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

Chrispy

Chrispy 132

Posted
Posted
55 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

I see no reason to doubt 1 at this stage.  She had it documented by her marriage counselor years ago. I guess it's possible that this is some real long game shit playing out, but that's doubtful. The closest I can even come to a plausible scenario that frames this as a 100% politically motivated attack with no basis in the facts of Kavanaugh's involvement is still based on #1 being truthful, that she was a victim of sexual assault in the early 80s.   

It’s possibe, but I’m going to need more to tarnish a man’s reputation and career. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
triplehorn

triplehorn 2664

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, deech said:

I can't help but laugh at the R's complaining about the process after what they did with Garland.  D leadership sat on this nugget until the very last second because they knew Trump would only get one nomination hearing before the mid-terms.  It was good, smart politics. 

Under normal circumstances, today would be nowhere near 'the very last second' if proper due diligence were being exercised.  It's reckless and irresponsible how rushed and withholding the GOP is being.  It's abject counter-diligence.  And now they're trying to rush testimony without an appropriate investigation preceding a hearing.  Eject these complicit bastards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

The paywall there is pretty stringent. It’s not as bad as the Statesman. It seems like you can’t read more than 1 article about the Horns before you get locked out 

But many conservatives subscribe to the Times.   It's readership may skew left, but that still leaves a substantial percentage of Rs who subscribe.   

And I'm looking at the web commentary on the main Kavanaugh headline article right now.  It's overwhelmingly pro-accuser.   Like, so much so don't see how you possibly arrived at your conclusion. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GHOSTUSER

GHOSTUSER 361

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

But many conservatives subscribe to the Times.   It's readership may skew left, but that still leaves a substantial percentage of Rs who subscribe.   

And I'm looking at the web commentary on the main Kavanaugh headline article right now.  It's overwhelmingly pro-accuser.   Like, so much so don't see how you possibly arrived at your conclusion. 

I was reading the comments from Michelle Goldberg column

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23469

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, triplehorn said:

Under normal circumstances, today would be nowhere near 'the very last second' if proper due diligence were being exercised.  It's reckless and irresponsible how rushed and withholding the GOP is being.  It's abject counter-diligence.  And now they're trying to rush testimony without an appropriate investigation preceding a hearing.  Eject these complicit bastards.

Meh, Feinstein sat on this all summer. It's politics.  She outmaneuvered Grassley at this point, but I think that he gets his way in the end. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18853

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

It’s possibe, but I’m going to need more to tarnish a man’s reputation and career. 

His reputation is already tarnished. From a financial standpoint, he'd be better off withdrawing his nomination and partnering up at a name firm in Washington. He'd make stupid money.

If he gets confirmed, this will follow him forever, just like Clarence Thomas. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chrispy

Chrispy 132

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

His reputation is already tarnished. From a financial standpoint, he'd be better off withdrawing his nomination and partnering up at a name firm in Washington. He'd make stupid money.

If he gets confirmed, this will follow him forever, just like Clarence Thomas. 

I disagree, I wouldn’t put this in the same ballpark as Clarence Thomas. If he didn’t do anything wrong, he shouldn’t withdraw. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RomaVicta

RomaVicta 29904

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

I’m here bitch. I don’t like seeing others run off or scared to post here. alincoln, greggym and other long time posters getting negged repped for the opinions shows things are not well here. DC is a cesspool. The Democrats know how important the stakes are. I wouldn’t be surprised in the least if this was complete bullshit or she misremembered who was on top of her if that really happened. Maybe she thinks she is being a valiant warrior in the “Resistance”. There WAS someone in the room with them. He says it never happened. Flimsy allegation. Let’s see if she has more to say when she testifies. I admit that I’m biased and want Kavanaugh rammed through to have a conservative majority on the court.

Despicable post. The guy in the room was an alleged accomplice not a witness. Of course he will not support her story because he is a participant in the alleged incident.

Your ends justifies the means stance is what got the GOP to this current wicked state. We'll preach hate and discord, but it's okay because we can lower taxes on the rich and load the court with people like us.

Fuck that. Fuck you.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted
5 minutes ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

I was reading the comments from Michelle Goldberg column

I just looked at those comments.  Out of the first 20 that make a direct comment, 15 were pro-accuser and 5 voiced caution towards relying just on one accusation (not exactly a ringing endorsement of Kavanaugh).   The NYT readership skews 65% left-of-center (http://www.journalism.org/interactives/media-polarization/outlet/new-york-times/), which means that the web commentary actually supports the opposite conclusion of the one you have drawn.   You're suffering from confirmation bias. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tom

Tom 2959

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, deech said:

I can't help but laugh at the R's complaining about the process after what they did with Garland.  D leadership sat on this nugget until the very last second because they knew Trump would only get one nomination hearing before the mid-terms.  It was good, smart politics.  

 

It wasn't just Garland by a long shot.  Federal judges across the U.S. were denied confirmation hearings under Obama.  Now they want to cry about obstruction and fair play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GHOSTUSER

GHOSTUSER 361

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

Despicable post. The guy in the room was an alleged accomplice not a witness. Of course he will not support her story because he is a participant in the alleged incident.

Your ends justifies the means stance is what got the GOP to this current wicked state. We'll preach hate and discord, but it's okay because we can lower taxes on the rich and load the court with people like us.

Fuck that. Fuck you.

Dude relax. I’m not ready to play judge, jury and executioner on a claim that has no corroboration. Anastasis’ position is probably the most reasonable. Projecting a little bit here dude. It’s not unreasonable to have reservations and doubts about her accusation when Kavanaugh has no other accusation remotely similar over 4 decades since 

Edited by Iconoclast Texan
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jimmyjazz

jimmyjazz 45898

Posted
Posted
24 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

It’s possibe, but I’m going to need more to tarnish a man’s reputation and career. 

Jesus Christ I just coughed up my spleen, diced it, sauteed it with some onions and a little ginger, and wolfed it back down.

Damn, man.  Have some self-respect.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted
Just now, Iconoclast Texan said:

Dude relax. I’m not ready to play judge, jury and executioner on a claim that has no corroboration. Anastasis’ position is probably the most reasonable. Projecting a little bit here dude 

Nobody here is.  This is about whether to give a guy an important job — not whether to subject him to government sanction.   The courtroom standards of proof and punishment are completely irrelevant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
troph

troph 24783

Posted
Posted
Dude relax. I’m not ready to play judge, jury and executioner on a claim that has no corroboration. Anastasis’ position is probably the most reasonable. Projecting a little bit here dude. It’s not unreasonable to have reservations and doubts about her accusation when Kavanaugh has no other accusation remotely similar over 4 decades since 

Anastasis’ position was mine and he agreed with it. And your language re judge and jury is nonsense - there is no court of law here. The burden IS on him. Serving on the Court is a privilege which he must prove he is worthy of its not a right we are talking about taking away.

Language matters people.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted
Just now, David Dennison said:

He's probably not going to make it. This is a disaster for the Republican Party.

I don't know about that.   Rs would be less willing to vote D for Senate (to check Trump) if the Court is on the line.  I think the biggest disaster for the Rs is if he does make it at this point. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
David Dennison

David Dennison 18853

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

Show me the evidence and I’ll hang him with you. 

Her testimony, her therapist's notes, her polygraph.

"Judge Kavanaugh, Dr. Ford has taken a lie detector test and the results of that test support her testimony. Would you be willing to take a lie detector test?"

I look forward to watching him answer this question.

Edited by David Dennison
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gil Bang

Gil Bang 25937

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, alincoln said:

They were from 2012 and do not mention Kavanaugh by name.  At this point, it remains a he said/she said issue raised at the 11th hour. 

January is not the 11th hour

1 hour ago, Chrispy said:

It’s funny, my friend was kicked off this site for such comments. But he’s a conservative, so it’s different. 

I don't believe you.

 

There's no way that you have a friend. 

40 minutes ago, babysdaddy said:

Kinda catching up on all this.  Read in Politico the accuser's lawyer is trying to put conditions around her public testimony?  I agree with Hugo that I doubt we have any sort of testimony next week.

She was definitely assaulted but how to prove it was or was not Kavanaugh?  From a purely political standpoint, this lady is as brave as they come.  Given it is a he said/she said I fully expect for her character to be totally and completely assassinated.  She had to know that or should have been warned about it.  Kavanaugh has already been through the ringer....this lady is about to be totally and completely exposed.  

The play from Feinstein is pretty smart, politically, but disgusting from a humanity standpoint.  Had him under oath and could've asked all the questions she wanted.  Sat on it purely to put pressure on her colleagues.  

 

Bullshit.  She was given the letter in confidence, and promised to keep it that way.  She acted with honor. 

24 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

Meh, Feinstein sat on this all summer. It's politics.  She outmaneuvered Grassley at this point, but I think that he gets his way in the end. 

See above. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Chrispy

Chrispy 132

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Her testimony, her therapist's notes, her polygraph.

"Judge Kavanaugh, Dr. Ford has taken a lie detector test and the results of that test support her testimony. Would you be willing to take a lie detector test?"

I look forward to watching him answer this question.

A lie detector? Really? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GHOSTUSER

GHOSTUSER 361

Posted
Posted (edited)

Lie detector tests have zero evidentiary and probative value as ruled by the SC. The issue to me is the accusation alone is sufficient alone for some of y’all to sink his nomination. I think that is fucking horrible no matter who it is when you have this fact pattern

Edited by Iconoclast Texan
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Anastasis

Anastasis 23469

Posted
Posted
Just now, Gil Bang said:

Bullshit.  She was given the letter in confidence, and promised to keep it that way.  She acted with honor. 

 

Until she didn't and decided to refer the letter to the FBI and issue a press release about it.  Look, I am not criticizing Feinstein's handling. It was masterful politically, and I find no reason to impugn her honor over it.  Politics is politics. She knows how to work the pieces on the board to maximal effect. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mojo Hand

Mojo Hand 4580

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

Lie detector tests have zero evidentiary and probative value as ruled by the SC

They are not admissible in court.   We are not in court.   The government uses them routinely.   You can't get into the FBI without passing a lie detector test on mundane issues like whether you've used drugs before.  Why shouldn't it be used for a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court? 

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...