Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Just now, McCroskey said:

No shit.  But are we saying now an accusation alone without any corroborating evidence whatsoever is sufficient to preventing an individual from being confirmed?  That's absurd.

Brisket already answered this.

Posted
Just now, McCroskey said:

No shit.  But are we saying now an accusation alone without any corroborating evidence whatsoever is sufficient to preventing an individual from being confirmed?  That's absurd.

No, it isn't. This is a political appointment. Senators are free to vote against him for whatever reason they want.

Posted
9 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

Her lawyers aren't taking any shit

 

I like them.  Do you lawyer types know who these lawyers are?  Are they well-known?

I'm pretty sure that guy on her left had a role in People of Earth. 

Brian+Huskey+Comic+Con+International+201

Posted
1 minute ago, McCroskey said:

Then why are they publicly implying Kavanaugh is guilty?  I mean, they can't have it both ways.

Maybe because they actually think he IS guilty, based on the proof of the sworn testimony being provided by the victim.

Posted
1 minute ago, McCroskey said:

No shit.  But are we saying now an accusation alone without any corroborating evidence whatsoever is sufficient to preventing an individual from being confirmed?  That's absurd.

And 2 years ago, a very-qualified person with no accusations whatsoever was prevented by the fuckstick GOP from being confirmed.  It's politics idiot.

  • Like 4
Posted
1 minute ago, chainsaw said:

She's fishing and fishing and coming up empty.  This is going nowhere.

Surely before this is over she will ask if Dr. Ford knows anything about Hillary's emails.

  • Like 4
Posted
No shit.  But are we saying now an accusation alone without any corroborating evidence whatsoever is sufficient to preventing an individual from being confirmed?  That's absurd.

A credible one is.

Hell, our prisons are full of people CONVICTED of crimes on the basis of the eyewitness testimony of a single person.

In fairness, most of them are minorities, so I can see why you’re confused.
  • Like 4
Posted
3 minutes ago, McCroskey said:

Then why are they publicly implying Kavanaugh is guilty?  I mean, they can't have it both ways.

Because they believe that he's guilty. They can have it as many ways as they want. You may want to sit this one out, chief.

  • Like 2
Posted
Just now, sachick said:

Did this prosecutor come up with the questions or did the senators tell her what to ask?

i think it's a bit of a mix, but i think her high points are directed by the republican brain trust, which explains the aimless flailing.

Posted
1 minute ago, Brandywine said:

How long is this going to last?

It's been a couple of years now, probably got at least two more...sorry

  • Haha 2
Posted
13 minutes ago, Gil Bang said:

Her lawyers aren't taking any shit

 

I like them.  Do you lawyer types know who these lawyers are?  Are they well-known?

Michael Bromwich is elite in these types of cases.

Posted
1 minute ago, hayden_horn said:

i think it's a bit of a mix, but i think her high points are directed by the republican brain trust, which explains the aimless flailing.

Republicans are too stupid to come up with a plan.

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, sachick said:

Did this prosecutor come up with the questions or did the senators tell her what to ask?

The senators told her.  I’m assuming that she edited/revised them for style, etc.

Edited by scottsins
Posted
4 minutes ago, McCroskey said:

No shit.  But are we saying now an accusation alone without any corroborating evidence whatsoever is sufficient to preventing an individual from being confirmed?  That's absurd.

So voting against an individual being confirmed to a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court because you believe that he has committed sexual assault is absurd.

Is refusing to allow an individual to be confirmed and leaving an empty seat on the Supreme Court for over a year because you just don't wanna do it absurd?

Posted

 

6 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

In a court of law.   Not in a job interview. 

while true, imagine he didn't do it. how shitty is it that someone should go through all of this and have his career damaged to this extent simply on the fact that somebody lie and said he did. seems like to damage his career like this there should be more than a story.

Posted
I love her lawyers. Priceless amount of publicity they are getting. 

I would have taken her case pro bono, and my partners would have supported me 100%. Lots of lawyers do things like this pro bono. We are ultimately performing a service for our system of justice. I’d be proud to do so.
  • Like 1
Posted
Just now, po elvis said:

 

while true, imagine he didn't do it. how shitty is it that someone should go through all of this and have his career damaged to this extent simply on the fact that somebody lie and said he did. seems like to damage his career like this there should be more than a story.

As soon as someone is accused of sexual assault something terrible has happened. Either it happened or it didn't, either possibility means someone's life has been horribly damaged.

But your last sentence doesn't follow in any way, shape, or form. For most sexual assaults there isn't anything more than a story. Most perpetrators of sexual assault don't sign a statement saying they did it, don't film it and mail it to the police, and don't even admit they did it.

Posted
3 minutes ago, Dolemite said:

Republicans are too stupid to come up with a plan.

This woman is a smokescreen to help them save their own asses. Except for Lindsey Graham. He's too fucking stupid to understand the plan. 

Posted
1 minute ago, po elvis said:

 

while true, imagine he didn't do it. how shitty is it that someone should go through all of this and have his career damaged to this extent simply on the fact that somebody lie and said he did. seems like to damage his career like this there should be more than a story.

There's a ton more.   There is the circumstantial evidence of her credibility.   There are other sworn accusers.   There are accounts of classmates about his drunken debauchery.   And she — not Kavanaugh — is asking the FBI to look into all of it.   

Posted
2 minutes ago, po elvis said:

 

while true, imagine he didn't do it. how shitty is it that someone should go through all of this and have his career damaged to this extent simply on the fact that somebody lie and said he did. seems like to damage his career like this there should be more than a story.

Imagine that he did do it. How shitty is it that someone should go through all of this and have her life damaged to this extent simply on the fact that she spoke up about what happened. 

Posted
4 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:


I would have taken her case pro bono, and my partners would have supported me 100%. Lots of lawyers do things like this pro bono. We are ultimately performing a service for our system of justice. I’d be proud to do so.

That would have been great.  "Mr. Chairman, what the fuck do you mean we only get 30 minutes for lunch? I strenuously object"

  • Like 3
Posted
2 minutes ago, Woodrow Call said:

This woman is a smokescreen to help them save their own asses. Except for Lindsey Graham. He's too fucking stupid to understand the plan. 

He just threatens to bring forth false witnesses to shoot down future D SCOTUS nominations...

Posted (edited)
Just now, Gil Bang said:

That would have been great.  "Mr. Chairman, what the fuck do you mean we only get 30 minutes for lunch? I strenuously object"

"What do you mean there aren't any Whataburgers around here?"

Edited by Huckleberry
  • Like 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, Woodrow Call said:

This woman is a smokescreen to help them save their own asses. Except for Lindsey Graham. He's too fucking stupid to understand the plan. 

Yep, I said earlier that Ted Cruz wants no part in questioning her when his race is already as tight as it is. 

Posted
1 minute ago, Gil Bang said:

That would have been great.  "Mr. Chairman, what the fuck do you mean we only get 30 minutes for lunch? I strenuously object"


"Mr. Chairman, the only way that is acceptable is if you bring the boudin to us!"

 

  • Like 2
Posted
3 minutes ago, BrickHorn said:

This is such a fucked-up process.  The witness testifies in 5-minute intervals, interspersed with closing statements by various senators.  

The prosecutor agrees. 



×
×
  • Create New...