|
Post by Chesapeake on Sept 27, 2018 19:46:09 GMT -5
Here's something to conjure with: Kavanaugh looked a little queasy (I thought) when one of his friends on the Judiciary Committee asked if the crime of sexual abuse wasn't one that had no statute of limitations in the jurisdiction where he grew up. His friend was trying to be helpful by suggesting that if the attack really did occur, why wouldn't Ford have reported it to the police by now? I'm thinking that Kavanaugh already has to be considering that, regardless of whether he's confirmed or not, Ford could still lodge such a charge.
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Sept 27, 2018 19:50:59 GMT -5
I'm tired of the whole thing, but I think that after her testimony he won't be confirmed. The old, white and male Republicans on the Judiciary Committee aren't doing themselves a favor by sympathizing with him. As the old western saying goes, when your horse is dead, get off. They have ample time to confirm another conservative to the seat.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Sept 27, 2018 19:54:39 GMT -5
Here's something to conjure with: Kavanaugh looked a little queasy (I thought) when one of his friends on the Judiciary Committee asked if the crime of sexual abuse wasn't one that had no statute of limitations in the jurisdiction where he grew up. His friend was trying to be helpful by suggesting that if the attack really did occur, why wouldn't Ford have reported it to the police by now? I'm thinking that Kavanaugh already has to be considering that, regardless of whether he's confirmed or not, Ford could still lodge such a charge. The only thing making this stick right now is that there are no standards of evidence that have to be met. And there IS NO evidence. He doesn't give a shit about being convicted of anything, mostly because he hasn't done anything. The reason he looked queasy is because the whole thing is vindictive horseshit that Democrat's should be ashamed of and has torn him to the core.
|
|
|
Post by Chesapeake on Sept 27, 2018 20:03:34 GMT -5
If he hasn't done anything, why doesn't he insist on calling the FBI back in? They gather information under oath, and report, and the committee makes of it what it will. Today he repeatedly refused to ask for it, which to my mind pretty clearly indicates he has something to hide.
I agree with Flake. They need to put this horse out of its misery. I'm sure they could find a nice conservative woman who would be bulletproof.
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Sept 27, 2018 20:10:41 GMT -5
As for the Democrats' culpability, does anyone remember the name Merrick Garland? I wish our national politics were beyond payback, but it's sandbox stuff regardless of my wishes, and this is what it looks like.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Sept 27, 2018 20:11:03 GMT -5
If he hasn't done anything, why doesn't he insist on calling the FBI back in? They gather information under oath, and report, and the committee makes of it what it will. Today he repeatedly refused to ask for it, which to my mind pretty clearly indicates he has something to hide. I agree with Flake. They need to put this horse out of its misery. I'm sure they could find a nice conservative woman who would be bulletproof. You apparently also have no idea what the FBI does. He's passed 6 legimate FBI background checks and she still can't remember where or when this hienous event happened.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Sept 27, 2018 20:12:50 GMT -5
As for the Democrats' culpability, does anyone remember the name Merrick Garland? I wish our national politics were beyond payback, but it's sandbox stuff regardless of my wishes, and this is what it looks like. Merrick Garland's entire reputation wasn't destroyed. Period. He just didn't get a hearing. A political gamble that paid off.
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Sept 27, 2018 20:15:44 GMT -5
"Merrick Garland's entire reputation wasn't destroyed. Period.
"He just didn't get a hearing. A political gamble that paid off."
Peter, I've met you and like you, but I don't think the distinction persuades me.
|
|
|
Post by RickW on Sept 27, 2018 20:16:30 GMT -5
Here's something to conjure with: Kavanaugh looked a little queasy (I thought) when one of his friends on the Judiciary Committee asked if the crime of sexual abuse wasn't one that had no statute of limitations in the jurisdiction where he grew up. His friend was trying to be helpful by suggesting that if the attack really did occur, why wouldn't Ford have reported it to the police by now? I'm thinking that Kavanaugh already has to be considering that, regardless of whether he's confirmed or not, Ford could still lodge such a charge. The only thing making this stick right now is that there are no standards of evidence that have to be met. And there IS NO evidence. He doesn't give a shit about being convicted of anything, mostly because he hasn't done anything. The reason he looked queasy is because the whole thing is vindictive horseshit that Democrat's should be ashamed of and has torn him to the core. So you genuinely think that she’s lying? She hallucinated? Or that if it did just happen, boys will be boys? The democrats are at all fault for not bringing this up the second they heard about it, not waiting until the last minute so that they could delay the vote and try to get it held after the election. But I can’t see how, seeing who she is, her career, the sheer hell she has gone through since coming forward, you can believe that she somehow made this up for political ends. Everyone needs to decide that if she is correct, was what happened okay? And that is what is truly frightening, that everyone will decide that, that that decision will be cut clearly down party lines. I’m pretty sure as Don said, they could pull up someone just fine, pretty quick.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Sept 27, 2018 20:19:18 GMT -5
"Merrick Garland's entire reputation wasn't destroyed. Period. "He just didn't get a hearing. A political gamble that paid off." Peter, I've met you and like you, but I don't think the distinction persuades me. Tell me who accused Garland of rape?
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Sept 27, 2018 20:30:40 GMT -5
The only thing making this stick right now is that there are no standards of evidence that have to be met. And there IS NO evidence. He doesn't give a shit about being convicted of anything, mostly because he hasn't done anything. The reason he looked queasy is because the whole thing is vindictive horseshit that Democrat's should be ashamed of and has torn him to the core. So you genuinely think that she’s lying? She hallucinated? Or that if it did just happen, boys will be boys? The democrats are at all fault for not bringing this up the second they heard about it, not waiting until the last minute so that they could delay the vote and try to get it held after the election. But I can’t see how, seeing who she is, her career, the sheer hell she has gone through since coming forward, you can believe that she somehow made this up for political ends. Everyone needs to decide that if she is correct, was what happened okay? And that is what is truly frightening, that everyone will decide that, that that decision will be cut clearly down party lines. I’m pretty sure as Don said, they could pull up someone just fine, pretty quick. I live down the road from UVa, where that reporter woman from Rolling Stone had some woman that was raped by someone at a party that didn't seem to have ever happened. Oh, and there's the whole Duke lacrosse team that apparently gang raped a woman and got kicked out of school where they remained even after she admitted she lied. This woman couldn't get a warrant. Time to stand up and ram it down these idiots throats.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Sept 27, 2018 20:39:45 GMT -5
In case we forget:
|
|
|
Post by Village Idiot on Sept 27, 2018 21:04:26 GMT -5
Speaking of horses, I'm sure Trump has a stable of people he could nominate that his party would be pleased with. I'd say move one to one of those.
|
|
|
Post by Dan McLaughlin on Sept 27, 2018 21:06:23 GMT -5
Why is it so easy to believe men that have been abused by clergy and no one believes a woman?
She is making the allegations, not "democrats."
Sheesh. Here I go again. See you in a week or two after I get trashed for my opinion again.
Have good ones.
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Sept 27, 2018 21:09:19 GMT -5
Dan, nobody else gets punished for speaking their minds. You shouldn't and I doubt that you will. If you do, ignore it.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Sept 27, 2018 21:10:06 GMT -5
Speaking of horses, I'm sure Trump has a stable of people he could nominate that his party would be pleased with. I'd say move one to one of those. Why? Democrats have no morals or decency. They'll make a mockery of whoever's nominated. If it's a woman, she'll end up being a pedophile with a taste for little (Democrat) boys.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Sept 27, 2018 21:17:57 GMT -5
Why is it so easy to believe men that have been abused by clergy and no one believes a woman? Um, you haven't followed the #MeToo movement? How many women have been believed there?
|
|
|
Post by millring on Sept 27, 2018 21:18:44 GMT -5
So you genuinely think that she’s lying? She hallucinated? I don't know. I tended to believe her testimony. I REALLY believed Kavanaugh's testimony. It was considerably more well-considered and appeared considerably more factual. So, at least to that extent I was left contemplating the legal angle of it all -- that it truly came down to he said she said. And in that regard, the fact of the way the Democrats manipulated the entire thing doesn't sit well. They knew the game wasn't a legal one (in fact, they knew from the experience of the past several decades of success-by-scandal that accusations -- not proof -- were all they required) and they cynically calculated using the woman for a strategic stall and did everything against her expressed wishes to remain anonymous -- a request that could have been granted if pursued immediately. I also "got it". The Democrats made another calculation: That everyone would buy into their "Just ask for an FBI investigation". It worked on a rhetorical level because Kavanaugh knew as well as they did that no matter how convinced he might be that the FBI wouldn't turn over any new evidence, ALL that was required for the Democrats to win was for the investigation to be called for. That's precisely why the Democrats played it this way. It's precisely why they timed this information to come out at the 11th hour. They only needed the stall. And they also knew that if they pressed the issue of an FBI investigation, of course Kavanaugh would know their game....but he had to either refuse to play it and take the gamble that he would lose in the court of public opinion -- armed as the Democrats are with the Washington press corp doing their spin for them....or lose by taking the bait, calling for an FBI investigation, and lose the entire war. He chose to sacrifice his bishop. He had to. He looked stupid and uncooperative doing so, but he had to. If he called for an investigation he lost the whole thing. The Democrats played a canny game. With the press on their side and actually playing a huge role in it (your ol' employers at the WaPo doing the heavy lifting to out Ford for them and simultaneously shelter them), their chances of success were pretty good. If your Tu quoque clock doesn't go back further than Garland, then your Tu quoque clock is as tribal as you are. Where I suspect Kavanaugh lost it was with overplaying the beer thing. Seriously. Though the FBI investigation thing was the most obviously awkward thing for him to handle, I could at least understand his calculation in answering as he did. The beer thing, no. It again made Ford's story more believable. I don't know whether or not I believe her. I doubt anyone believes she's not a Democrat. That doesn't make her less truthful, but it does, in this over-the-top, supercharged political atmosphere, make her motivated. She is now a superstar. She won't ever have to work another day in her life (though, truth be told, she probably didn't need to anyway, and the offer of significance was probably of greater temptation than that of wealth). And from the histrionics demonstrated around the trial, I'd say the Kavanaugh's are in far more danger from the unhinged left we saw on obvious display every day of the hearing than Ford is from the unhinged right. So, though it's clear that the Democrats used her and didn't care about what that meant for her future, if they did give it a second thought, I'm sure they looked at it realistically and realized they just won her the lottery. At least, I'm betting that's what they told themselves as they and the press were planning to out her at the 11th hour. I do believe there is no way Kavanaugh would ever even be brought to a trial on the evidence given today. No way. Not ever. But this wasn't a trial. And this is a divided country. And most of America isn't capable of thinking beyond their tribe. I thought all the old politicians were on the pathetic side of reason and rhetoric. But Sasse came off the best speaker of the day.
|
|
|
Post by Village Idiot on Sept 27, 2018 21:19:13 GMT -5
Why? Democrats have no morals or decency. They'll make a mockery of whoever's nominated. If it's a woman, she'll end up being a pedophile with a taste for little (Democrat) boys.[/quote] Both parties do that. No side is perfect.
|
|
|
Post by aquaduct on Sept 27, 2018 21:23:25 GMT -5
Why? Democrats have no morals or decency. They'll make a mockery of whoever's nominated. If it's a woman, she'll end up being a pedophile with a taste for little (Democrat) boys. Both parties do that. No side is perfect. [/quote] Well, in that case it's timefor Republican's to show some spine and call thier bluff.
|
|