh, and it doesn't matter if he is on the Supreme Court or the District Court where he presently sits.
Kavanaugh should not be placed on the Supreme Court, because he has been accused of sexual assault, and now also exposing himself and urging a woman to put his penis in her mouth at a college party. The new charge is being made by a second woman.
No one is ever going to know whether these incidents took place or not, mainly because everyone who may have been involved was likely drunk, and the incidents took place 35 years ago. It is pretty clear that these accusatory memories, and the denial memories, are not in themselves reliable.
If we step back a little from what is taking place with the back and forth of the accusations and the denials and make a larger picture, we can clearly see that Kavanaugh's nomination is highly problematic. We objectively know, according to what was known of Kavanaugh's friends and associates at the time, that Kavanaugh ran with a group of high school friends who drank a lot and took part in promiscuous sex. It appears this behavior carried on into college. There is of course nothing surprising about this, as it describes a noticeable part of American youth at any given point in time, and has for many decades.
The problem is that in a less partisan and chaotic time Kavanaugh would have already withdrawn his name for consideration for the Supreme Court seat, or the president of the United States would have already withdrawn the nomination. It may not be provable that Kavanaugh committed these specific offenses, but the fact that he hung around in circles where this was likely to have been done by someone clouds Kavanaugh more than enough to require him to step aside. Is it "fair" to him? Probably not, but it regularly happens that people lose a job opportunity due to factors that they may or may not be guilty of.
====================
There was no "Biden Rule", it was a speculation by Joe Biden that suggested that nominations to the Supreme Court should not be accepted during election years. It was a careless and silly suggestion by Biden, but not a "rule" of the Senate that demanded conformity. The Republicans dishonestly and disingenuously pretended that there was , thanks to Biden's words, a "precedent" that enabled them to deny a hearing to President Obama's last Supreme Court nomination in 2016, when Justice Scalia died, of Judge Merrick Garland. Garland's nomination was never acted on and was eventually lost when Trump became president. This was a shameful course of events perpetrated by Mitch McConnell and the GOP senate.
Now the chickens are coming home to roost. Kavanaugh is being put through a meat grinder , and we have had the suggestion made , I believe seriously , that he will be impeached as soon as the Democrats gain control of both houses of Congress, which whether you like it or not will take place sometime during Kavanaugh's career as a Justice. It has also been suggested that the Democrats will add additional justices to the Supreme Court when they get the chance, as a way to dilute the conservative majority that has been unethically placed on the court by McConnell and company.
Nothing that is going on is good for the country, but the first step should be for Kavanaugh to withdraw and Trump replace him with a "moderate" who will objectively consider cases before the Supreme Court and not base his decisions on predeterminations.
Tags
Who is online
50 visitors
There have been numerous reports that Kavanaugh ran with a circle of friends in high school and college which was in fact an environment where the accusations against him could have occurred. That is in and of itself sufficient reason to withdraw his name. In any other era it would have happened already.
No one has a "right" to a seat on the Supreme Court and the justices there should be pristine in their conduct.
I would have denied Kavanaugh the seat when it came out he once pressed for a "Vince Foster death" related investigation against the Clintons when he worked for Ken Starr. This strongly suggests Kavanaugh is highly partisan and unfit for a fair court.
The sex charges and the drunkenness charges only add another layer to the reasons to reject him.
That is new levels of crazy. "Ran with a circle"? "Could have occurred"? Oh FFS.
It's not crazy at all. He has a tainted background. He is not US Supreme Court material. He doesn't have any "right" to sit on the Supreme Court.
The combination of the accusations and the fact that he existed at the time in an environment that makes the accusations more, not less, believable creates a preponderance of evidence that he is tainted.
The honorable thing to do would be for Kavanaugh to withdraw his name. He probably should have thought twice about being a drunken carouser in high school if he wanted to be on the Supreme Court one day, but the young are often not thinking that far ahead.
Were you around in the 1980s? Did you drink?
If so, you are tainted and probably a sexual assaulter, no matter what witnesses say. "Evidence" is so old fashioned.
Do liberals ever think through the implications of what they argue?
From a drunk that can't even remember the year it supposedly happened, but they knew how old they were. And when you have to call "Friends" to see if they remember what you think might have happened to you 35 years ago, well, That's a nail in the coffin too.
There is evidence that he was in an environment, by his own choice, that gives some weight to the accusations against him. All these people were drunk, including Kavanaugh and Ford and the girl at Yale and all those defending Kavanaugh. None of their recollections are necessarily reliable, although Ford has the strongest case for being believable. When someone places their hand over your mouth and cuts off your breathing, even for only a few seconds, it is possible that would leave an indelible memory of who did it.
Utterly batshit.
We all know very well that you do not think he is SCOTUS material simply because he was nominated by the person you hate most in the universe. Trump could have nominated Merrick Garland and you'd still be having a strop.
"He existed at the time in an environment". Are you listening to yourself??
Just withdraw his name? No ritual suicide necessary?
More batshit by the minute.
Has it ever occurred to you that she stands to make a lot of money from all this?
Popular kids go to parties. It's a thing.
Conspicuously absent from her set of evidence is the corroboration from any of her friends at the time. It's difficult to believe she didn't tell any of her friends about it.
Maybe she only had "Boyfriends" ?
So what's the rush then? Where is the REASONABLE investigation? Just how long was Justice Scalia 'cold and dead' before his seat on the bench was filled. So obviously and disgustingly hypocritical of conservatives who so-call swear themselves the model of principled government.
Conservatives are attempting to break down this countries Rule of Law! OUTRAGEOUS!
This is republican nonsense. Had Trump nominated Merrick Garland, first, it would have been just desserts—McConnell and conservatives jilted liberals out of a fair and mutually-agreeable nominee. Second, this justice nominee is being rushed on the bench Machiavellian-style, with a clear-cut purpose to serve political agendas of conservative 'takeover' of our federal system of government.
Kavanaugh's carcass is loaded now with accusations, and let's be clear, conservatives have other candidates, but have chosen to go for bust on this "tainted" guy! How long did McConnell stiff former President Obama on filling Scalia's seat?
Such disgusting hypocrisy! Liberals must not figuratively prostrate and place an "enter here" sign on their nether-regions to deceitful, greedy for gain,Trump or Conservatives!
CODE RED: Liberals, Independents, and Conservatives-fight damn it! Call your Senator today while it is today!
Describe a "reasonable investigation" in your mind. Why do I think a "reasonable investigation" would take however long it takes to get a Democrat in the WH?
The president appointing a judge and the senate confirming him....but because it's not a liberal, it's "breaking down the rule of law". Riiiiiiight. That's not totally transparent or anything.
How quaint. You do not know what a reasonable investigation is! Consequently, you give assent to RUSH a scandal-laden judge onto the Supreme Court for a lifetime appointment, what is the hurry? What if he is 'found out' later? Ugly-time!
It is 'Trump wish' all the time now. And Trump, being the daily liar that he is, does not wait for facts and figures. Just EXPEDITE!
Did Kavanaugh put his hands on this this woman without her permission is the only 'story' here! Surely conservatives, who buy every conspiracy theory 'sold' over conservative talk radio (books, magazines, columns, and ad buys) don't mind people making a buck! Sean Hannity and Rush Limbaugh are cases in point! These men, along with Laura Ingraham and Ann Coulter have been riding the conservative 'gravy' train for a "thousand' years!
Wonders of wonders: What did you all do with Ms. Thang: Sarah Palin? Did she get permanently full at the conservative trough? She does not come to the 'table' where we can hear from or see her anymore!
Insinuation.
All you know without a meaningful investigation is Trump won't offer to let the FBI investigate. So you are just 'free-styling' out here about something you can not possibly have an answer for.
You might be one of a handful of people still thinking that this whole thing really has anything to do with rape, or inappropriate actions, or a woman's rights.
THIS is strictly political.
Nice try. I asked what it was in YOUR mind.
So I guess that's a "yes" on a reasonable investigation being "one that takes long enough for Trump to be out of office".
Material to that story would be "what does she have to gain by fabricating or embellishing such an account?"
Sure. The business model is well established. All one has to do is become a famous darling of political extremists and one is set for life.
As you are attempting to change the subject, I'll take it you're acknowledging the monetary gain headed toward the accuser.
Well, all we have so far is ONE accuser and NO WITNESSES who have corroborated any part of her "story".
Sorry, I am not willing to ruin a good man's reputation on the "word" of one woman some 35 years later without one scintilla of evidence.
Maybe you are willing, but I just can't do that in good conscience.
But hey, that's just me.
I'm sure you think so.
Personally, I thought they should have confirmed Garland. I didn't find him objectionable at all.
Bit of melodrama there. Kavanaugh has already been held up longer than Sotomayer, Roberts, Breyer, Ginsburg, Kennedy, and Sandra Day O'Connor.
Clearly you believe he's tainted simply because he's Republican and a Trump appointee. If somebody had made an accusation like this against Merrick Garland, you'd be screaming and typing in red letters about the dastardly Republican smear campaign.
I'm not sure it gets more hypocritical than being a hypocrite while accusing somebody else of being a hypocrite. Well done.
See? THIS is what's wrong with America today. People don't use the word "scintilla" enough.
LOL!
It IS a good word.
To me, it equates to "less than nothing", which is what they have on Kavanaugh.
The FBI did all their background checks on Kavanaugh already. The FBI has nothing to investigate that's on the "Federal" Level.
It's all just a political joke now.
The "Joker" and the "Riddler" would be proud of this fiasco the Left is calling "Justice".
Call the local "Law and Order SVU" to do it. It's their job, not the (Fed) FBI's.
Your comment is dismissive of all that has occurred. No comment.
Unbelievable! You want to have a 'drawn out' discussion about what constitutes a reasonable investigation, in lieu, of having a reasonable investigation.
We have trained professionals who make determinations on what is reasonable and unreasonable uses of time and resources when getting to the bottom of a matter:
JUST STEP ASIDE AS IN GET OUT OF THE WAY OF IT!
The only point for this matter:
Did Kavanaugh put his 'fingerprints' on this this woman without her permission?!
It is a conservative 'dream' to label every opposer who speaks up against conservativism as money-grubbing, 'needy' and otherwise deficient; it is a damage control tactic, we all have heard about or know from experience so well.
The question (above) stands!
OK.
What evidence does she provide to prove her claim?
You don't know that yet, do you. I know she sought help from a therapist. And that's the only thing I know right now. I'd have to wait. Like you should. You lose credibility every single time you attack the accuser without hearing any testimony. Then you've got your mind set on her "guilt" before knowing the facts.
The question that supposedly stands can ,most likely be answered with the following question.
is there anyone who can substantiate from their own witnessing of the fact that the accusor AND the accused were both at the same place at the same time that the accusation was suppose to have taken place?
I will be asked , what will that prove? well if they can be placed in each others presence at the same time and the same place it points to the accusation COULD have happened.
as it stands nobody named can even say such a get together of the 6 individuals even happened other than the one making the accusation. so absent someone being able to say outside those 6 , that it did in fact take place , how do you prove a party DIDNT happen ?
But hey, what about an investigation? Is Trump not guilty of deliberately lying about the FBI role in investigating accusations? What's a couple of days of FBI investigation relative to a lifetime appointment? What's the rush? Oh, I see.
No, you are being dismissive of the facts given your increasing hatred of conservatives
So you haven't thought it through that far?
So let's walk through this again. The FBI investigates.
So we have her word against his, with 3 people she says were there who have no idea WTF she's talking about.
But let's be honest. You don't give a shit about any of that. The only "reasonable" investigation in your mind will be one that concludes with a "he definitely did it" ruling.
It's definitely difficult for me to believe that she never told ANYBODY about it. It's also hard for me to believe that if the event was so traumatic that she didn't race out of that party crying, prompting her "lifelong friend" to chase her down and get the story out of her.
Yes. For marriage counseling, apparently?
No, you know that all three of the other people at this party have issued statements that they have no idea what she's talking about, including her lifelong friend....who says she's never even met Kavanaugh.
The "testimony" of the three supposed witnesses is available. Credibility gets lost when you ignore testimony.
I didn't. I was actually leaning 60/40 toward the idea that it may have happened, or that some sort of something may have happened...which is a huge "benefit of the doubt" in her favor, BTW, given the paucity of evidence she's able to muster. I figured boys only prep school, little hornballs locked up with no girls, lots of alcohol... it's definitely possible.
But when she names 3 people at this party, and none of them have any clue WTF she's talking about, I'm kinda leaning 80/20 the other way.
That would be a start. She can't even get there, yet.
The problem with shit like this is, that unless he can prove he was someplace else, every liberal in America is going to believe he did it, simply because they want to believe he did it. Conveniently, she doesn't seem to remember the date.
Exactly. If you're trying to smear somebody, it's the perfect playbook. It's like something from House of Cards.
You're writing out of your sack! Being "up" is not the issue here. A charge with a body attached to it has been leveled by a woman out of Kavanaugh's past. It does not matter how long she waited or kept private about an assault of this nature. Perhaps she can not stomach the image this man is planned to stand as "judge" for a lifetime over this country's legal affairs! Knowing something about him—she speaks out!
I don't know that is the situation. But, she spoke up.
The question for me now becomes why you think you have to fall in line to not want a routine investigation. Do you realize that Maine can open up a case of "whoop-ass" on Kavanaugh and investigate this, after the fact of his appointment?There is no statute of limitation on sexual assault in Maine, I hear. (I think that is the state this alleged incident occurred in.)
Smear campaign? That is a republican damage control tactic (talking point). If you do not want to investigate this accusation - just say so. Can these "what-fors" and "how-comes."
If the shoe fits!
A new accusation has appeared. The FBI does have something to investigate on the federal level. But, why am I wasting time with this? You do not care about what this woman or anybody associated with this has to say. Consciences seared.
FBI Investigation:'
Interview Ford,. She makes allegations against Kavanaugh.
Interview Kavanaugh. He denies allegations.
Interview Judge. He denies any knowledge.
Interview Ford's friend she says was at the part. She denies ever meeting Kavanaugh or being at a party with him.
FBI looks for physical evidence. There is none.
FBI looks at police reports and medical records. There are none.
Investigation concludes.
Kavanaugh confirmed.
How about we just skip the bullshit clown show?
She is willing to step forward out of the shadows. She asked for the friend of Kavanaugh-identified as present during the alleged assault-to step forward and testify under oath . It was denied willy-nilly.
Now then, why are some conservatives and this republican committee not willing to let this situation speak for itself?
Precisely! Whole-heartedly I support something tending towards a fair process. This is not it. It is simply some republicans and a backdrop of conservatives (think tanks and the like) advocating for steamrolling over the liberals where-ever and whenever the democrats (and independents) won't resist the injury!
My whole argument is against this outrage of ignoring liberal concerns, and just listening to the conservative base and conservative talk jocks! McConnell over the weekend thereabouts told the Values Summit (of conservatives) that Kavanaugh will (not if), will be on the Supreme Court. In other words, if he has anything to say or do about it. He has not even heard from "Ms." Ford!
What more do we need to know about this Thursday hearing? It is a put-on for show.
Liberals and Independents do not have to take crap off Trump, some republicans, and some conservatives. Consequently, get up and resist. Never surrender!
Call your senator today and tell them: Do not voluntarily surrender. Fight for what is right and what is dignified! Matter of fact: I am 'bout to call both of mine right now!
We will not be "man-handled." Full-stop.
I do not have conservatives! I hate people who have contempt for process. It is a strong distinction. And please stop with this pretense to not knowing what the Federalist Society is up to; you were explaining some of this to NTs months ago! NOTE: Now, Senator Cornyn is on-air suggesting a vote could be held on Kavanaugh by this Friday! So who is blowing 'chunks'? These (some) republicans and conservatives do not care what this woman has to say. No fakery accepted!
All you know without a meaningful investigation is Trump won't offer to let the FBI investigate. In fact, Trump should be investigated by state attorneys for sexual assault, if some republicans and conservatives were doing their jobs correctly.
Are you going to start making sense soon?
An as of yet wholly, completely and totally unsubstantiated charge.
It does, actually. Because she's waited so long, there can be no physical evidence to support her claim. Her memory of the supposed event will have worsened, as will the memory of anybody else who may have been there. Although as of yet, she can't seem to find anybody who was there. We don't have a date, because it was so long ago. All very conspicuously convenient for a person making an erroneous allegation they don't want disproven.
You realize that just "speaking up" doesn't matter, don't you? If I "speak up" to say that Diane Feinstein sold secrets to the Russians or that Nancy Pelosi runs the largest child trafficking ring in California, that's not enough. I need to have evidence that backs up my allegations.
I don't fall in line very well. I don't think we need an investigation because she has not produced enough evidence to warrant one. Do we need an investigation into Pelosi's human trafficking ring?
Great point. Where, exactly, did this take place? Nobody but Ford even remembers a party.
Pretty much.
I have said so. Did you want to investigate Pelosi's trafficking ring? No? Does child trafficking not matter to you? Do liberals just not care about children?
You do not know what I ordinarily give a "WTF" (your words) about.
As for those people who you write about, admittedly, I have not seen the statements - only heard it voiced on the air today. But, then a little research on my part sports this:
"As negotiations continued, Leland Keyser, a woman Ford told The Washington Post was present at the party where she alleges Kavanaugh assaulted her, came forward to say she “does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present,” according to an email her lawyer sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee, obtained by The Post. In a brief interview at her home in Silver Spring, Keyser said that she did not recall the party, but that she was close friends with Ford and that she believes Ford’s allegation. "
Before her name became public, Ford told The Post she did not think Keyser would remember the party because nothing remarkable had happened there, as far as Keyser was aware. Ford has said she did not tell anyone about the alleged assault until 2012.
SOURCE : https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/lawyers-for-christine-blasey-ford-say-she-has-accepted-senate-judiciary-committees-request-to-testify-against-kavanaugh/2018/09/22/e8199c6a-be8f-11e8-8792-78719177250f_story.html?utm_term=.0c651b01d76b
So there is that. "Keyser believes her close friend, "Ms." Ford. There is something here that needs further clarification—which we won't get if Grassley has his way. The FBI can put all of these people under oath and do research. Who knows what they were asked? What they answered in a full context?
As for me, I do not know if "Ms. Ford" has a false memory, faulty mind, or if otherwise a fraud, what I give a "WTF" (your words) about is process. The Senate is not conducting itself "in accordance with" in my opinion. As a matter of principle, I have a problem with that!
FULL STOP.
Let's not skip the "bullshit clown show" —did you skip it any time it mattered for some conservative purposes?
As you might can imagine. Sitting down with the FBI (trained professionals on sexual misconduct questioning), is plenty different than replying to politicians who are really interested in asking deep probing questions—looking for inconsistencies. They say sitting down in an interview with the FBI can be a "mind-clearing" experience!
Funny, how the proper relevant authorities doing what they are trained to do can get closer to kernels of truth, opposed to partisan staff members with weak questions!
Alright then.
THAT....is something I can respect.
I don't know either, but my opinion is that what I've heard of her story sounds very dubious, and there are a lot of reasons I don't want official govt business held up for every dubious accusation that comes out of the woodwork. By the time we get through listening to all the crackpots, 4 more justices will have died of old age.
We're talking about 30 years ago. There will be inconsistencies.
Perhaps Senate Democrats should get better lawyers to coach them to ask better, more probing questions then.
And what exactly do other circumstances or cases have to do with this?
Questions like THAT lead me to believe this is ALL about politics.
Some people remember people who attempt to insert "something" inside of them—usually they be a woman. So if you do not know about the "sentiment' don't try to play 'one' in public.
By and by this is likely why girls and women do not come forward early; dig all the shit you are throwing up in the air before you even take the measure of this woman. Not every body have the time and energy for this kind of societal or political hostilities.
You have to compare apples with other apples and oranges with oranges:
1. President Donald Trump does not give a damn about this woman or her accusation. That's a fact. He sided with Kavanaugh already without hearing her out. No doubt.
2. Kavanaugh admitted as a youth he 'partied' more or less. So, who is to say he did not attempt to take some "boof" — c'mon, have you read Kavanaugh's words about "devil triangle" and "boofing"during the years under question? It sure sounds like he was a hot. . .'stick' back in the day. His own words state so much.
Not everything can be "boys being boys." (If you have ever been attempted sexually assaulted, it might help you understand how one can recount it.) What's don't we remember memories all the way back to three or four years old?
See: 1.1.55 and 1.1.56 below.
That's not evidence. That's her claim. We're looking for evidence to back up the claim.
You're not making sense.
Had she come forward early, we wouldn't be having this conversation. He'd be an ambulance chaser in Des Moines or something and we'd be talking about a different nominee.
I'm sure to you it seems like "political hostilities" or some other such fantasy. But pointing out that she's presented zero evidence is just stating a fact.
Hold an appropriate investigation: Some conservatives and republicans will not be respected for rushing this. We could give a damn about your 'turn' to the mid-terms. In fact, that is a reason for some conservatives not to hurry along! And as for sitting Kavanaugh's scandalous butt by October 1, 2018 just to appease some conservatives, we RESIST!
Correct. Why would his opinion matter?
As I've stated, I was leaning toward believing her until all of her "witnesses" didn't know WTF she was talking about.
His words are MUCH less damning than the president's words about his own behavior, but nobody is assuming he's an attempted rapist.
Nor can it be "girls and their feelings". There must be some evidence.
Go ahead and resist. We are working hard to destroy any effort by the left in this country to steal back their Stalinist power goal
the left in this country is the greatest threat to our Republic
Why? How is her claim any different than my Nancy Pelosi child trafficking claim? Do you want to investigate both?
They will all be both respected and devised, depending on who you talk to. That's the nature of our country's current brainless partisan identity politics.
You wouldn't anyway.
You'll need to explain that.
Sure. Right. Resist. Protest. Occupy. Whatever.
Bottomine: I want an investigation of the accusation and not a Rush "job." You do not request an investigation of any kind, I got it. Full Stop.
I don't want to tap-dance this number any longer (with you). Full Stop.
That's the part I find fascinating, the fact that conservatives overwhelmingly lack empathy for the victims of sexual assault. In the end that will blow back on them hard.....possibly on Nov 6th.
Lies, stealing, and deceit is not a Christian Cause. Christians like myself will not join with the Christian Right to twist this faith out of sorts! Evangelical Christians have made 'inside' enemies of fellow believers. Resist we shall: The "hard work" begins!
Do what you can to 'make it so' on mid-term election! The notion that Trump and his base (a select minority) should hold sway over the rest of us is anathema! One election (of sorts) is enough.
McConnell literally stated in difference words: 'I give a damn about what any set of women against Kavanaugh say: If I got anything to do with it Kavanaugh will be on the October 1, 2018 Supreme Court.'
Wh-Where is the OUTRAGE?
If you have had enough of this: Call for OUTRAGE. Call your Senators right now! Tell them to stand up like never before. Fight for the right processes! Even if they do not get it - never accept outright evil.
You say you want an investigation, but you fail to describe how it would be possible or feasible.
I don't think she's produced enough information to warrant an investigation. If she does, I might think differently.
I hear a rumor a third accuser is coming forth. Don't bother writing me about her (I assume) before s/he is announced. Thanks. Seems you and I are done for now!
Sure !
"I can't remember, but I know SOMETHING happened and it could have been with Kavanaugh. Not sure, but give me a chance to call a few friends to see if they remember what I think happened to me."
It's difficult to believe she didn't tell any of her friends about it.
How many women do you believe would go around blabbing that they were almost raped as well as someone trying to put their penis in their mouths???NO WOMAN WOULD!!! And if they did tell someone, that woman or teenage girl would have to be thoroughly convinced to report to the police, your assumption is BS..
I did...told people about it. So, you are incorrect in thinking that NO WOMAN would speak about sexual assaults or harassment.
While I didn't file charges...or a lawsuit...those that I told would not hesitate to back up my claims of the incident. (That includes the slobs wife.)
There is a difference between "go around blabbing" and "telling your best friend"....who would remember the account, even 30 years later.
And yet the very next post is written by a woman strong enough to do so.
Obviously not.
I did...told people about it. So, you are incorrect in thinking that NO WOMAN would speak about sexual assaults or harassment.
I stand corrected, I have not experienced that sort of behavior and no one that I am acquainted with have had that conversation with me, so I don't know about other people's experiences, however, most young girls would not want to relive the shame of what happened to them...
I didn't have any shame...none whatsoever. I don't have any shame now. It wasn't my fault.
I was extremely embarrassed in one incident...that occurred when I was 16. The boys are faceless in my memories - I couldn't tell you who was at that party...it was so long ago. The memory of what happened is in tattered bits and pieces in my mind. The second incident occurred shortly before the Anita Hill / Clarence Thomas hearings. I told my boyfriend, family and co-workers. His wife had the audacity to tell me that I couldn't sue. I corrected her thinking. Neither incident involved alcohol.
If you have not experienced abuse and don't know anyone who has...please, don't feel that you can speak for most young girls who have.
I didn't have any shame...none whatsoever. I don't have any shame now. It wasn't my fault.
Very good, you had and have a good approach, however, most young girls would not report for whatever reasons, fear or otherwise as evidenced by current news reports...
Current news reports? When did the media become experts in female reactions to sexual abuse? Isn't MsM usually guilty of revealing victims identities to the public? Suddenly they are sensitive to victim's feelings? pfffft
I am not a woman, but for twenty years I did sleep with men. And, plenty of alcohol may have been involved. I say this to say that even when I would awake with somebody in bed with me that was not there when I went to sleep: I remember who he is to this day.
So, I do not concede an understanding of "no-possible" solid memory to you. And, for that matter, I have not shared any of the situations (memories), with anyone. Though several were quite painful. I certainly remember being punched; robbed, and one guy planned worse (for which I will not go into).
Though, in the larger scheme of life—I have been blessed. It could have been worse. Women, in the 80's, faced even harsher treatment from some men, I am sure. So to pretend alcohol is a "memory destroying drug" is a rank lie. Nobody has suggested anyone in this situation was at the time a raging alcoholic suffering from blackouts. It is some conservatives and republicans doing damage control and doing so before hearing from the woman/men!
Is it the FBI's job to do background checks on federal officials applying for high-ranking positions in government? What about it?
Current news reports? When did the media become experts in female reactions to sexual abuse? Isn't MsM usually guilty of revealing victims identities to the public? Suddenly they are sensitive to victim's feelings? pfffft
I get the impression from your writings of your anger, you have stated your experiences and I have stated my opinions, that should be sufficient, since I am not a therapist, I will no longer have this discussion with you or anyone else..Good day...
January 19th 2017
I am sorry that you had similar experiences.
Memories are funny things...just as eye witness testimonies are. We cannot trust that decades old memories are precise...with or without alcohol being involved.
At least not any of the victims, but Mark Judge has admitted that he and "Bart O'Kavanaugh" were both blackout drunks.
Apparently they didn't do their job very well, eh?
Actually it's now up to 4.....Ford, Ramirez, the gang-rape victim Avenatti is representing and the other one the cops in Maryland are investigating.
So now Kavanaugh, the federal employee, has a new, different, set of accusers — plural ahead of the Senate "advise and consent" to an upwardly motivated position on the Supreme Court. And, it is dumbfounding to me that you or anybody else would waste time trying to persuade me you can not determine a need or make the distinction between pass background checks and a new background inquiry based on women coming forward with new accusations.
I am not going to wear myself out with so many words in here vainly explaining what you should understand already!
Thank you, but I am not crying foul over my situation. That's life. We are trying to change the direction of it, so that people can get some respect, if not compassion, from others who would abuse them and think nothing of it. To do that we need to hear people out and INVESTIGATE ACCORDINGLY.
My position is this: If I tell you or somebody else that, this one did such and such to me with conviction and this one flatly denies it and you agree with this one's statement over mine- then, I expect to get a fair chance to explain myself and have my accusation looked into! Do not expect me to simply let myself be judged a liar, because of some display of favoritism? The latter is as bad or worse in some cases than the former!
Accusations are being made, today! What we have been told (this past weekend) by McConnell at the Values Summit; 'Kavanaugh will be on the Supreme Court if I have anything to do with it!'
That is an admission that in McConnell's and Grassley's opinions nothing the women coming forward matter. These women are just [insert your thought here]! And, Trump is bogus all-around. That horse's ass never admits he is a liar or makes mistake even when it is made plain to him.
I am watching Kavanaugh on FOX NEWS right now using a "charm offensive" tactic ahead of Thursday. That is Trump 101! Get out ahead of your "opponent."
There is some corroborating evidence plastered in school year books, in a book written by Kavanaugh's friend with implications, and other statements which bear a need for an investigation. But, some republicans and conservatives are so damn desperate to 'steal-away' this seat; they have thrown caution away for expediency-sake. That is not right and I will resist it, and tell others to resist it, even if Kavanaugh is seated.
Democrats should strike to IMPEACH or DILUTE any power of KAVANAUGH's appointment to the Supreme Court if he is not now willing to help the system establish his proper placement on the Court. Why should we liberals accept a rush job (political appointee; partisan judge extraordinaire) Justice appointment?
We shall not and we will not! If a Judge on the Supreme Court can be sham-placed there, we may as well pack up our pretense of democracy and realize that we stand for nothing. We're all be Trump's kiss asses!
Yeah. You're right I read that. I guess it is possible for a teen to be a virtual drunk; though for the life of me, I would wonder where were the adults in the picture. But, I digress. You're right I read that too!
Blackout drinking implies a lot. That is, the admission alone means something is deficient with these guys recollections—not "Ms." Ford's.
Oh my! If it true, then so be it! We should not let Trump win simply because he wants a toadie on the Court, willing to instill him with additional powers reasonable men who have held the office of president forego.
People, there is a private reason Trump wants this specific man on the Supreme Court and private reasons the Federalist Society wants him there: To destroy this democracy and make it subject to autocratic conservative 'freedoms' in lieu of the hard fought and won philosophy of Rule of Law.
Rule of Law is a social construct. It stands only as long as we demand it. Trump is virtually undermining and stripping down Rule of Law and reconstructing it in his image. See the man behind the mask!
Liberals and Independents you have see how close to being troubled you really are! Try not to have to experience REGRET for inaction; SEE to the horizon! We are under serious and grave legal and social attack! RIGHT THIS MINUTE!
It amazes me that any woman would ever vote for these misogynistic assholes.
McConnell has exposed himself as a hypocrite. Do as I say - not as I do.
OUTRAGEOUS! Call your senators today while it is today! Thank them both for standing up to some phony ass republicans and conservatives. Tell them to bring these fake ass republicans and conservatives down with your 'blessing.' Why should phony, deceitful, people rule over us?
it is damnable when women support men who want to strong arm them over the course of their lives. What is entirely weird and stupid on its face is to watch conservative women like Ann Coulter, Laura Ingraham, and Jeanine Pirro pretend some women should not be able to EXPRESS control over their own vaginas—the same as they enjoy liberal expression of theirs!
In fact, conservative women are freer than they have ever been in sexual and societal expressions (and it is stupid for them to want to go back!); because of the progress made by liberal women on behalf of all women!
Probably weirder hearing a bunch of liberal, progressive men telling conservative women all about how they are voting against their own interests, as if women are incapable of making up their own minds.
Truth is truth no matter where from whom it comes. You should know that truth crosses all artificial boundaries.
[deleted] We are trying to restore the Court to following the Constitution instead of the unConstitutional oxymoronic “living Constitution” activism of leftist justices.
Judge Kavanaugh along with Justice Gorsuch are great improvements towards that end
1. Your insult is irrelevant.
2. In your pipe dreams! If the citizenry has to wait on any constitutional amendment to achieve liberties and relief from the set-backs from changes some conservatives certainly intent to make to our federal system of laws in the immediate future—the people will be dead and gone. Certain states have no intention to support needed, practical, and moral changes to our laws. So, do not feign with fake talk and fake outs about "pipe dreams," while you hamstring some legitimate groups in this country. We see some conservatism for what it REALLY is.
3. Justice Gorsuch was foisted upon us by McConnell (Calbab spits), and Judge Kavanaugh is scandal-laden. Evidently, some conservatives are not deterred or distracted from this dangerous path of appointing judges in unjust, unprincipled settings.
It is this mindset which is part of the problem!
[deleted - derogatory]
[deleted sweeping generalization]
[deleted - terms] of [service]
[deleted multiple offences]
There it is! The real truth is spilled.
A fellow Christian expressing war as an alternative to peace—which the Lord commanded for God's people. It is a shame, a sham, the expectations you have for people who will not allow you to rule over them. (Just how many libertarians are there anyway?)
Millions of Christians will confront such HI-JACKING of our Christian faith. Indeed, I certainly hope you will continue to "make it plain" your intentions for peace-loving people in all groups of this country. That way, other believers can see this depravity of what some conservatives have dreamed up in gun-filled secret meeting rooms—and walk away.
Turned off.
Sunlight is good disinfectant, my brother! Talk in the light - let it all come out in the open! For only evil lurks in the dark!
You theocrats and opponents of equal rights lost the last civil war. Do you expect a different outcome this time?
The plan is some conservatives have been stockpiling guns for "what-if" scenarios and "such a time as this." As if liberals and independents are too stupid to comprehend what their hyper-guarding of the Second Amendment is really about! Hmmph.
Incidentally, Trump is a honest to goodness danger to this country. Think about it historically; had, President Lincoln capitulated to the southern states demands - in order to avoid the promised secession - imagine in your mind's eye what this country would look like today.
Trump is just the kind of guy with no compunction to order the federal government and our military to sit on its "hands," while the conservatives "wage revolution" in individual states.
This is the danger that is Trump! Can we talk brass tacks now?!
Kavanaugh is a part of some conservative conspiracy to turn this country back to a time when only the conservative voice carried any say-so in the running of the United States. The Supreme Court deferred. People-groups, including women, were trapped and oppressed with no power to rise up.
Do you actually live in the US?
Do you realize that nobody "rules over" anybody here? We have this thing called "the rule of law".
OK...so apparently you don't live in the US. Let me help you out. Speaking on behalf of "the patriarchy", I can tell you that all of us spend most of our time doing the exact. same. thing.: "Following our wives' instructions".
Of course I live in the United States. Probably, could tell you a few things about travel in this country. So now what?
[deleted]
furthermore Jesus never forbid confronting evil
Calbab is a humanist now?
You owe Calbab an apology. That is a profound (and clearly wrong-headed) insult to him.
Well not everyone does. There are lots of other countries out there. Didn't want to presume.
Excellent. Look forward to hearing them. I could probably tell you some as well.
Now we remember that nobody "rules over" us. We're Americans. As such, it doesn't really matter very much what Donald Trump or Mitch McConnell or Maxine Waters or Nancy Pelosi say. You and I can tell each one of them to go fuck right off, either individually or collectively.
What matters are the laws upon which they can agree. Fortunately, there aren't very many of those.
Wrong. My family fought to preserve the Republic which is exactly the same fight I am supporting. So we will win again
Name-calling is irrelevant. Jesus is "All and All." I love and covet peace (and diversity) with all mankind. How. About. You? Brother! You and me can speak "eyeball to eyeball" about Jesus, faith, and walking in the Spirit anytime (over in the Religion and Ethics section. Start the "session" and let's rock and roll. I am grounded in my faith ~ I though you knew! Enough 'reaching after it' - you want to question my understanding of Jesus: 'build it and I will come'
In case you wonder: I create enough articles, blogs, and groups already. Your turn to 'invite' me somewheres.
Sadly, I wish my accusation was wrong, but it isn’t. In recent weeks he has taken a radical leftist secular human position, especially against Christian Conservatives.
I will believe you when you cease calling Conservative Christians evil
No apology necessary. LOD's slanders do not connect with me. When he wants to talk 'brass tacks" we can get after it. I know what's up with some republicans and some conservatives, because I used to be a conservative, and I continue to read their public 'mail' and listen to their talk jocks too. Even the archival shows from years ago still play online. And, the Youtube'd video 'shelves.' Oh my! (Smile.)
So, let LOD fake denials all he wishes.
I don’t fake anything. I speak truth which is why my comments are so often deleted
Yeah, that must be the reason.
Wait.....you're claiming that your family fought to defend a secular republic which supports equal rights for all rather than a theocratic one which claimed that straight white Christian men were superior to everyone else? Sounds like they were really fighting against your basic values.
Well I will hazard a guess on this and suggest that Cal is indeed quite at odds with conservatives (ideology) but is as strong a Christian (religion) believer as one can be.
Why every other strong Christian is not also at odds with conservative ideology is what's hard to figure out. The Republicans are the epitome of the money changers Jesus threw out of the temple.
LFOD is in the building and available for an interview.
If you mean I will not support having processes that some republicans and conservatives can arbitrarily decide to abuse to suit personal fancy and whim, then yeah: I am "righteously" beside myself with OUTRAGE! When we, as faithful believers, arrogantly take it upon ourselves to withhold fairness from others, then that group of believers' faith is morally bankrupt. It becomes a sinful "baggage" and mocks God. And, you should be fully informed as to what the Bible teaches about exposing God to intentional mockery.
Okay. Now what?
Now he stops talking to you because you're so sanctimonious? Just guessing!
My use of the word, "righteous" is keen to the mind of Lfod. As a Christian and Pastor, he would 'get' the meaning.
And Muva, my outrage is not an affectation. All day I have made my case. What some conservatives and republicans are doing in this so-called, "Thursday hearing" is the definition of a sanctimonious facade.
Have a great night yourself! (Smile.)
Thank you John, for at least being honest.
Of course this is political.
And Garland wouldn't have been Borked, if Bork hadn't been, you know, Borked. This all started with Bork.
At least the Republicans didn't resort to character assassination to stop Garland.
Now you can be honest and admit that in normal times Kavanaugh's nomination would have already been withdrawn. His past has been tainted more than enough to make him unsuitable. He was in an environment in high school (drunken parties where promiscuous sex occurred) that adds a level of believabiliity to the accusations against him. Just pick a new guy, I'm sure there are more than enough partisan right wing judges out there.
That is a laughable comment, and you know it.
I think the only thing to do is castrate every boy when he's born in order to stop this unnatural ugly non-PC behaviour. The only way to protect oneself these days is to be a lifetime eunuch.
(Would a baker make a cake for two eunuchs?)
They're not doing it at birth. It happens slowly, over time, and it's been happening for decades. We're to the point now where masculinity is declared "toxic".
Your desire to wail on "political correctness" is taking on comic proportions.
What exactly is normal times? 'cuz I think I am missing out on what that even constitutes .. when did these normal times begin, and when did they end? Were normal folks told about these normal times?
The allegations have only just begun .. especially if Kavanaugh is forced to withdraw .. that would leave his future wide open for more destruction - how old can a accusation be that will ruin someone's life? Will an accusation made 50 years later still be relevant?
Scary time to be a man Sean .. especially a man of power that is seen by some as controversial to start with.. sad really!
..
That's what all pedophile priests are hoping.
Kanavaugh may be 'examined' by the state of Maine—one way or another. If he is rushed on and sitting on the highest court in the land when it happens, depending on the results of an investigation. . . .
Oddly enough I taught both my sons to respect women and never behave that way towards anybody, male or female. And I know plenty of men that seem to know how to behave too. Is is something with conservative men that they don't know how to behave around or treat women? They seem to be having major problems understanding sexual misconduct and its impact on victims, in this case females. Maybe if conservatives didn't choose amoral misogynist assholes as revered leaders it would be easier to understand why Kavanaugh won't be heading to the court anytime soon.
And of course you never heard from them of any indiscretions they may have performed.
I don't see a lifetime appointment to SCOTUS on there, one who will impact the lives of all women with his misogynist attitudes. Kind of a higher standard of conduct necessary, dontcha think?
Would it not be disrespectfully misogynist for Old White Guys and White Gals" for that matter..... to tell women they can do what they want and then turn around and say "women must have help by funding the wants" off others hard earned backs ?
I thought it was supposed to be "Self" when it came to these type rights. Ya know that ….. "I" HAVE THE RIGHT thingy ?
So thank you for finally admitting that you just don't want this guy on the court and you don't care how he's kept off of it.
I don’t know it is possible Garland might have given some kid a titty twister in junior high school.
Too bad the gop didn't give him a hearing and investigate then, if he was an ass, they could have found that out and held him up for public display. Just imagine the gop being on the side of women and nominating a person who respects them as much as they do men. They might not be facing so many pissed off women in November.
The Senate followed the Constitution as noted by Former Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid
Harry Reid on advice and consent spoken on the Senate Floor in 2005?
"HARRY REID: "And sadly now, the President of the United States has joined the fray and become the latest to rewrite the Constitution and reinvent reality. Speaking to fellow Republicans on Tuesday night, two days ago, he said that the Senate and I quote, 'has a duty to promptly consider each nominee on the Senate floor, discuss and debate their qualifications, and then give them the up or down vote they deserve.'
The duties of the United States Senate are set forth in the Constitution of the United States. Nowhere in that document does it say the Senate has a duty to give presidential nominees a vote. It says appointments shall be made with the advice and consent of the Senate. That is very different than saying that every nominee receives a vote."
Oh, the poor, poor women!!!
Woman up time!
And Livefreeordie, you take a specific comment for a specific time and space, as opportunity to pre-textually 'launch it' as you see fit? Specious argument. (Try that on our book of faith!)
Context matters to honest 'reporters.' Which are you?
Oh, believe me, I am. And you will continue to hear about it. Remember that when Kavanaugh goes down, the women and dems win in Nov and Trump gets the checks and balances he needs to stop him from destroying the country. Enjoy the show, we'll be talking Kavanaugh and women for the foreseeable future. I think Avenatti is dropping a couple of bombs in the next couple of days too.
LOL!
Keep the "resistance" alive!~!
Laugh now, we will see who is laughing at the end of this clusterfuck.
Or who is crying!
Or screaming at the sky!
I'll get back to you Friday.
Titty twister Dean? So, to you, that's the equivalent of locking a girl in a room, putting your hand over her mouth so no one can hear her scream while you tear her clothes off?
That isn't what he wrote.
And who had their clothes ripped off?
At least we now know that all we have to do is find a woman willing to say it.
A man would work just as well. Can't discriminate these days.
You can't have it both ways. They claimed Senator Spector was sooooo tough on poor Anita Hill, so now we bring in a nice decent woman to ask the questions.
Lol, this is nothing but cowards outsourcing their jobs to a woman to avoid bad tv clips. Assholes can't even do the jobs they were elected to do. This hearing is a shitsham.
I'm sorry you feel that way. I have a feeling you have a personal grievance?
We have created a justice system in this Nation to prevent innocent people from being railroaded...yet, you suggest here that since accusations of an alleged incident occurring over 3 decades ago were made, Kavanaugh should just quietly walk away. Really? How preposterous.
This is a job interview, not a trial to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt.
The fact is that Kavanaugh's high school and college partying ADDS to the possibility these women are telling the truth. There was a small story in the news over the weekend which stated that Kavanaugh became noticeably upset when those who are prepping him for the hearing Thursday asked him questions about his hard drinking parties in high school and college. This guy was not an altar boy, let's just dispense with that nonsense.
Just put another right winger on the court, they are interchangeable for that purpose.
Job interview? You mean lynching...don't you?
Actually, I believe Kavanaugh was an altar boy. Did he drink and party in High School and College? Probably...but that does not mean that the allegations are true. He has every right to face his accusers.
You stop being an altar boy when you leave grammar school. And, yes I was an altar boy.
A lot of altar boys become less 'religious' as they go through life, lol.
There is a certain type of wickedness plaguing this comment.
Were it true, how would it matter? Did Kavanaugh touch "something" without this young girl's consent?
Then search. And prove it. If you come up with nothing, then you aren't making sense. I could say, WallyW admitted to be being a right-wing troll, never had a date, never has been kissed, only admits to being bi-curious and kills puppies to deep fry them and eat them with powdered sugar and his deleted comments and tweets prove it.
See how ridiculous that comment appears, Wally? Except for the troll thing. That can be proved.
Okay, what did you do in high school, when you were underage that might reflect badly on you? You see, even under current law for most states, the situation that is being alleged would have been handled in juvenile court as both were below the age of 18 at the time of the alleged assault. And, it is unlawful to ask a question about criminal records or possible criminal activity in a job interview.
Possibly, I was just making an observation. And 14 year olds can be in 8th grade.
Anyway, Kavanaugh wasn't an altar boy during the period of this allegation.
When I get nominated to the Supreme Court I will tell you.
One of the wildest women I knew went to a Catholic school her entire life, and when she got out of that environment she let loose. Happens all the time. Not to mention one used to say 'he's a priest, above reproach', when in reality he was a child molester. Means nothing.
Partying is a long way from rape.
There was a small story in the news over the weekend which stated that Kavanaugh became noticeably upset when those who are prepping him for the hearing Thursday asked him questions about his hard drinking parties in high school and college.
That is going to be the line of questioning from the radical left tomorrow
This guy was not an altar boy, let's just dispense with that nonsense.
I'm 66 years old. I know what I see. Kavanaugh is brilliant etc, but he was a "Mama's boy".
This is not a normal job interview, where normal people are often tossed aside for minor youthful indiscretions. This a LIFETIME appointment to the highest court in the land, one of 9 people in the country, a person who will wield great power over all Americans (and nonAmericans too). Including half the population of women. He already has misogynistic tendencies when it comes to legal power over women and their rights. Now these allegations fit right in with what was going on with Kavanaugh and his clan during those years. His friend wrote a damn book about it. And these kinds of things have happened to women FOREVER. What is preposterous is that anybody thinks this guy 'deserves' anything! WE DESERVE THE BEST. And that isn't Kavanaugh. Women deserve someone untainted by sexual misconduct charges. The gop has already filled THAT seat with Thomas.
Excellent analysis lib50.
I don't like her at all. But in the back of my mind I have hopes that if the gop manages to ram someone through (it would likely have to be female for that to happen), she would be mellowed by the other women on the court. Not holding my breath, and I think republicans need to follow their own 'garland' rule, and LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE IN NOVEMBER. We are barely a month from midterms and this clusterfuck is going nowhere.
ublicans need to follow their own 'garland' rule, and LET THE PEOPLE DECIDE IN NOVEMBER
Not everyone gets to vote for the Senate this year.
Everyone votes for President.
He deserves the right to face his accusers.
Your Thomas comment proves that unfounded accusations are never forgotten.
Of COURSE they wouldn't be happy with ANY person nominated by ANY Republican.
They might as well freaking admit it instead of tapdancing all around what everyone knows.
And if they CLAIM differently, just look at how they have acted when a Republican has nominated one the last few times.
What he really deserves is an FBI investigation but the GOP won't allow that.
FBI Investigation:
Interview Ford. She makes allegations.
Interview Kavanaugh. He denies accusations.
Interview Judge. He denies any memory of any attempted "rape".
Interview Ford's friend. She denies ever being at a party with Kavanaugh, or even ever meeting him.
FBI looks for physical evidence. There is none.
FBI looks for police and hospital records. There are none.
Case closed.
Conclusion: No reasonable prosecutor would ever bring charges against Kavanaugh based on such flimsy "evidence".
This isn't about a prosecution, it's about a comprehensive background investigation before a lifetime appointment to SCOTUS.....something the GOP apparently doesn't want done.
The good news is that if that investigation isn't done now it will be in 2 years when a Dem administration takes over. And that's assuming Kavanaugh isn't impeached before then.
FBI interviews Ford. She makes allegations against Kavanaugh.
FBI Interviews Kavanaugh. He denies allegations.
FBI interviews Judge. He doesn't remember anything.
FBI interviews Ford's friend, She doesn't remember anything.
FBI looks for physical evidence and finds none.
FBI looks at police reports and medical records. There are none.
FBI concludes its "investigation". Kavanaugh is confirmed.
How about we just skip to the chase?
McConnell is a damnable hypocrite! Full stop!
Moreover, so are the republicans and conservatives who will not take the time to have any investigation. This is an attempt to steam-roll "Ms." Ford, the Democratic Party, and liberals AND Independents everywhere. It is an OUTRAGE!
So NOW it is about McConnell and what he did to Garland? And I though this was all about some poor woman!
I have heard Democrats in Congress say Kavanaugh will be impeached when the democrats take over. It is just a question of when.
He should simply withdraw his name.
What evidence do you suggest they would find?
That.
And Trump.
Always Trump.
He says mean things on Twitter, you know.
Let them try.
Should be fun.
First, you have to win some elections.
Then, you have to actually find enough Democrats with big enough balls to actually DO IT.
Then, you have to find enough idiots in Congress to agree to impeach him.
Good luck on THAT shit!
GASP!
He DOES?
OMG!! What ever shall we do now!!!???
Trump is a piece of shit. An embarrassment to the human race. History will surely render that judgement as well. By that time though, most of us will be pushing up daisies including the asshole in question himself.
So you can go on defending him and keep up the pretense that you are on the right side.
I know, right?
You know what else? He's never attended a single OWS rally or BLM protest. Can you believe it?
Well all of the kids from "Save the Environment from White Male Privilege Microaggressive Confederate Statues by Making the Rich Pay Their Fair Share Club" at the university are getting together to make signs with the paint left over from redecorating the Safe Space rooms and then they're going to go scream at the sky.
Wanna go? I'll pick up pumpkin spice lattes and meet you there.
I realize it makes you "feel" better to pretend I support him. But we've had that conversation already, so you know better.
I'm on the side of rational thought over brainless emotion. It's definitely the right side.
The fact is she's not going to be able to produce conclusive evidence to support her story of a supposed event from 30 years ago. Intellectually, you know this. Emotionally, you just fucking can't stand Trump and absolutely anything that goes against him earns your fervent support.
You're crazy awesome.
The purpose of the hearing is not necessarily to produce conclusive evidence. It is to present someone who raises serious questions about Kavanaughs behavior and integrity.
There is already more than enough evidence , from sources describing the culture at the time that Kavanaugh and his friends inhabited , to put his suitability for the Supreme Court in question.
As for trump, he is a piece of shit, and decent people are at "war" with his supporters. That doesn't bother me at all. In fact it is necessary in the face of right wing lying, gaslighting and bamboozling that goes on every day.
No doubt about it. He's a disgrace. All these people defending the I-Wanna-Fuck-My-Daughter-And-Have-Said-So-Publicly-Multiple-Times-In-Chief is appalling. I'd call him a piece of shit too, but then I'd get all these angry emails from pieces of shit everywhere livid that I compared them to him.
That is one smart comment steeped in truth. Your intellect is kinda turnie-onie, if you ask me.
This is about every relevant (connecting) link to judges and their selection in this country. We can, and we will, walk and chew at the same time. An accusation of sexual assault has been leveled against a candidate for the Supreme Court. It is telling conservatives do not have any interest in letting the process play itself out. Kavanaugh does not want to be cleared, he simply wants to be placed on the court by any means necessary.
That is insulting, injurious, and in the long-term is going to cause the Supreme Court to be a discredited institution— as, it becomes just an arm of the republican party and a tool of the Federalist Society!
Drama? Here is some for you. Liberals should resist what republicans and conservatives are doing by high-jacking the processes of this country and the Rule of Law at every opportunity. Because, as matter of principle, we do not accept abuse from anybody!
Not sure I can.
My pink pussy hat is at the cleaners, and some redneck misogynist asshole stole my "Not My President" sign.
P.S. Can I get a piece of quiche with my latte? Will you make sure you get me a paper straw?
Gee, with all the stupid stuff Trump has said and tweeted, why make up stuff?
Why are you saying that?
Please supply any quote of Kavanaugh's even REMOTELY close to saying he wants on the Court by any means possible.
The rule of law IS being followed. Give an example of where it ISN'T being followed in this case.
And your principle SHOULD include not railroading someone because YOU don't like his politics.
This whole mess isn't about Ford and assault, it is flat out ALL about politics, and Democrats have proven there are no limits as to how low they will go to seek their revenge.
Erm.... In this case, it pretty much is.
So it's just part of a smear campaign? Why would there be concerns about his behavior and integrity if there isn't any actual evidence to support her allegations?
That's not any less crazy than the first time you rolled it out. You want to start judging people on "culture that they inhabited"? That is so utterly stupid it defies description.
I've been a non-fan of Trump a lot longer than you have.
Hmmmm...yeah....well.....no. Not actually. However it's impressive that you're able to fit so much garbage into a single post. 1. There is no "war". People disagree with each other, which isn't new, BTW. 2. A lot of people who voted for Trump are decent people, just like a lot of those who voted for Bernie are decent people. Both are very easily misled, IMO, but that's hardly a character problem.
You should always do as much of that yourself as you can manage. It keeps people from getting confused and thinking leftists are different than rightists.
Hate it when that happens.
Got you covered, bro. Vegan quiche with tofu egg-substitute and kale, I presume?
Oh cut the bullshit. You declare the Supreme Court a "discredited" or "biased" institution any time you disagree with a ruling.
Because as much stupid, idiotic, nonsensical and/or untrue stuff as he has said....liberal emotions are more voracious.
Emotions are one thing.
Outright falsehoods are another.
And please tell them to make my latte dairy-free.
Oh, and I picked up an extra pair of Wendy Davis pink tennis shoes for us!
Don't forget our "I'm with her" buttons.
Obviously. It's not milk, it's violence.
Cool. Matches my pantsuit.
Damn! I knew I forgot something. I'll go back....
When you run out of reality, fantasy will have to do.
Not going to repeat myself. I know what some conservatives are up to. Miss me with this whole time consuming "shocked" act, please.
Okay, prove that! I'll wait.
Helpful hint:
If one is going to accuse a SCOTUS nominee of something, it would sound more credible if one proved it.
More helpful hint:
If one is going to get a rightful confirmation of a nominee, it would be more credible and just if one investigated the charges of misconduct before the hearing Thursday. Now more and more and more women and men are starting to talk. Including one woman who initially signed a letter supporting Kavanaugh a week or so ago. She's not too happy with him now though, after learning how she was used by Kavanaugh and his friends for rumors about their make out sessions (that never happened), smearing HER reputation, although she just found out the other day. Do you honestly think women will allow this asshole on the court? Not going to happen, he doesn't deserve it.
Sorry, I wasn't aware that women as a groups had a single thing to do with US Senators voting for SCOTUS nominees.
Do point that out in law, will you?
Why? I never said it had anything to do with court or the law! You just pulled that out of your ass. We all know women aren't proportionally represented on the committee, let alone within the ruling party.
Then there was no point to your comment about how women weren't going to ALLOW Kavanaugh on the court.
Bet you already knew that, though.
There is a point. Women won't just sit back and let the guy get confirmed without fighting back. Wait for it.
At least 3 of the Yale classmates who previously endorsed him now want an FBI investigation and say that they regret those endorsements.
So we should believe them when exactly then?
When they signed statements saying they supported Kavanaugh and never witnessed anything bad happening, or now, and why?
Actually they never signed a statement supporting your 2nd claim (something which you apparently pulled out of your butt). So now that they've heard several credible accusations they all want an FBI investigation.
I realize that you may wish to think differently, but women as a group have no power or means or rights to block Kavanaugh's nomination.
And let's be honest.
This whole shitpile isn't about women, or rape, or attempted rape, or rights, or Kavanaugh, or his qualifications.
This is ALL about politics and Democrats getting "revenge".
Those who fail to see that are welcome to keep the blinders on.
Meanwhile, back in reality, the proof is clear before everyone.
If they saw something bad happening, why would they ever sign anything supporting Kavanaugh?
Would that make sense to YOU?
It damn sure doesn't to me.
But that's just me--a logical, sane individual.
And what do they want the FBI to investigate when there isn't anything TO investigate except interviews with people about events that happened some 30 years ago, and not a single person EVER came forward before the last-ditch efforts by Democrats to derail his nomination?
"They all want an FBI investigation".
ALL the women who signed now want an investigation?
Proof? Or did YOU just pull it out of your butt?
Actually it will just take two GOP women to kill his nomination. If all the women in the Senate voted against him that would be even better.
.
Actually yes it is about his character and suitability for the court. Why do you want a credibly accused rapist on the court? Once Kavanaugh's nomination is well and truly dead which misogynist or rapist do you think Trump will nominate next?
.
That's a separate issue from the poor character of the current nominee.
However none of Trump's nominees should be considered before he's removed from office, and no nominee of any Republican prez should be considered unless the confirmation process is fixed. McConnell broke it so I doubt he can fix it. It will only begin to be repaired when balance is restored to the court by taking back the seat which was stolen and when Dem nominees are given the due consideration they deserve. Until then the GOP reaps what it sowed.
Sounds like you have a reading comprehension problem.
5.2.50.
Your words.
ALL.
If you MEANT SOME of the women, then write SOME.
When you write ALL, I will always assume that is what you meant.
Unless you don't mean what you write?
All of those particular 3 of his Yale classmates who had previously endorsed him but now want an FBI investigation and say that they regret those endorsements. There were something like 2 dozen Yale classmates who had originally signed that endorsement.
As I said you really do have a reading comprehension problem. It's like you can't track the flow of conversation from one paragraph to the next.
Two women are incapable of blocking his nomination. It is simple math.
And why would you assume every Democrat and independent will vote against him anyways?
He hasn't been credibly accused in my book of SQUAT. Just a woman with an axe to grind.
Your insane hatred of all things Trump is well-known, so I discount whatever you say about him based on your own extreme prejudices.
No SCOTUS seat has ever been stolen. Get real.
SMH
No, you keep misrepresenting your theories as facts.
Now, if you bother to READ the article, you will find that MORE than 3 women signed the letter.
And 3 are now going against what they previously signed.
Maybe in YOUR world 3 out of 10 is ALL, but where I come from, that isn't even a majority.
So, do you still insist that ALL the women from Yale that signed the letter supporting Kavanaugh are now demanding an FBI investigation, or would you like to amend your post and apologize for your ludicrous comments about MY reading ability and comprehension?
The Senate is 51-49. Apparently you can't add or subtract. Assuming both parties vote as a block, 2 GOP defections are all that are needed to defeat Kavanaugh. At this point it sounds like there will be many more than that.
He is, however, intelligent enough to express himself without abusive personal attack.
That is IF you ASSUME that everyone will vote how YOU think they will.
What do you base your insider info ON?
And two women can JUST as easily vote FOR as AGAINST.
This has nothing to do with Garland. Gorsuch is in the seat that Obama nominated Garland for. This is just more liberal propaganda attacks on a man that there has been ZERO evidence against. The left has now officially managed to taint the last facet of the govt that anybody trusted. Congratulations.
[Removed]
Yes, let's hope so.
If Ford cannot prove her accusations, she should be censored for lying and be fired from her job teaching.
And then Kavanaugh should sue for every penny she has got. I don't think he will do that because he seems like a nice man and will be willing to let it go.
No reply needed. (Did you see what I did there?)
Aw, don't worry about it.
Just another free service I cheerfully provide!
No thanks necessary.
Meh. Most people today can't tell justice from revenge.
Maybe.
Probably not. But she probably won't do that anyway. She'll probably make her living on the speaking circuit pushing her new book.
Yes. He has been damaged and will have a case.
I don't know enough about him. I suspect he won't want the publicity.
Hmmm...sounds like Kavanaugh would go high when they go low.
Oh....you HAD to go there, didn't you?
There is no evidence of a crime much less a federal crime
this is part of the systematic attempt byDemocrats to destroy the careers and personal lives of conservatives. It’s been the playbook of the left for decades. We have two extremely dubious accusations that have no basis in evidence to even be considered credible.
[deleted]
The committee has seen all of his judicial record which are the only relevant documents to his confirmation process.
political activities including those in the employ of an elected official have zero relevance to either judicial temperament or insight into judicial philosophy
Kavanaugh has the left’s gold standard approval, “extremely well qualified” by the ABA and his 12 year record as a federal judge.
I support the move to end a future judicial committee hearings on Supreme Court or other Federal Judgeships and cast up or down votes.
, or announce to whomever is president that no vote will even be cast (which is of itself advise and consent). This should be regardless of who controls the White House and Senate. It has become so partisan it is relegated to political theater and nothing more.
How convenient. Remarkably, your agenda is plain to see: DAMN THE RULE OF LAW.
What hypocrisy! You demand fealty to the constitution (alone) and then you 'guide' people around it with this? False flag!
The rule of law is happening. And you're squealing about it.
You realize that "the rule of law" isn't some sort of code for "liberals get whatever they want", yes?
[deleted] There is NO Constitutional requirement to even have Senate Committees. That is a Senate rule, not the Constitution
Some conservatives are abusing the rule of law, they know it and I know it! Kavanaugh, should he get on the court, a will not be legitimate. We must, and we will, fight him singularly and collectively as not to stand in judgement over us.
You keep making that claim.
Any plans to actually document it or at LEAST describe how they are doing that?
Okay, I just reached your original complete comment. Your insult is irrelevant.
We know what processes are used for; we also know when one side or the other chooses to avoid or abuse those processes.
Which law? Do tell.
I'm guessing you missed the whole Clarence Thomas thing.
Weeeelll ..... OK. You do that. Let us know how it goes.
Something different than I did in the 1990's. Be involved. Don't gloat, yet! The state of Maryland (I have been wrongly stating Maine above - O well) can revive the issue if it chooses.
Maybe, I can supply the revelant Maryland officials phone numbers to interested groups like . . . . That would be a start!
That is part of the process too. Senator Feinstein's position is not to make some steam-rollin' republicans and conservatives glide path smooth. The fact is, some conservatives have a 51 majority rule vote what else you want from liberals, a "massage" and to "take one for the team"?
The, . . .heaven, . . .you say!
If, If , IF, IF, IF.
If a pig had wings, he might fly.
Get over Garland.
Or win an election and nominate him again.
Whining isn't getting anything accomplished in that regard.
Then stop acting like it's worth our attention!
I have seen nothing that would make me think Kavanaugh has not been a fair judge in his career. On the contrary, he actually ruled against conservatives on occasion. You don't hear about this a lot, but plenty of conservatives were actually disappointed with the Kavanaugh nomination because they think he's too liberal. Go figure.
Why social conservatives are disappointed that Trump picked Brett Kavanaugh
Was Kavanaugh on the Federalist Society list or not?
What? You can not even stiff the liberals properly? Blame "the society" for shoddy service!
Is that some sort of hidden requirement that only progressives know about?
Kavanaugh got the UNANIMOUS TOP RECOMMENDATION from the ABA.
But, hey, what would a bunch of lawyers know about judges, right?
SMH
Not sure why you would ask me or why I would care.
That would be an excellent reason to confirm him. It demonstrates his fidelity to the Constitution
Because Kavanaugh is/was on the vetted Federalist Society list, and that list is where he has been pulled from.
That you don't know or do not care is not a liberal's problem. Get a grip on some of the 'particulars' of a discussion before you hug one side or the other.
Some of our ways of life will be affected by the decisions the Federalist Society makes using this president to install "stilted" (uncompromising) judges in our collective court system. We do not have to accept 'rampant' ignorance of current politics and policies, when we know better.
Well, on the plus side, after Kavanaugh gets confirmed, you can lead the parade of "Not My Justice".
Won't that be fun?
Oh I'm aware of what the Federalist Society is and that they endorse Kavanaugh, but they are hardly unique in that. He is extremely well thought of in the profession and a likely pick by any Republican president.
For example?
LOL!
Why don't you guys wait until Ms. Ford and any other allegers have been heard. You don't know if Kavanaugh is lying. Neither do I. I don't know if Ford is lying. Neither do you.
MAGA: My Attorney Got Arrested.
Thinking trump would nominate a moderate is laughable.
Lines have been drawn and extremes have taken over. It will be a while before moderates are once again the norm.
Not sure if its true but I read thats fords parents home was forclosed on by judges mom. Could this be retaliation? Her witness don't stack up. The whole story makes no sence. Do we just pursicute every one in America now by alligations. All it takes is a couple of people to make false alligations to ruin someones life
If Trump has 19 sexual assault allegations and is traveling south at 60 mph, and Kavanaugh has 3 sexual assault allegations and is traveling west at 35 mph, how many more allegations do they need before people start believing women?
Avenatti says that a third accuser of Kavanaugh for sexual assault will go public within the next 48 hours.
Its going to take her that long the read the script they prepared and for her to learn her lines?
Accusing these women of lying is pretty disgusting. You should be ashamed of yourself.
I calls 'em likes I sees 'em!
Would you rather they be called bimbos and trailer trash like the left called Bill Clinton's victims?
That, or CNN.
No real reputable channel would entertain that bullshit.
You must be using those rose colored glasses that makes you see any accuser of a conservative as a liar but any accuser of liberals as a righteous victim who should be believed. I'm pretty sure you can find them in most jokes shops, which is of course what conservative ideology is, a joke.
f Trump has 19 sexual assault allegations and is traveling south at 60 mph, and Kavanaugh has 3 sexual assault
Birds of a feather flock together:
TRUMP=KAVANAUGH....
"I moved on her, and I failed. I'll admit it. I did try and fuck her. She was married. And I moved on her very heavily. In fact, I took her out furniture shopping. She wanted to get some furniture. I said, "I'll show you where they have some nice furniture." I took her out furniture—I moved on her like a bitch." "I better use some Tic Tacs just in case I start kissing her. You know I'm automatically attracted to beautiful—I just start kissing them. It's like a magnet. Just kiss. I don't even wait. And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab 'em by the pussy. You can do anything." - DJT
If conservatives don't give a fuck about their President saying such disgusting things and having it confirmed by at least 19 credible accusations, they certainly won't give two shits about nominating a misogynist with only two or three accusations against them to the supreme court. Why? Because many conservatives actually admire those traits, the loud and proud boys club who grunt like Tim Allen and pretend they're testosterone filled cavemen who laugh at sensible reason and logic for being too girly. Of course it's just a smoke screen for their insecurity and lack of education, but don't tell them that, they'll just march around with some tiki torches chanting about not being replaced.
Show us a single person who has successfully sued Trump in civil court for inappropriate behavior or a single criminal case that was prosecuted against him for that
That conveniently excludes all the lawsuits he's settled out of court, as well as a sexual assault against Jill Harth (a complaint which Harth can refile at any time). There are many additional cases still pending like his sexual assault on Summer Zervos.
.
Here's a list of some of the others:
"In 1988, the Justice Department sued Trump for violating procedures related to public notifications when buying voting stock in a company related to his attempted takeovers of Holiday Corporation and Bally Manufacturing Corporation in 1986. On April 5, 1988, Trump agreed to pay $750,000 to settle the civil penalties of the antitrust lawsuit."
"In late 1990, Trump was sued for $2 million by a business analyst for defamation , and Trump settled out of court. Briefly before Trump's Taj Mahal opened in April 1990, the analyst had said that the project would fail by the end of that year. Trump threatened to sue the analyst's firm unless the analyst recanted or was fired. The analyst refused to retract the statements, and his firm fired him for ostensibly unrelated reasons. Trump Taj Mahal declared bankruptcy in November 1990, the first of several such bankruptcies. After, the NYSE ordered the firm to compensate the analyst $750,000; the analyst did not release the details of his settlement with Trump "
"In 1991, Trump Plaza was fined $200,000 by the New Jersey Casino Control Commission for moving African American and female employees from craps tables in order to accommodate high roller Robert LiButti, a mob figure and alleged John Gotti associate, who was said to fly into fits of racist rage when he was on losing streaks"
"In 1991, one of Trump's casinos in Atlantic City, New Jersey, was found guilty of circumventing state regulations about casino financing when Donald Trump's father bought $3.5 million in chips that he had no plans to gamble" (More evidence Trump nor his father thought rules do not apply to them).
"In 2000, Donald Trump paid $250,000 to settle fines related to charges brought by New York State Lobbying Commission director David Grandeau."
"In 2014, the former Miss Pennsylvania Sheena Monnin ultimately settled a $5 million arbitration judgment against her, having been sued by Trump after alleging that the Miss USA 2012 pageant results were rigged. Monnin wrote on her Facebook page that another contestant told her during a rehearsal that she had seen a list of the top five finalists, and when those names were called in their precise order, Monnin realized the pageant election process was suspect, compelling Monnin to resign her Miss Pennsylvania title. The Trump Organization's lawyer said that Monnin's allegations had cost the pageant a lucrative British Petroleum sponsorship deal and threatened to discourage women from entering Miss USA contests in the future. According to Monnin, testimony from the Miss Universe Organization and Ernst & Young revealed that the top 15 finalists were selected by pageant directors regardless of preliminary judges' scores. As part of the settlement, Monnin was not required to retract her original statements " (Because Trump and his phony cronies are liars and cheats, just like she said).
"In 2013, in a lawsuit filed by New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman , Trump was accused of defrauding more than 5,000 people of $40 million for the opportunity to learn Trump's real estate investment techniques in a for-profit training program, Trump University , which operated from 2005 to 2011" "Trump filed a $1 million defamation suit against former Trump University student Tarla Makaeff, who had spent about $37,000 on seminars, after she joined the class action lawsuit and publicized her classroom experiences on social media. Trump University was later ordered by a U.S. District Judge in April 2015 to pay Makaeff and her lawyers $798,774.24 in legal fees and costs".
Seems like an awful lot of money to be shelling out in settlements over the years for never doing anything wrong...
Avenatti for President!! Listening to him right now...
I'm sure you would. How is that shyster different than any other politician you idolize.
The liberal smear campaign will not succeed. The unethical partisan false accusations by the Democrats will fail, and Kavanaugh will be confirmed to the SCOTUS. In a victory for American jurisprudence.
Are we trying to find a Judge or some kind of Saint?
Do you not think that judges should be of impeccable character? I do, especially the ones on the Supreme Court.
ain't nobody perfect
Charger, the Supreme Court even with its oscillating decisions and opinions was not anchored to one side of the political spectrum. Moreover, as a matter of principle, if some conservatives and republicans would respect decorum, fairness, and process and liberals lose out, then those are the breaks in life. This is not the case here.
Some conservatives and republicans are deliberating lying and destroying the system in Washington, the seat of all of our federal oversight and rule of law, in order to gain an unhealthy control over the lives of millions. That is some "fork-tongued" crap! And, they want us to look pass the deceitful manipulation and propaganda while they screw over and deny other citizens their rights, privileges, and liberties.
It can not stand. Even if it happens, it will not stand.
We, are being maneuvered into a bad posture by very deceitful people: Donald Trump has not changed: apparently he has been an evil man for a long time, even though we outside of New York did not know it. Clearly, he is a evil liar who does not give a damn about people different from his plans! He is the lead representative for some people who smile in our faces, while stabbing us in our political backs! No one should accept such conduct from anybody, at-known a want-a-be "superior" Judge. A justice who should stand for more than a 'slanted' court which rejects the pleads of real people in need and alive today!
This is not some academic exercise. Some conservatives and republicans are mapping out a path to cause serious oppression and injury to some other Americans!
No, we are not trying to find "some kind of saint" we are in desperate need of a justice who can see people for what their existences are really about - not some ideology!
For SCOTUS I'd want a judge who isn't a misogynist, a sexual predator or a liar.
Actually I'd want that for any judge but especially for a federal judge.....so until it's investigated properly I hope this issue hangs around Kavanaugh's neck even if the Senate rejects him. Based on what we know now he never should have been confirmed to the DC Circuit court.
.
There is very little evidence to suggest Kavanaugh is any of those.
What do you actually know?
You'll find that innuendos and hearsay are good enough. You'll also find that even if an investigation occurs and the accusations are unfounded, the innuendos and hearsay will continue to be good enough.
I suspect that if she recanted her accusations, many would scream she was threatened into it.
When an accuser makes an allegation, if/when the accused claims "innocence," and, both accuser and the accused remain steadfast in their positions, the only logical way to potentially break the impasse, is via a neutral third-party/entity INVESTIGATION.
In such an investigation, there are only three possible outcomes … • evidence more-or-less validating the allegation, • evidence contrary to the allegation raising questions about the credibility of the accuser, or, • ABSENCE OF -- FAILURE TO FIND EVIDENCE OF ANY KIND (thus enabling the accused to declare, i.e. "Of course no evidence was found because the allegation is false!"
Thus, two-out-of-three investigatory outcomes, FAVOR THE ACCUSED!
I contend that, if/when either the accused or accuser resists the idea of an investigation, the one who resists manifests "consciousness of guilt" in fear of what truth(s) may be revealed!
Pretty harsh indictment of Ms. Ford, who is doing everything possible to avoid giving her version under oath.
A primary objective of this exercise is to smear Kavanaugh for political gain. Democrats would love this shit to go on for a decade. The longer it goes on, the more innuendo they can create, and the more spectacle they can deliver to their rabid emotional followers. The longer it goes on, the more abuse they can hurl at Kavanaugh and his family, which is almost as good in their eyes as hurling abuse at Trump himself.
There is no possible outcome of an investigation that will convince these people of his innocence. Every witness she has named has issued a statement declaring they have no idea what she's talking about, and yet liberals are still not satisfied.
So the idea that any of that "favors the accused" is just bullshit.
So getting death threats and having to move her family out of their home is okay by you?
Might I suggest reading the entire conversation prior to commenting? There isn't one part of the conversation that would indicate that death threats and having to move her family is okay by me.
Interestingly enough, try and say 'I think Ford is possibly confused' .. (one must be careful of the claws that come out) Ford has no details whatsoever of her alleged feared for her life violent sexual assault by Kavanaugh.. add to that NO one recalls the party …….. The answer to the lack of information the accuser has of an alleged assault, is to have the FBI investigate rumors from 35 years ago?
Rumor has it that Avenatti's new client is actually claiming to have been raped .. only 48 hours to go til 'we' know .. I am on the edge of my seat! <s>
That's a completely false statement.
Ford has recall of being pinned to a bed by Kavanaugh, a hand being placed over her mouth during the alleged violent sexual assault and allegedly Judge jumping on them sending all to the floor … so yes, there are details there and my comment is false - I should have said that she has NO details outside of the alleged life threatening attack supposedly perpetrated by Kavanaugh ...
My bad …
We'll know more about what Ford actually recalls if there's a hearing held on Thursday, but in the meantime you might want to read her unredacted letter before you make more false assertions.
Good luck with this.
OK. Hang on a minute....
OK...I'm ready.....
I think Dr Ford may be confused.......
That is what has angered me the most: Some republicans and conservatives are using the 51 percent rule to mock congressional norms! It is pathetic that such an esteem body has deteriorated down to such a low-brow level that they can't even depend on common courtesy and fair processes between equal empowered officials and states are alienated from each other as a strategy.
It is sad, but our success as a nation; our success at peace in the land; is mocking us as a "united" people. Seems all we have left is our petty tendencies to consume our own selves. We are becoming a nation of "fenemies" right here and now. A liar, cheat, and amoral leader, has political influence over the majority party in congress, and is 'stealing' the courts —consolidating the three pillars of government into a figurative spear to stab the political heart of the greatest democracy in the world. Once we are an autocracy—can the rest of the world be far behind us in conforming?
This is the new frontier; Trump is offering us. Made in HIS IMAGE.
Harry Reid is not responsible for McConnell and Trump. But, you can spread your talking point all you wish (and so you have).
I do not know when or how civility will come back to the Congress and to the states. Yes, the states! For states and locales are responsible for electing these uncompromising "hardcases" to send to D.C..
So if shit must hit the national fan; here's to some conservatives getting their proper proportion due them!
You evidently ignore history
A little history reminder to our leftist bloggers
politicians right and left are flip flippers
2013 Dems call for end of Filibuster Rule
Warren signaled there could be a fight ahead on filibuster rules if the GOP keeps holding Obama’s court nominations hostage.
“Senators not only have a right to change the filibuster rules, senators have a duty to change the filibuster rules. We cannot turn our backs on the Constitution,” she said. “We have a responsibility to protect and defend our democracy, and that includes protecting the neutrality of our courts–and preserving the Constitutional power of the president to nominate highly qualified people to fill their vacancies.”
Barack Obama
"A simple majority vote no longer seems to be sufficient for anything, even routine business, in what is supposed to be the world's foremost deliberative body," Obama said. "Today's pattern of obstruction, it just isn't' normal, it's not what our founders envisioned."
Schumer on the need to stop opposition obstruction by ending the Filibuster November 2013
On Thursday afternoon, Schumer voted along with 51 other members of his party to kill the filibuster for federal judges and certain other presidential appointments.
"Things should never have gotten to that point," Schumer said after the vote. "We've gotten here by an extreme group that has waged a successful war on government."
Schumer framed the move as a reaction to the Tea Party's influence on the Republican Party, and the resulting public disapproval of the party's increasingly militant confrontational tactics.
"The public is asking—is begging—us to act," Schumer said. "We're at nine-percent approval because the rules given an advantage to those who want to prevent the Senate from achieving anything."
The concern for Democrats is that Republicans will wield the same power if, or when, they regain control of the Senate. When majority leader Harry Reid was asked about those fears, Schumer interrupted to answer the question.
"We much prefer the risk of up or down votes and majority rule than the risk of continued total obstructionism," he said. "That's the bottom line, no matter who's in power."
I lived through all of this. What is your point?!
You will not be allowed cheap talking points here, Lod. I "see" what your politics is about; maybe, clearer than you. Why? Because I have lived through and suffered through conservative ideologies: NEARLY. ALL. MY. LIFE!
My point?
You ridicule and accuse Republicans for advocating the same position as some of your “gods”. That makes you a hypocrite
Opposing Hussein Obama who has spent his life seeking the Marxist destruction of the US is an act of patriotism. Furthermore the Democratic Party represents the biggest enemy threat to our Constitutional Republic
facts do matter and you have yet to present any. All you have are emotionalism tantrums typical of the radical Marxist left
Some of your "gods" What means this? Name my gods, if you can. Please proceed.
Your hatred for President Obama is misguided and foregone conclusion at this point. That president restored our country from a deep recession in FDR manner and you would defame him as UNPATRIOTIC. Shame.
I will keep writing as NT permits and I am able. You can pick facts out of my writings where you can.
How many justices can a court room hold? Consult a local team of structural engineers. . . .
if some conservatives and republicans won't stop with the foolishness of messing over the citizenry; how can we? Drop the political rocks and unclench the fist already!
So what does the 'Marxist left' do (in your mind of course)? What form of evil do they seek to impose upon the USA? And, of course, what positions of Calbab cause you to, in effect, stereotype him as evil incarnate (given what you seem to mean by 'Marxist')?
contend that, if/when either the accused or accuser resists the idea of an investigation, the one who resists manifests "consciousness of guilt" in fear of what truth(s) may be revealed!
So we know AMAC thinks the second accuser is lying.
: )
I just typed out a response to you regarding the letter .. and what I should learn before making false statements etc etc .. and POOF after clicking post comment… not going to retype
one thing that I did not know was that Ford left said house party and found her own way home, yet does not know where she was ..
Nothing in that letter screams 'I need to believe her' .. I am looking forward to her testimony - perhaps I will see what I am told I am missing regarding her believability ...
We know that Grassley is not permitting witnesses who have now signed afadavits to testify, nor, is he willing to subpoena Mark Judge.
We know that the gutless, misogynist Republican members of the Judicial Committee have hired a female attorney to question Ford and Kavanaugh, and we know that Democrats will only be allowed five minutes of questioning with no follow up questions while the Republican attorney can ask as many questions as she cares to ... for as long as she cares to.
We know that the attorney is Rachel Mitchell is reportedly the Republican's choice to question Kavanaugh and his accuser, and, that she is with t he Maricopa County sex crimes division WHICH HAS HAD A DIFFICULT TIME CONDUCTING PROSECUTIONS in the Arizona county, with a serious backlog of sex crimes under Sheriff Joe Arpaio.
Lawyer for second Kavanaugh accuser says Republicans refuse to talk
Source?
Judge has already stated he has no recollection, as have all of her other named witnesses. There is zero justification for dragging these people into this.
Kavanaugh is a lawyer and knows they are inadmissible because they are so unreliable.
Source?
Grassley refuses to delay Kavanaugh hearing, won’t back FBI investigation
By Ruth Brown
September 19, 2018 | 7:38pm
Judge has already stated he has no recollection, as have all of her other named witnesses. There is zero justification for dragging these people into this.
What Judge says to the press and/or under any circumstance wherein he is NOT UNDER OATH … is meaningless!
Kavanaugh is a lawyer and knows they are inadmissible because they are so unreliable.
We're not in a trial situation … Kavanaugh's refusal manifests a fear of the outcome, which, should he appear to fail, he can then assert your "inadmissibility" explanation.
No? Implying that bullying was just a dodge by the accusers and putting bullied in " " didn't indicate that you didn't take it seriously? My comment stands. Keep trying, though. It's fun to watch people back pedal from their comments.
Where are you getting this shit?
It's pretty clear who's hoping to bury something by whether they welcome an investigation or are doing everything they can to avoid one.
Keep bringing it forward! The truth will set us all free eventually! I appreciate how you are on this one!
This is a republican sham! EVERYBODY, INDEPENDENTS , The time has come to make a stand!
We do not know what the truth is between these three women accusers and Kavanaugh. This is the very model of the idiom: "Walk like a duck, quack like a duck, . . . ."
CALL YOUR SENATORs! DEMAND A RE-OPENING INTO THE BACKGROUND CHECK ON BRETT KAVANAUGH. Demand a delay in the Senate Republicans steamrolling and "plowing" through this willy-nilly fashion! Go to the link below if you really care about any of this.
Call My Congress:
Published statements from the supposed witnesses she's named, as well as Ford's statements.
There is no need to back pedal as I was quite clear. Sorry to ruin the fun you thought you'd have.
The inference in my post was regarding the 'posting public' (That would be you, me and others here) and their comments regarding the committee hearing.
Thanks for coming clean on either the bullshittery of your sources ("published statements" from people who will not be tested under oath) and your, I'm being charitable here, self-serving "interpretaions" of what Ford has said.
Bravo!
First off, it was the implication in your post. Inference is on the readers' part and, your protestation notwithstanding, I stand by my comment.
Riiiiight. Because we should only believe people who say things rabid liberals want to be true. Her "lifelong friend" said she didn't even know Brett Kavanaugh, much less remember being at a party with him.
But no....she's lying.
Before Kavanaugh crashed and burned, the most recent poll* of credibility for Ford and him among those who were not "undecided" showed that 55% thought Ford more credible, 45% Kavanaugh. As far as I know there haven't been any new (and reputable) polls released since yesterday's testimonies. I expect the numbers to shift significantly toward Dr. Ford when they are released.
*
I'm referring to Keyser. She's a "lifelong friend" of Ford. Ford says she was there. Keyser doesn't know what Ford is talking about.
By which you mean you've been caught out again.
"Bullshit" being defined as "things that leftists wish weren't true".
Why is it that this situation makes me think of a story my late father liked to tell:
A woman goes to the butcher to buy one of the plucked gutted chickens hanging from hooks in the window. She asks the butcher to hand one to her, which he does. She looks inside the cavity, puts her hand in and feels the inside, smells it, then pinches the breast, squeezes the thighs, lifts the wings and smells under them, pulls the neck, rubs the back, and then hands it back to the butcher saying "This one won't do", to which the butcher replies, "Lady, could YOU pass an inspection like that?"
[deleted]
Which actual sexual assault again ?
Go do some poppers and have fun.
Donald Trump is on televising LYING THROUGH HIS TEETH AGAIN! Are you listening to this?
Trump lies all the time. You should be surprised when he does not lie or exaggerate.
So true. Now the television networks will have to perfunctorily come in and clean up his lies and poorly stated answers. Also, I can see what he means about how smart and energetic he is: Trump likes heaping praise on himself and 'subtracting' from others. Take away the self-bloviating and I think we could see the face of a rather tired old man!
Kavanaugh today at the hearing is trying the Caucasian man version of "high-tech lynching" and "stank-face" defense. It is diametrically opposed to Mrs. Ford's meek and accommodating appearance. Watching. . . .
Is it my mistake or confusion in this hearing, but is Mr. Kavanaugh implying or stating he does not even KNOW Mrs. Ford?
Hasn't he already said that publicly?
Said what?
This.
Are you filibustering me now? Do you KNOW the answer or not?
Yes. That's it exactly. It's all about you.
Well, "Jack" it ain't all about me, and I will tell you why: I just sat here listening to the senate hearing for the long-haul and Kavanaugh just stated, "I do not know her." — to Senator Booker's round of questioning. So, evidently this is not about me: You're wrong yet again.
Somebody has to be lying:
Oh....don't sell yourself short.
He's been saying that since she came forward.
Oh no. It most certainly is all about you. Fil - i - bust - er.
Not a chance.
Or mistaken.
She might be confused.
I don't understand how you haven't been paying attention for the last several days when almost all the non-hysterical among us have been telling you this was never going to be more than "he said/she said".
Well here we are. He said. She said. No conclusion. There is no "next step". We're there.
She says she is 100 percent sure she knows him (from sitting on top of her and "grinding" his pelvic into hers). So you can "BS" through this - you can do that. However, somebody, one of the two people is lying.
I genuinely am "in the moment" on this hearing (which has ended now) and you are 'tripping' still over some nonsense parsing through my words. I am irrelevant, and for this time being so are you!
Kavanaugh is not the only one saying she's mistaken.
She also named three other people who were supposedly at this mystery location on this mystery day. All of those have said they have no idea what she's talking about. Her "lifelong friend" who was supposedly there says she's never met Brett Kavanaugh and has no recollection of anything like this.
"Lying" requires the intent to mislead. It is quite possible she's just mistaken. How long has she been in counseling?
Filibuster!!!
Never.
Well, since you want to play with me ; I'm out! I've had a day full of
on television, thank you very much!!
Don't take it too seriously.
You had to know a full day of testimony was going to change exactly zero minds.
1.
ABA testifies on 'well qualified' rating: Kavanaugh has 'an excellent reputation for integrity'
Paul T. Moxley, chair the ABA Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary; and John R. Tarpley, the standing committee’s representative for the Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Court of Appeals and the lead evaluator. Screenshot from PBS.
Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh earned the highest rating of unanimously “well qualified,” members of the American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary told the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee on Friday.
“We concluded that his integrity, judicial temperament, and professional competence met the highest standards for appointment to the court,” said Paul T. Moxley of Salt Lake City, the chair of the committee. “Our rating of unanimously well-qualified reflects the consensus of his peers who have knowledge of his professional qualifications.”
2.
American Bar Association: Delay Kavanaugh until FBI investigates assault allegations
The American Bar Association is calling on the Senate Judiciary Committee to halt the consideration of President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh until an FBI investigation is completed into the sexual assault allegations that have roiled his nomination.
In a strongly worded letter obtained by CNN on Thursday, the organization said it is making the extraordinary request "because of the ABA's respect for the rule of law and due process under law," siding with concerns voiced by Senate Democrats since Christine Blasey Ford's decades-old allegations became public.
"The basic principles that underscore the Senate's constitutional duty of advice and consent on federal judicial nominees require nothing less than a careful examination of the accusations and facts by the FBI," said Robert Carlson, president of the organization, in a Thursday night letter addressed to Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley and ranking Democrat Dianne Feinstein.
"Each appointment to our nation's Highest Court (as with all others) is simply too important to rush to a vote," Carlson wrote. "Deciding to proceed without conducting additional investigation would not only have a lasting impact on the Senate's reputation, but it will also negatively affect the great trust necessary for the American people to have in the Supreme Court."
Well Jack, now what? ABA, well played. . . .
Serious question: Do you think an FBI investigation is going to change anybody's mind?
The odds are overwhelming that any such investigation will find that "there is no conclusive proof" he did or didn't assault her.
Conservatives will claim this is vindication, demand apologies from anyone who doubted him, and push forward with the confirmation. Liberals will claim that since he can't prove his innocence, he should not be confirmed. We will simply be right where we are now, only we'll have an FBI investigation for TV news people to argue about in addition to what we have now.
So for this to break, some combination of events has to take place.
I frankly don't see any of that happening.
The very first mystery to be solved by a FBI probe is this:
Kavanaugh says he did not know her and it never happened. She says he sat on top of her. The FBI or an appropriate agency needs to try to clear this up.
Most likely true. If he had at least a hearing then this entire thing wouldn't be the joke that it is. This bullshit is so partisan there is almost no point to even having these hearings. FFS just listen to the questions posed by the party of the president that nominated this guy, they are saying without saying that this entire thing is a pointless show. They may as well just ask him what color socks he wears. Its all bullshit.