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

David Dennison

David Dennison 18946

Posted
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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gil Bang

Gil Bang 26000

Posted
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
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105286

Posted
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
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Huckleberry

Huckleberry 33079

Posted
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?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
po elvis

po elvis 2076

Posted
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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Brisketexan

Brisketexan 105286

Posted
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
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Huckleberry

Huckleberry 33079

Posted
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.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
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.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hobbes2702

hobbes2702 13060

Posted
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. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gil Bang

Gil Bang 26000

Posted
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
Link to comment
Share on other sites
retread

retread 2951

Posted
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...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
shnsajax

shnsajax 3591

Posted
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. 

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...