Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Mitch McConnell speaking to the senate right now regarding democratic obstruction of Kavanaugh, he is calling for a vote this week before the FBI investigation is complete, he has some stones.
Suddenly appointing a SCJ is some sort of emergency.
I disagree. There is no reason or excuse to blatantly lie. I don't care whose side you are on. He was under oath. If he did lie, that disqualifies him. Too bad because all of these high school accusations were fluff (in my opinion) with no merit or at least not enough collaborating evidence to support him not getting the job. Lying under oath, unfortunately for him, disqualifies him for a lot more than SC seat.
I have defended him regarding these 35 year old accusations when he was a kid. However, I cannot defend him lying under oath (if he did, I have yet to see the texts). I have stated before, the other lies people are holding their hats on (ie.. him saying he did not drink too much, him saying he was of age his senior year) are all partisan pies thrown against he wall to rally up the base. Anyone with any legal background (or half a brain actually) can review his answers and clearly see he did not lie on those accounts.
Turns out, as well, that he and his supporters have been trying to buffer him against the Ramirez situation since well before the hearing even happened:
So the Clintons allowed him to sit on the DC District Court untouched in 2006 and waited for this moment, Ford has been in a sleeper cell since 2012 waiting to come forward.
Sure its a conspiracy and this claim coming from someone that is already a judge is rather incredible.
Falsely accusing someone of a hainice crime, and have the media pushing it to an elevated level of accusing someone of stealing a blade of grass, pushed as an armed robbery. In the court of public opinion, the guy is toast and must be hung. Turns out there is no evidence what so ever. They were just mad at them for something not even related. They ruined their career and their life, harming their entire family over Hatred and a false accusation that was believed and pushed by the media.
Then the other... a group of people are discussing a MAJOR news story being reported on. They are going to all the usual sources and see something odd. They discuss the oddities that are not adding up as the investigation is continuing. They are so interested they dig deep into their research of every aspect of the location and the people involved. Many wild assumptions and paths are discussed. One of those paths was that it didn't happen at all and was an illusion staged to fool people in a direction against logical thinking. Once it all comes out and they see the Media was staging the scene, like they have been caught, no one still thought it didn't happen.
What is worse?
Thinking, wondering and discussion of the evidence, or outright falsely accusing someone of a crime, where there is NO evidence what so ever?
Why are people still supporting this guy? It is abundantly clear that he is a liar (under oath) even if all the other allegations are groundless. Move on. There are plenty of conservative judges more suited for this appointment than Kavanaugh.
It will no doubt be more of the same. Accuse the nominee of crimes without any proof. Maybe the next nominee will be accused of child porn or trafficking drugs in elementary school. They better hope Ginsberg doesn't need to be replaced soon or they are going to look pretty stupid and petty when they play the same tactics again.
Are you saying that Ford accused the nominee without proof (which is true, with her motives not clear or perhaps a mix)?
Or that Feinstein brought forward the accusations without proof (which except for Ford's sworn testimony also is pretty much true, with their her motives not terribly out of sync with our increasingly partisan $hit-politics)?
Or there are Democratic cabals that will orchestrate criminal conspiracies?
These are important distinctions. False accusations do damage lives. It's for that reason that prosecutorial standards must be met prior to indictment. We've developed standards for libel and slander. HR departments work to develop guidelines. There are penalties for perjury. The "line" that is being crossed here is not that we are endangering the individual with lower standards for false witness. Not really. That's a Republican talking point.
For we've have accepted "false witness" in politics for decades, maybe since the Founding. Look what happened to McCain in the South Carolina primaries. What's new here is that traditionally the Supreme Court was held off limits. Appoint judges with known views, yes, but there remains the presumption they will consider evidence within the framework of the Constitution and other case law is they read it. Historically, up or down votes at confirmation have been on the merits or suitability of the nominee.
The REAL danger is not of a son being unfairly accused of sexual abuse but the increased politicalization of the Supreme Court. That process started with Bork (Democratic-led) ... continued with Garland (Republican-led) and now plays out with both questionable behavior by Feinstein and statements by Kavanaugh.
Not too many innocents here. Me, I flip flop but absent Mark Judge changing his statement a Senator EveryLady might well vote to confirm Kavanaugh after all this, although that would be a tough, tough vote. No doubt the actual vote largely will be on the party-line. Because of what's transpired Kavanaugh's name will never be cleared to the satisfaction of many.
I agree there is a "wrongness" to that but simply put do not know how to fix it. Denying Ford the right to come forward would not be the answer in our open democracy. (Sure, if assessed as an outright kook don't let her testify but I'm speaking more generally.)
In their own statement, the four men praised the U.S. justice system and the presumption of innocence:
"We are so grateful to the justice system for recognizing that we were the victims in this case," the statement reads. "We knew when the facts came out that the vicious allegations would be exposed as lies and our good names would be cleared. At this sensitive moment in our history, we believe that women should be respected and heard and believed. But as this case shows, it is also important to keep a critical eye on those willing to use the movement for their own selfish motives and remember that innocent until proven guilty is one of our country’s bedrock principles."
The accused were: Ali Badkoobehi, Poria Edalat, Saman Edalat and Sina Edalat.
This just happened yesterday. (emphasis mine)
Guess in addition to his calendar, Kavanaugh should have carried a video camera around with him at all times.
Falsely accusing someone of a hainice crime, and have the media pushing it to an elevated level of accusing someone of stealing a blade of grass, pushed as an armed robbery. In the court of public opinion, the guy is toast and must be hung. Turns out there is no evidence what so ever. They were just mad at them for something not even related. They ruined their career and their life, harming their entire family over Hatred and a false accusation that was believed and pushed by the media.
Then the other... a group of people are discussing a MAJOR news story being reported on. They are going to all the usual sources and see something odd. They discuss the oddities that are not adding up as the investigation is continuing. They are so interested they dig deep into their research of every aspect of the location and the people involved. Many wild assumptions and paths are discussed. One of those paths was that it didn't happen at all and was an illusion staged to fool people in a direction against logical thinking. Once it all comes out and they see the Media was staging the scene, like they have been caught, no one still thought it didn't happen.
What is worse?
Thinking, wondering and discussion of the evidence, or outright falsely accusing someone of a crime, where there is NO evidence what so ever?
There are two sides to the story but the McConnell is calling for a vote this week before the FBI investigation is complete. He hasn't changed, he wanted a vote even before Ford even testified. Truth is it doesn't matter what the FBI finds, if Kavanaugh murdered someone he will still push him through.
I always believed the 2nd accusers allegation that during a drinking game Kavanaugh may have pulled his pants down and exposed himself to her. Seems in line with many drinking games I participated in. I saw one to many penises I did not need to see lol I do not believe that in itself disqualifies him, however, if true that he was contacting his friends prior to the allegation coming out to see if they would back him up then he lied under oath. He said he did not know about the allegations until the New Yorker story. I have yet to see these texts to see if they prove he knew prior to when he said BUT if they do in fact prove that then he lied. Stupid too. Why lie if you knew you contacted many old friends?
Kavanaugh DID NOT lie about his drinking as he did say "sometimes he had too many beers" vague but admitting to drinking too much. Kavanaugh DID NOT lie about the drinking age. He never said he was 18 during his senior year summer he stated that some friends were so were legally able to obtain beer.
Not enough evidence to reject his nomination on Ford's allegation alone because too many holes and inconsistencies in her story. Swetnick is a whackjob. Her interview contradicts her sworn affidavit. She saw him "hanging around" the punch bowl. Please.
He didn’t lie under oath. He told the senators that he had heard about her calling people. Of course he did, they’re all friends. If someone called to tell you their old friend is trying to say you did this thing at a party, you’re not going to ask people to back you up?
This article includes parts of the transcript from his testimony that includes him saying he heard about her calling people to make some allegation prior to the story coming out in the New Yorker.
No, it's a reference to the fact that Kavanaugh was a key player in the Starr investigation, which went after Bill Clinton--and Kavanaugh was especially relentless in his pursuit to nail Clinton. In other words, Democrats are supposedly trying to get "revenge" for something that happened 20 years ago. This particular line of non-reasoning was, I'm sure, included as bait for the GOP base, most of whom--at FOX's relentless urging over the years--harbor an irrational hatred for anything "Clinton."
And the Balsey-Ford legal team are pure Clintonistas. Bromwich worked in the Clinton administration as the Justice Dept Inspector General along with other jobs for years and there are other DNC workers on the team as well.
Clintonistas:
Quote:
In 2016, attorneys Debra Katz and Lisa Banks were preparing to buy white pantsuits as "a sign of solidarity" with Hillary Clinton on her potential presidential inauguration day.
Not me. I've known a more than a few women (including one of my sisters) who got sexually assaulted by men on dates, and it was their own damn fault for being in those situations.
And I have re-watched Ford's testimony and she still comes across to me as mentally unbalanced. And I have known other people like her, and that's just their manner and personality and not because they ever suffered any traumas in their lives.
To say “it was there own damn fault” kind of sums up the whole debate.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
