Jump to content

Brett Kavanaugh Confirmation Thread

Hugo Stiglitz

By Hugo Stiglitz
in Cloak Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 17.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

Yuk
Yuk

No, you guys went Republican to ethnonationalist.

Bozo_Casanova
Bozo_Casanova

When Georgetown Prep sends its people, they're not sending their best. They're not sending you. They're sending people that have lots of problems, and they're bringing those problems with us. They're

TexArcher
TexArcher

In 2016 I was a moderate.  Socially liberal, fiscally conservative, but not quite a libertarian.  I would have considered voting for Kasich had he won the nomination. Now?  I will probably never

Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23355

Posted
  • Author
Posted
4 minutes ago, Skyline said:

Yeah I was operating under the assumption that they would force Kavanaugh to withdraw since that was the context of the article. Trump will go blaming democrats for anything and everything. That's hardly a surprise. 

McConnell could unilaterally pull the plug on Kavanaugh too.  He doesn’t need to convince Trump.  He just needs to call Kavanaugh and tell him it’s over, the votes wouldn’t be there and we need to put the crime family first. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Skyline

Skyline 325

Posted
Posted
Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

McConnell could unilaterally pull the plug on Kavanaugh too.  He doesn’t need to convince Trump.  He just needs to call Kavanaugh and tell him it’s over, the votes wouldn’t be there and we need to put the crime family first. 

Lol that would involve McConnell having a spine when it comes to Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23355

Posted
  • Author
Posted
3 minutes ago, Skyline said:

Lol that would involve McConnell having a spine when it comes to Trump.

The judges were McConnell’s part of the Faustian bargain with Trump.  What is Trump going to do? Alienate more republicans right before the midterms?  Trump doesn’t have as much leverage as he did six months ago.

McConnell is going to do what’s best for McConnell which is work hard AF to retain the Senate.  If aborting Kavanaugh is in his best interests, that’s what he’s going to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JimmyJames

JimmyJames 12271

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Boy oh boy, you riled up them libtards! Showed "em the what fer! 

The remaining apologists really are bottom of the barrel bomb throwers. So very aggy. 

I dunno. The guy does make some good points. He’s pretty persuasive if you really stop and think about it. 

MAGA!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
burntorangebongos

burntorangebongos 10681

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, conVINCEd said:

I don’t really  like this guy, and think holding back of documents and probable perjury is shady af, and also think that he probably got drunk af and tried to get in her pants with some degree of aggression 30 years ago.  He may even have been drunk enough to have no memory of the incident.  What I fail to see is of what use the FBI is in 30 year old he said/she said.  It’s not like there is evidence to dig up.  There are 3 people who were supposedly in the room, all of whom have given their version of events, and 2 more in the house.  I just don’t see the point.

The FBI would likely find the other participants of this gathering, like whose house, what they were drinking etc. They would likely find out if Dr. Ford left the room and was followed(if anyone remembers) and if she took off after the incident the way she says. Per her letter, she stayed in the bathroom a bit and they went downstairs to join the rest of the party and she ran out. What did they say happened, what state where they in? That is the kind of stuff the FBI could find out.

But I don't think they will on their own accord look into it unless the White house tells them to since they do the background checks and vetting of nominees for the administration. I don't think the White house or republicans want them digging further because other Judge K stories of his heavy drinking might pop out...maybe he drunk drove, maybe he vandalized property.....he seemed pretty rowdy back then. Or this story might be corroborated by what the other teens remember. Her leaving to go upstairs and the boys following, them coming back down and her leaving the party.  You have to imagine that if they were the kind of dicks that her story implies then they bragged that they did her.  Also, since they were drinking all day and she came with the other teens from the Club pool, she might have been at the home of Mark Judge or Bret Kavanaugh. According to her letter, they were lit so they likely weren't at the Country Club but drinking heavily somewhere and waiting for the word of mouth to spread to get some girls over. That place was probably one of their homes. If one of the other teens were to remember that then her story really get credible, imo.

The democrats should hire PIs and find this shit out without the FBI. Find out from the other teens who might be able to flesh out the story. Going in blind on Monday is just going to be a dog and pony show. We aren't going to learn anything unless one of them confesses to lying.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EMAWesome

EMAWesome 101

Posted
Posted
21 hours ago, Nivek said:

Like they did for Al Franken and Anthony Weiner right? And Elliot Sptizer?    

You know you have little wiggle room to stand on when you go to the tired and failed 'bothsides!" attempt to deflect.    It is difficult to see the white knight in shiny armor when you have eyes caked with shit.

Examples that had multiple video and/or text messages to support the claims.  Let me know when the VHS copy of this instance hits the shelves.  Truly anyone who thinks this is a credible accusation has sand for brains and their opinions should be treated accordingly.  

  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stros

Stros 153

Posted
Posted
If growing up, you had moves to pick up girls that include your hand over her mouth or duct tape, you are not allowed to sit on the US Supreme Court.  I'm sorry.

Where is your proof? She doesn’t remember anyone at the party, where the party was, or when the party was. For all we know it could have been a wet dream.
  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EMAWesome

EMAWesome 101

Posted
Posted
12 hours ago, Nivek said:


The point was how the democrats didn’t run to defend the bad actors but instead sought to remove them as prominent members/ or future leaders within the party. So once again the bothsideser fail to grasp reality.
 

So you are for the standard for a political nomination being confirmed to be any accusation brought up by anyone at anytime with no supporting evidence is enough to force a nominee to withdraw.  Good luck getting anyone confirmed to any position anywhere in the United State government with that standard.  To use your "logic" if this woman claims to shit unicorns and fart rainbows she must be able to because that is what she claims.

  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hayden_horn

hayden_horn 11358

Posted
Posted
49 minutes ago, burntorangebongos said:

The FBI would likely find the other participants of this gathering, like whose house, what they were drinking etc. They would likely find out if Dr. Ford left the room and was followed(if anyone remembers) and if she took off after the incident the way she says. Per her letter, she stayed in the bathroom a bit and they went downstairs to join the rest of the party and she ran out. What did they say happened, what state where they in? That is the kind of stuff the FBI could find out.

But I don't think they will on their own accord look into it unless the White house tells them to since they do the background checks and vetting of nominees for the administration. I don't think the White house or republicans want them digging further because other Judge K stories of his heavy drinking might pop out...maybe he drunk drove, maybe he vandalized property.....he seemed pretty rowdy back then. Or this story might be corroborated by what the other teens remember. Her leaving to go upstairs and the boys following, them coming back down and her leaving the party.  You have to imagine that if they were the kind of dicks that her story implies then they bragged that they did her.  Also, since they were drinking all day and she came with the other teens from the Club pool, she might have been at the home of Mark Judge or Bret Kavanaugh. According to her letter, they were lit so they likely weren't at the Country Club but drinking heavily somewhere and waiting for the word of mouth to spread to get some girls over. That place was probably one of their homes. If one of the other teens were to remember that then her story really get credible, imo.

The democrats should hire PIs and find this shit out without the FBI. Find out from the other teens who might be able to flesh out the story. Going in blind on Monday is just going to be a dog and pony show. We aren't going to learn anything unless one of them confesses to lying.

The main issue here is, though the Republicans love to excoriate Ted Kennedy, there are tons of "boys will be boys" skeletons out there from back when they were invincible, before the #metoo curtain fell. This has to terrify most male congressmen. Many of them, I'd bet, are one or two or ten brave steps forward from women or schoolmates in their lives from resigning in disgrace for what would once be casual assault. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bad_teammate

bad_teammate 13115

Posted
Posted
Just now, EMAWesome said:

So you are for the standard for a political nomination being confirmed to be any accusation brought up by anyone at anytime with no supporting evidence is enough to force a nominee to withdraw. 

"No supporting evidence"? Interesting lie.

Quote

Good luck getting anyone confirmed to any position anywhere in the United State government with that standard. 

How did Gorsuch get confirmed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Buzzrock

Buzzrock 14859

Posted
Posted
Nothing was gained politically for the Democrats by Franken resigning.  Nothing.  
They lost one of their most influential Senate leaders who was replaced by I don’t know who.  
It was a net win for the GOP.


Bulllllllllshit. They got to maintain their moral high ground and their purity. They can’t give up ground to the Rs on that.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
horncyclist

horncyclist 1384

Posted
Posted
So you are for the standard for a political nomination being confirmed to be any accusation brought up by anyone at anytime with no supporting evidence is enough to force a nominee to withdraw.  Good luck getting anyone confirmed to any position anywhere in the United State government with that standard.  To use your "logic" if this woman claims to shit unicorns and fart rainbows she must be able to because that is what she claims.
The fact that she shared this with her therapist 6 years ago when there was no incentive to make it up.or way she could have known Kavanaugh would be up.for the Supreme Court, gives the story credibility. Why is that so hard to understand? Also, she passed a polygraph.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Horn Dog

Horn Dog 9584

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Stros said:


Where is your proof? She doesn’t remember anyone at the party, where the party was, or when the party was. For all we know it could have been a wet dream.

Hysterical!   Not many people can equate attempted rape with a wet dream and pull it off, but you did it!  Your female family members must be so proud.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EMAWesome

EMAWesome 101

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, troph said:

 


The notes say prominent DC cat... and that gets you well away from a democrat conspiracy. She was sexually assaulted, that’s a known fact now. It was also a prominent DC guy. That’s damn close to game. Set. Match.

It should not take much to sink this guy and I think he should withdraw and hope to god he isn’t impeached in his current position

 

No it isn't.  That is a known claim.  It is not a known fact.  Me claiming to have a 14 inch dick does not make it a known fact.  Jeff Fisher claiming to know how to coach an NFL team does not make it a known fact.  Billy Corgan claiming to know how to sing in tune does not make it a known fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Onboard 2.0

Onboard 2.0 9083

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, horncyclist said:
7 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:
So you are for the standard for a political nomination being confirmed to be any accusation brought up by anyone at anytime with no supporting evidence is enough to force a nominee to withdraw.  Good luck getting anyone confirmed to any position anywhere in the United State government with that standard.  To use your "logic" if this woman claims to shit unicorns and fart rainbows she must be able to because that is what she claims.

The fact that she shared this with her therapist 6 years ago when there was no incentive to make it up.or way she could have known Kavanaugh would be up.for the Supreme Court, gives the story credibility. Why is that so hard to understand? Also, she passed a polygraph.

This is the biggest piece of corroborating information in her favor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hugo Stiglitz

Hugo Stiglitz 23355

Posted
  • Author
Posted
5 minutes ago, Buzzrock said:

 


Bulllllllllshit. They got to maintain their moral high ground and their purity. They can’t give up ground to the Rs on that.

 

When one side is putting up accused child molesters and closet nazis, an accused rogue ass grabber isn’t going to level the moral playing field. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
horncyclist

horncyclist 1384

Posted
Posted
No it isn't.  That is a known claim.  It is not a known fact.  Me claiming to have a 14 inch dick does not make it a known fact.  Jeff Fisher claiming to know how to coach an NFL team does not make it a known fact.  Billy Corgan claiming to know how to sing in tune does not make it a known fact.
So assessing claims is difficult. In court you look to facts that substantiate the claim. Like consistency or making a statement despite incentive not to. Here, unless you believe the Washington Post is making stuff up or her therapist forged notes, she told the same story six years ago with no motivation to. She then came forward surely knowing one consequence might be endangering herself or her family. Those facts give her story credibility. Until someone undermines those facts or other facts come up--like she's insane or maybe she didn't even live there at the time -- then the sum of the evidence says her story is true. Again, it's not that hard. Do you have another explanation for the known facts?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EMAWesome

EMAWesome 101

Posted
Posted (edited)
19 minutes ago, horncyclist said:
22 minutes ago, EMAWesome said:
So you are for the standard for a political nomination being confirmed to be any accusation brought up by anyone at anytime with no supporting evidence is enough to force a nominee to withdraw.  Good luck getting anyone confirmed to any position anywhere in the United State government with that standard.  To use your "logic" if this woman claims to shit unicorns and fart rainbows she must be able to because that is what she claims.

The fact that she shared this with her therapist 6 years ago when there was no incentive to make it up.or way she could have known Kavanaugh would be up.for the Supreme Court, gives the story credibility. Why is that so hard to understand? Also, she passed a polygraph.

The Ames guy that was convicted of spying two decades ago passed two polygraph tests.  Polygraphs are not admissible evidence in court.  Plus she has been associated with the area of Washington D.C. her whole life where was she when Kavanaugh was being nominated to D.C District Court of Appeals?  If this story has so much credibility why did Feinstein sit on it until the last moment?  By the way sharing the story with her therapist is no proof whatsoever that the story is true.  Her sharing the story with anyone is no proof that the story is true.  Proof would be somebody else collaborating the story independently or there being some kind of forensic evidence gathered that would support the claims.  And how do you know she did not have an incentive to make it up?  Are you her therapist?  How much incentive did the accusers in the Duke lacrosse team and University of Virginia cases need to make up stories?

I'll also shoot down the "she has nothing to gain today by making this up" argument as well.  How much is she going to gain with the book deal some publisher is going to offer her?  How much is she going to gain when HBO, Lifetime, or whatever television network wants to buy the rights from her for the TV-movie on this?  Let's take a look at Anita Hill's tax returns pre-Clarence Thomas meetings vs her post Clarence Thomas meetings tax returns and see how much one could gain from all of this.

Edited by EMAWesome
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EMAWesome

EMAWesome 101

Posted
Posted
11 hours ago, jimmyjazz said:

Letting this guy's appointment get to a vote is a political nightmare for Republicans.  There is no standard by which he should be presumed innocent until proven guilty.  There are enough serious questions about his integrity, including multiple instances that smell like perjury PLUS the accusations of a woman who initially brought evidence forward years ago and who tried to avoid the glare of the spotlight until it literally became too important to avoid, that it's absolutely the most reasonable thing in the world to say "enough, there are better candidates out there".  As it stands now, a "yes" vote looks like an endorsement of deceipt and sexual assault.  

If it goes to a vote, we have very strong circumstantial evidence that Kavanaugh is little more than the most efficient tool in the toolbox to accomplish a "hidden" agenda, and that ain't just Roe V Wade or immigration law.  It's something more nefarious.   Pay attention.

Well, on the plus side for you you have very little to fear in regards to being selected for jury duty.  The most scary thing about this whole thread is that there are about fifty posters in it who need therapy more than this woman did.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
horncyclist

horncyclist 1384

Posted
Posted

Answers below.

The Ames guy that was convicted of spying two decades ago passed two polygraph tests.  Polygraphs are not admissible evidence in court. 

You meant inadmissible. FBI finds them reliable enough to use. Plus, I just tacked that on.


Plus she has been associated with the area of Washington D.C. her whole life where was she when Kavanaugh was being nominated to D.C District Court of Appeals?

DC District Court of Appeals is not a thing. The court you meant is not the Supreme Court. Not flipping philosophical balance of said Supreme Court. And not subject to 24 hour news coverage.

  If this story has so much credibility why did Feinstein sit on it until the last moment?

Ford requested confidentiality. Feinstein respected that.

  By the way sharing the story with her therapist is no proof whatsoever that the story is true.  Her sharing the story with anyone is no proof that the story is true.  Proof would be somebody else collaborating the story independently or there being some kind of forensic evidence gathered that would support the claims. 

No. Sharing the story and telling it consistently makes it more likely it's true. Another witness telling the same story would as well but that doesn't mean her telling it to a therapist isn't significant.

And how do you know she did not have an incentive to make it up?  Are you her therapist?

How much incentive did the accusers in the Duke lacrosse team and University of Virginia cases need to make up stories?


I'll also shoot down the "she has nothing to gain today by making this up" argument as well.  How much is she going to gain with the book deal some publisher is going to offer her?  How much is she going to gain when HBO, Lifetime, or whatever television network wants to buy the rights from her for the TV-movie on this?  Let's take a look at Anita Hill's tax returns pre-Clarence Thomas meetings vs her post Clarence Thomas meetings tax returns and see how much one could gain from all of this.

You think everything is about money? I wouldn't go through this shit for any amount of money. Maybe you're poor though.


Link to comment
Share on other sites
retread

retread 2951

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, burntorangebongos said:

Boom! That was dumb on Grassley's part, if true. I think we are moving closer to having this moved back yet again. Wow.

If you listen to Grassley and the rest of these asshole Rs, you'd think she's sitting around sipping on some iced tea and deciding if she wants to go to DC to testify. Maybe if she can find a few hours b/w the nail salon and taking the kids to soccer practice?

 

Edited by retread
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Buzzrock

Buzzrock 14859

Posted
Posted
The fact that she shared this with her therapist 6 years ago when there was no incentive to make it up.or way she could have known Kavanaugh would be up.for the Supreme Court, gives the story credibility. Why is that so hard to understand? Also, she passed a polygraph.


Long game bro. Dems been planning this move for years.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Buzzrock

Buzzrock 14859

Posted
Posted
When one side is putting up accused child molesters and closet nazis, an accused rogue ass grabber isn’t going to level the moral playing field. 


I didn’t say that it would. My point is they can’t give an inch, can’t start down that road. Their purity is their biggest play right now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing


Football ... Basketball ... Baseball ... Other Sports ... Futbol ... 🤫995🤫 ... Gambling ... Movies & TV ... Music ... Hobbies ... Lulz ... Food & Travel ... Daily Texan ... Business and Markets ... Cloak Room ... Help ... For Sale ... Board Discussion ... Subscribe!... Donate!... Advertise... COOKIE MONSTER!

×
×
  • Create New...