Brett Kavanaugh Confirmation Thread

[David Dennison 18855]

18 minutes ago, Dutchrudder said:

I'm generally pretty moderate in my political views, but ^ this is the kind of stuff that isn't helping Democrats at all. It wasn't the "attacks on Ford" that got Republican's enthusiasm up, it was the perception that the Dems were intentionally attacking a Federal judge for political points. The allegations made by Ford were not confirmed in this process, the story didn't have supporting witnesses, and it was wrong to make it into a public smear campaign, even if that wasn't the intent. It's clear to me that the Democrats mishandled this entire process by making it a public circus, rather than going for the FBI investigation as soon as the sexual assault allegations were thought to be credible. Sitting on it for a few weeks, and waiting until they were close to a vote was politically motivated in order to stall the process, and hope that the Supreme Court seat was essentially on the ballot in November. I don't think even liberals would disagree with that assessment of the events, but feel free to explain it otherwise if you want to try. 

What did Democrats have to lose by first investigating this behind closed doors, and then making it public if the FBI investigators didn't do their due diligence?  It seems they went for the appeal to the public's emotions attempting to ride the #metoo wave, and instead of blocking Kavanaugh, they emboldened the right by creating another clear R vs D fight. Now that enthusiasm will carryover the next 4 weeks into the November election, and it will absolutely be used as a battle cry by every R in every race over the next few weeks. The Democrats made a huge mistake in the way they went about this confirmation process and it will cost them several seats this November. 

 

 

I think this is exactly wrong.

[Laxtonto 12080]

11 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

How do you reconcile this with the Republicans refusal to even consider Merrick Garland WITHOUT any negative story line?

You cannot be serious.  You can't say "oh sure, there was some he said she said but it all came back to bite the accusers" in the bright light of a complete and total political power play.  That shit just doesn't fly.

So your argument is that a political smear job with no corroboration that has absolutely no basis in the standard parliamentary procedure used in the Senate is the same as using the rules of the Senate (which the democrats augmented to fit their goals prior to this) to slow play and eventually kill a confirmation? 

You dont see the difference between the two? Just because your side got out played previously using the rules doesn't mean then you get to make it up as you go to try to get what you want. These types of sweeping overreaches are what led to the loss the previous protection to help slow the partisan nature of confirmations.  If those changes were not made by the Democrats, then the 60 vote rule would still be in place.

Sometimes you need to recognize the unintended consequences of past decisions and accept that if you change the rules, don't be upset when the other side uses those changes against you.

 

[jimmyjazz 45903]

1 minute ago, Laxtonto said:

So your argument is that a political smear job with no corroboration that has absolutely no basis in the standard parliamentary procedure used in the Senate is the same as using the rules of the Senate (which the democrats augmented to fit their goals prior to this) to slow play and eventually kill a confirmation? 

You dont see the difference between the two? Just because your side got out played previously using the rules doesn't mean then you get to make it up as you go to try to get what you want. These types of sweeping overreaches are what led to the loss the previous protection to help slow the partisan nature of confirmations.  If those changes were not made by the Democrats, then the 60 vote rule would still be in place.

Sometimes you need to recognize the unintended consequences of past decisions and accept that if you change the rules, don't be upset when the other side uses those changes against you.

 

If your characterization was at all accurate you might have a point.

[David Dennison 18855]

1 minute ago, Laxtonto said:

So your argument is that a political smear job with no corroboration that has absolutely no basis in the standard parliamentary procedure used in the Senate is the same as using the rules of the Senate (which the democrats augmented to fit their goals prior to this) to slow play and eventually kill a confirmation? 

You dont see the difference between the two? Just because your side got out played previously using the rules doesn't mean then you get to make it up as you go to try to get what you want. These types of sweeping overreaches are what led to the loss the previous protection to help slow the partisan nature of confirmations.  If those changes were not made by the Democrats, then the 60 vote rule would still be in place.

Sometimes you need to recognize the unintended consequences of past decisions and accept that if you change the rules, don't be upset when the other side uses those changes against you.

 

Which is why you aren't going to like the payback.

[Dutchrudder 11138]

How do you reconcile this with the Republicans refusal to even consider Merrick Garland WITHOUT any negative story line?
You cannot be serious.  You can't say "oh sure, there was some he said she said but it all came back to bite the accusers" in the bright light of a complete and total political power play.  That shit just doesn't fly.

I wouldn't even compare those two situations after the way this one went. If this was a holdover from the Garland issue, then the dems should have found a better way to stall, and a full thorough investigation may have helped do that if that was their intent. I don't think either party should stall nominations as a political play, but here we are.

Do you agree that these allegations were made public simply for political purposes? Could they have gone about it more professionally?

[David Dennison 18855]

Just now, Dutchrudder said:

I wouldn't even compare those two situations after the way this one went. If this was a holdover from the Garland issue, then the dems should have found a better way to stall, and a full thorough investigation may have helped do that if that was their intent. I don't think either party should stall nominations as a political play, but here we are.

Do you agree that these allegations were made public simply for political purposes? Could they have gone about it more professionally?

Who leaked the story?

[GHOSTUSER 361]

2 hours ago, FondrenRoad said:

Quit being a hypocrite and go back to Iran. 

I’m quite content remaining in then US and for flimsy, 36 year ucorronorated accusations and the feminazi movement being put in its place. Great day for America. You should talk to the women I do. Lots of them sympathetc to Kavanaugh and not child like sounding Ford. Some bought her BS. A lot didn’t 

[David Dennison 18855]

Just now, Iconoclast Texan said:

I’m quite content remaining in then US and for flimsy, 36 year ucorronorated accusations and the feminazi movement being put in its place. Great day for America. You should talk to the women I do. Lots of them sympathetc to Kavanaugh and not child like sounding Ford. Some bought her BS. A lot didn’t 

You should talk to other women.

[Js1 85314]

Just now, David Dennison said:

You should talk to other women.

They don't actually want to talk to him.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

1 hour ago, David Dennison said:

The left does make this argument. They shouldn't be in pre-trial custodial facilities at all.

Fair enough.  Did they start making whis argument before or after January 2017?

Edited October 8, 2018 by Johnny Sack

[David Dennison 18855]

Just now, Johnny Sack said:

Fair enough.  Did they start making whis augment before or after January 2017?

Before. The Obama administration was roundly criticized by the left for its immigration policies.

[FondrenRoad 4378]

4 minutes ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

I’m quite content remaining in then US and for flimsy, 36 year ucorronorated accusations and the feminazi movement being put in its place. Great day for America. You should talk to the women I do. Lots of them sympathetc to Kavanaugh and not child like sounding Ford. Some bought her BS. A lot didn’t 

The only women you ever talk to are cashiers at stores, and even they just want you to buy your ramen noodles and get the fuck out.  There's nobody in this world that actually likes you, brother.  You should change.  

[Johnny Sack 8397]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

Before. The Obama administration was roundly criticized by the left for its immigration policies.

Good.  

[Bama Chick 28596]

Women are afraid of angry men.

They say what they want to hear so the angry, creepy men go away.

If women are telling you everything you want to hear, they’re lying to you.

Because they can smell the anger and misogyny on you.

[UTDD 362]

Just because something in testimony hasn't been proven by the proper standard of evidence doesn't in my mind mean it's complete B.S. unless there is some kind of corroborating evidence that shows this to be true.  ( one example being proven to have knowingly lied)  I think labeling things that way (whether for or against Ford or Kavanaugh) so easily as BS versus saying unproven or uncorroborated says a lot more about how one is quick to label and judge based on preconceptions and political orientation rather than deep thought.  The truth is that Ford didn't prove enough to merit Kavanaugh being kicked off the court based on the actual evidence, but I haven't seen any evidence the other way to indicate it was complete B.S. versus unproven/uncorroborated.

[G650 14253]

Iconoclast is the kind of guy that shaves with  Gillette Fusion.

[jimmyjazz 45903]

27 minutes ago, Dutchrudder said:

I wouldn't even compare those two situations after the way this one went. If this was a holdover from the Garland issue, then the dems should have found a better way to stall, and a full thorough investigation may have helped do that if that was their intent. I don't think either party should stall nominations as a political play, but here we are.

Do you agree that these allegations were made public simply for political purposes? Could they have gone about it more professionally?

Well, there was strong evidence Kavanaugh perjured himself 12 years ago, so I think your "point" is a non-starter.  Forget for the moment that there was (and is) good indication Dr. Ford's accusations have merit.

You apparently want the left to take all politics out of their tactics, and yet have no problem with the right making all decisions wholly on politics.  Good for you, I guess.

[ChickenSandwich 9834]

As there is with Ford perjuring herself even with two attorneys trying everything to coach her through it. 

Not to mention the 5 denials, and another man admitting it could have been him. She claimed her best friend had mental problems and that is why she denied her claims. 

She withheld the only piece of evidence she said could corroborate her story. Using the therapy notes as one last ultimatum in another attempt to stall. 

Other than her crying on TV we have zero reason to believe Brett Kav sexually assaulted her.  She may have been assaulted by the other man. Who knows?  A date and time would be helpful. 

 

Edited October 8, 2018 by ChickenSandwich

[David Dennison 18855]

1 minute ago, ChickenSandwich said:

As there is with Ford perjuring herded even with two attorneys trying everything to coach her through it. 

Narrator: she didn't.

[Dutchrudder 11138]

14 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

Well, there was strong evidence Kavanaugh perjured himself 12 years ago, so I think your "point" is a non-starter.  Forget for the moment that there was (and is) good indication Dr. Ford's accusations have merit.

You apparently want the left to take all politics out of their tactics, and yet have no problem with the right making all decisions wholly on politics.  Good for you, I guess.

I don't disagree with the perjury accusation, and that should have been the focus of the public hearings, but it was lost amid the sexual assault allegations.

I don't discount Ford's testimony either, I do believe she was assaulted. I can't say for sure Brett did it, but I think it deserves a thorough investigation to review the matter. I wouldn't bet my own career on her testimony being 100% true, and I don't think you should do that to someone else, hence the reason to have an investigation and not make it a public spectacle until absolutely necessary. 

I'm not saying anyone should take the politics out of it, I'm saying they went about it the wrong way regardless, and that's what is galvanizing Republicans. I know it's easy to blame Trump, and say his attacks are the problem, but it's the Democrats fault this time. They went about it all the wrong way, and at least half the voting public can see that. I'm not sure why that's so difficult.

[ChickenSandwich 9834]

3 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Narrator: she didn't.

Sorry Comrade. Your one sentence bullshit can’t change the truth

should have bought more Facebook adds and people to harass families next time

[David Dennison 18855]

Just now, ChickenSandwich said:

Sorry Comrade. Your one sentence bullshit can’t change the truth

should have bought more Facebook adds and people to harass families next time

You're the one posting bullshit.

[jimmyjazz 45903]

3 minutes ago, Dutchrudder said:

I'm not saying anyone should take the politics out of it, I'm saying they went about it the wrong way regardless, and that's what is galvanizing Republicans. I know it's easy to blame Trump, and say his attacks are the problem, but it's the Democrats fault this time. They went about it all the wrong way, and at least half the voting public can see that. I'm not sure why that's so difficult.

Because you're wrong.  If Garland wasn't wrong, you're wrong.

[Hank Kingsley 20922]

3 minutes ago, Dutchrudder said:

I don't disagree with the perjury accusation, and that should have been the focus of the public hearings, but it was lost amid the sexual assault allegations.

I don't discount Ford's testimony either, I do believe she was assaulted. I can't say for sure Brett did it, but I think it deserves a thorough investigation to review the matter. I wouldn't bet my own career on her testimony being 100% true, and I don't think you should do that to someone else, hence the reason to have an investigation and not make it a public spectacle until absolutely necessary. 

I'm not saying anyone should take the politics out of it, I'm saying they went about it the wrong way regardless, and that's what is galvanizing Republicans. I know it's easy to blame Trump, and say his attacks are the problem, but it's the Democrats fault this time. They went about it all the wrong way, and at least half the voting public can see that. I'm not sure why that's so difficult.

They wanted an FBI investigation. The Republicans made sure it was a complete sham. Why are you giving them a pass?

 

[Guest]

On 10/6/2018 at 8:58 PM, Brisketexan said:

What’s fascinating to see is everything I said about Trumpkins - that their sole reason for existence is to revel in inflicting pain on all who dare disagree with them in the slightest - be perfectly validated by the string of posts above.

Couldn’t be much clearer. That’s our country - the winning side in any political battle can’t just win, they must inflict and enjoy pain and suffering. Not of some evil foreign power. Of their fellow Americans. That’s a recipe for a GREAT future for this country. And I know none of y’all care - for y’all, it’s just more “sweet libtears” - which, again, underlines the truth.

Some people do take pleasure in the frustration and tears of the other side, but not everyone does.  But it doesn't take much for the tears to flow these days.  Having the pride and decency to not publicly cry over every little thing that doesn't go your way is no longer seen as a virtue.  From a historical perspective considering all nations and peoples prior to ours and even within our own national history, things are about as good as they've ever been.  Life expectancy is up, diseases drastically reduced, literacy rates are the highest in history, free public education for all, no external national threats, prolonged period of international peace between global powers, no threat of famine or plagues, politically stability despite all the online and cable news petty bickering, crime is down, institutional racism & sexism is outlawed, racism and sexism are publicly shamed, incorporation of numerous technologies for safe travel and communication, &c.  Yet the more one cries about how shitty things are in the US today, the more they are praised by weak-minded sycophants.  It creates a false perception that things really are terrible and that we are on the verge of collapse.  In reality, being born today in the US is about as good of a set of circumstances to be born into considering every time and place in history.  It's not perfect, but life is not perfect and we are not going to achieve perfection.  Of course we can continue to make things better and we should strive to do so, but that involves perseverance and strength.

[David Dennison 18855]

1 minute ago, Aphelion said:

Some people do take pleasure in the frustration and tears of the other side, but not everyone does.  But it doesn't take much for the tears to flow these days.  Having the pride and decency to not publicly cry over every little thing that doesn't go your way is no longer seen as a virtue.  From a historical perspective considering all nations and peoples prior to ours and even within our own national history, things are about as good as they've ever been.  Life expectancy is up, diseases drastically reduced, literacy rates are the highest in history, free public education for all, no external national threats, prolonged period of international peace between global powers, no threat of famine or plagues, politically stability despite all the online and cable news petty bickering, crime is down, institutional racism & sexism is outlawed, racism and sexism are publicly shamed, incorporation of numerous technologies for safe travel and communication, &c.  Yet the more one cries about how shitty things are in the US today, the more they are praised by weak-minded sycophants.  It creates a false perception that things really are terrible and that we are on the verge of collapse.  In reality, being born today in the US is about as good of a set of circumstances to be born into considering every time and place in history.  It's not perfect, but life is not perfect and we are not going to achieve perfection.  Of course we can continue to make things better and we should strive to do so, but that involves perseverance and strength.

Thank you for the chuckle.

[Hank Kingsley 20922]

I mean, holy shit. 

 

[G650 14253]

2 minutes ago, Aphelion said:

Some people do take pleasure in the frustration and tears of the other side, but not everyone does.  But it doesn't take much for the tears to flow these days.  Having the pride and decency to not publicly cry over every little thing that doesn't go your way is no longer seen as a virtue.  From a historical perspective considering all nations and peoples prior to ours and even within our own national history, things are about as good as they've ever been.  Life expectancy is up, diseases drastically reduced, literacy rates are the highest in history, free public education for all, no external national threats, prolonged period of international peace between global powers, no threat of famine or plagues, politically stability despite all the online and cable news petty bickering, crime is down, institutional racism & sexism is outlawed, racism and sexism are publicly shamed, incorporation of numerous technologies for safe travel and communication, &c.  Yet the more one cries about how shitty things are in the US today, the more they are praised by weak-minded sycophants.  It creates a false perception that things really are terrible and that we are on the verge of collapse.  In reality, being born today in the US is about as good of a set of circumstances to be born into considering every time and place in history.  It's not perfect, but life is not perfect and we are not going to achieve perfection.  Of course we can continue to make things better and we should strive to do so, but that involves perseverance and strength.

 

While I generally agree with all of that, we are due for retrenchment and I am not sure our populous is emotionally equipped to handle it. Furthermore, our culture has objectively begun to rot in many areas, especially outside of the cities. Progress won't keep progressing if our people are going in the opposite direction.

 

There's a whole bunch of shit that is way outside the purview of this topic, but the short version is if you know as I do that capitalism raised the living standard of the world to an unimaginable level and want to see it continue, you need to be for a drastically strengthened social safety net, including guaranteed minimum income and government healthcare, otherwise you will be living in a socialist country before it's all said and done because people aren't going to stand by and die, they are going to start voting for people like Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump, who are just two sides of the same coin.

[jimmyjazz 45903]

3 minutes ago, G650 said:

There's a whole bunch of shit that is way outside the purview of this topic, but the short version is if you know as I do that capitalism raised the living standard of the world to an unimaginable level and want to see it continue, you need to be for a drastically strengthened social safety net, including guaranteed minimum income and government healthcare, otherwise you will be living in a socialist country before it's all said and done because people aren't going to stand by and die, they are going to start voting for people like Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump, who are just two sides of the same coin.

Easy solution to that problem -- take away their right to vote.

[ChickenSandwich 9834]

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-pakistan-blasphemy/pakistani-islamists-warn-of-terrible-consequences-over-blasphemy-appeal-idUSKCN1MI0NP?il=0&utm_source=reddit.com

 

at least we know where your playbook comes from DD

[SKJ 1311]

4 hours ago, EMAWesome said:

Oh, fuck off with this Republicans don't care about children stolen from their parents bullshit.  I never heard one fucking word from a Democrat when this was happening under Obama's administration.  You know why?  Because I never heard one fucking word from the douchebag media about this when they were doing stories about the border under Obama's administration.  It was going on back then, hell the photograph that touched all of this topic off was taken in that time.  No one made this a topic until the media did and the media waited until a Republican administration came around before they wanted to cover it.  Same with the school shooting stuff.  You make it sound like Republicans are standing outside of schools with popcorn chanting "we want more school shootings."  Fuck you.
 

This is just not factual

[Jack 51]

1 hour ago, Bama Chick said:

Women are afraid of angry men.

They say what they want to hear so the angry, creepy men go away.

If women are telling you everything you want to hear, they’re lying to you.

Because they can smell the anger and misogyny on you.

Projecting much?

[RomaVicta 29906]

37 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

As there is with Ford perjuring herself even with two attorneys trying everything to coach her through it. 

Not to mention the 5 denials, and another man admitting it could have been him. She claimed her best friend had mental problems and that is why she denied her claims. 

She withheld the only piece of evidence she said could corroborate her story. Using the therapy notes as one last ultimatum in another attempt to stall. 

Other than her crying on TV we have zero reason to believe Brett Kav sexually assaulted her.  She may have been assaulted by the other man. Who knows?  A date and time would be helpful. 

 

Negged for repeated lying.

The newest repeated lie is that she wouldn't turn over her notes. Everyone on this thread has seen the statements by her lawyers that they would gladly hand them over to the FBI. Who controlled the FBI and if they would seek the notes?

Quote

Other than her crying on TV we have zero reason to believe Brett Kav sexually assaulted her. 

Other witnesses at other times claim he could be sexually aggressive and prone to what is considered assault when drunk. Willfully refusing to get to the truth does not qualify anyone or any side from claiming such truth does not exist.

We don't know for sure what happened, but the position that there are zero reasons to believe the assault happened as you do is false.

[Longhorn_Fan68 33869]

9 minutes ago, SKJ said:

This is just not factual

And it doesn't matter which administration does it, separating children from their families is inhumane and un-American.

[RomaVicta 29906]

20 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

I mean, holy shit. 

 

I've usually admired the senators from New England on both sides of the aisle. They're usually smart and fair. This woman outed herself as a tool of the GOP last week. This statement from her is outrageous. I wonder what cabinet post she is vying for.

[jimmyjazz 45903]

1 minute ago, Longhorn_Fan68 said:

And it doesn't matter which administration does it, separating children from their families is inhumane and un-American.

. . . and regardless of what the right wing newsletter subscribers would have you believe, Obama's administration did everything possible to keep families together at the border.  The main exceptions were (a) unattended children who crossed and (b) children of parents who were taken into custody after being charged with crimes.

But let's not let the fact get in the way of a good smear against the other side.  You know, because #bothsides.

[Jack 51]

 

1 hour ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

I’m quite content remaining in then US and for flimsy, 36 year ucorronorated accusations and the feminazi movement being put in its place. Great day for America. You should talk to the women I do. Lots of them sympathetc to Kavanaugh and not child like sounding Ford. Some bought her BS. A lot didn’t 

No man in their right mind would pursue a relationship with a woman who believed Ford's testimony.  It was clearly garbage from the get go.

[RomaVicta 29906]

6 minutes ago, Jack said:

Projecting much?

One of us doesn't have a firm grasp of projection in this context. 

[tantric superman 4667]

1 minute ago, Jack said:

 

No man in their right mind would pursue a relationship with a woman who believed Ford's testimony.  It was clearly garbage from the get go.

Enjoy your homo-ness.

[RomaVicta 29906]

2 minutes ago, Jack said:

 

No man in their right mind would pursue a relationship with a woman who believed Ford's testimony.  It was clearly garbage from the get go.

Avatar checks out. You can't handle or even recognize the truth. But speak with gusto and emotion; maybe one day you will sit on the Supreme Court!

[David Dennison 18855]

3 minutes ago, Jack said:

No man in their right mind would pursue a relationship with a woman who believed Ford's testimony.  It was clearly garbage from the get go.

That must be why it was so easy to confirm Brett Kavanaugh.

[Jack 51]

1 hour ago, Dutchrudder said:

Do you agree that these allegations were made public simply for political purposes? Could they have gone about it more professionally?

I was reading unverified claims Feinstein paid for the lie detector.  If that turns out to be the case, it's pretty clear it was a political hit that backfired.

Either way..  Ford was surrounded by lawyers and political types.  Kavanaugh was surrounded by family... where was her family?  Why weren't they there to support her?  I know I would even if I knew my wife was full of shit.

[jimmyjazz 45903]

Just now, Jack said:

... where was her family?  Why weren't they there to support her?  I know I would even if I knew my wife was full of shit.

No, your bad self has already indicated you wouldn't put up with any of that kind of nonsense.  Don't try to walk it back now.

[tantric superman 4667]

3 minutes ago, Jack said:

  I know I would even if I knew my wife was full of shit. 

Um.  You don't have a wife.

[David Dennison 18855]

3 minutes ago, Jack said:

I was reading unverified claims Feinstein paid for the lie detector.  If that turns out to be the case, it's pretty clear it was a political hit that backfired.

Either way..  Ford was surrounded by lawyers and political types.  Kavanaugh was surrounded by family... where was her family?  Why weren't they there to support her?  I know I would even if I knew my wife was full of shit.

Why would you use your family as props?

[DDD Dad 14335]

17 minutes ago, Jack said:

Projecting much?

She's not wrong.

[Jack 51]

3 minutes ago, tantric superman said:

Um.  You don't have a wife.

That's news to me and my kids then.  Is she an imposter?  Russian agent?

4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Why would you use your family as props?

Family showing up for something like that is pretty standard.

[DDD Dad 14335]

12 minutes ago, Jack said:

I was reading unverified claims Feinstein paid for the lie detector.  If that turns out to be the case, it's pretty clear it was a political hit that backfired.

Either way..  Ford was surrounded by lawyers and political types.  Kavanaugh was surrounded by family... where was her family?  Why weren't they there to support her?  I know I would even if I knew my wife was full of shit.

The $500 lie detector?  Yes, that clearly would be the tipping point in any consideration of this matter.  JFC.

Ford's husband was in the gallery.  He came up to her during breaks.  Unlike Kavanaugh the Democrats didn't parade her family in front of the cameras or place them in the front row.

Also, Kavanaugh didn't need to be surrounded by lawyers and made a conscious decision not to have one (presumably for optics).  He clearly didn't need one since he carried out closing arguments during his testimony rather than answering questions.

 

Edited October 8, 2018 by DDD Dad

[David Dennison 18855]

Just now, Jack said:

Family showing up for something like that is pretty standard.

Not when they're the subject of death threats.

 

[hobbes2702 13032]

26 minutes ago, Jack said:

 

No man in their right mind would pursue a relationship with a woman who believed Ford's testimony.  It was clearly garbage from the get go.

What a great, well thought out and researched reply. Do you guys try to sound like idiots on purpose?