US politics general thread

[cerebus]

Four. The count is now four.

Link?

 

[greg0205]

Link?

https://news.vice.com/en_us/article...ugh-accuser-is-taking-to-maryland-authorities

 

[Emjay]

Filibustering a vote by accusing your opponent of sexual assault. This is not going to end well for the Democrats.


https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/23/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-christine-blasey-ford-testify.html

Kavanaugh had exposed himself at a drunken dormitory party, thrust his penis in her face, and caused her to touch it without her consent as she pushed him away.

There is no way to defend against this. It's pretty vile behaviour if it's truthful. They should just can the nominee tbh. The Republicans are looking worse for not acting on this properly. Sadly, the Dems played the political game far better. You cannot defend yourself against allegations like this. Just look at all the virtue signalling happening.

Okay, so you're just going to ignore all the information in that post...

Anyway, so she's getting advise from someone who helped someone else who was previously railroaded in a sham hearing by Republicans. Can't imagine why...

And obviously it won't be a conservative/Repub lawyer, so where else would she go for advice?

Also, how's this for coincidence?

PR firm helped Whelan stoke half-baked Kavanaugh alibi

At least 2 GOP Senate staffers tweeted about this before it came out, and they've already admitted they don't care whether it's true or not, and won't call any other relevant witnesses. How obvious do they have to make it...?

I started writing out a response to you, but lost interest.

Lets call a spade a spade. The Dems are playing politics with this women's experience. He is dead in the water anyway. It is clear that the ends justify the means. I was naive to think that some here would actually be against this. It's going to be quite interesting to see what happens next, and how the Republicans are going to respond.

 

[cerebus]

There is no way to defend against this. It's pretty vile behaviour if it's truthful. They should just can the nominee tbh. The Republicans are looking worse for not acting on this properly. Sadly, the Dems played the political game far better. You cannot defend yourself against allegations like this. Just look at all the virtue signalling happening.



I started writing out a response to you, but lost interest.

Lets call a spade a spade. The Dems are playing politics with this women's experience. He is dead in the water anyway. It is clear that the ends justify the means. I was naive to think that some here would actually be against this. It's going to be quite interesting to see what happens next, and how the Republicans are going to respond.

I don't know what on earth you're talking about. These women have come out independently to testify of their own experiences. The Dems had nothing to do with it. The very least they deserve is a fair hearing and to be taken seriously. Ford doesn't have much corroborating evidence, but Ramirez has at least two classmates who heard of the event and can verify some of her details. By all accounts Kavanaugh was a drunken lout as a student and he did some very reprehensible things to women that are coming back to bite him. Don't blame it on anyone but him.

 

[OrbitalDawn]

Must be because the other accuser is fast losing all credibility. All so obvious a set up by the deranged left. Why did you forget to put this paragraph in, it's in the same article?

Are you asking why I "forgot" to link the article that I linked?

And then there's this totally exonerating paragraph...

Why did you forget this, Chris?!?!?

I'd go with the majority of people in this case. Also aren't alarm bells ringing that she herself admits she was inebriated at the time? This is even weaker than the Ford case, where the guy she claimed was in the room at the time of alleged assault does not recall the event happening.

The same Judge that wrote memoirs about how he was basically blackout drunk for that entire period of his life? And mysteriously scrubbed much of his writing about this stuff?

This Judge?

Kavanaugh Friend Mark Judge Reportedly Admitted to ‘Taking Turns’ Having Sex With Drunk Girl

The same Judge who refuses to testify and who Republicans are refusing to call for some obscure reason?

I love how Kav has a detailed calendar from 1983 that shows every party he ever went to.

Soooooo convenient. I am glad that this is normal behaviour.

Yeah, weird how he's randomly got these calendars at hand, yet during the confirmation hearing he "couldn't recall" almost anything they asked him, including whether he spoke to people at Trump's lawyer's firm, where he has many, many friends?

I started writing out a response to you, but lost interest.

Lets call a spade a spade. The Dems are playing politics with this women's experience. He is dead in the water anyway. It is clear that the ends justify the means. I was naive to think that some here would actually be against this. It's going to be quite interesting to see what happens next, and how the Republicans are going to respond.

Except none of this happened to Gorsuch, despite his seat being given to Trump for nomination was even more egregious.

And the 'playing politics' card is quite rich, given how Republicans held a seat open for almost a year for literally no reason other than 'playing politics'. Not even giving Garland a hearing, much less a vote. They also filibustered an Obama nominee until she died explicitly because it would hurt Obama.

 

[OrbitalDawn]

I said the NYT thing had Bill Shine all over it. Pretty sure it's a "in case of emergency, break glass" plan to provide cover for a Rosenstein firing and/or distract from the Kav confirmation.

That said, as the day goes on, it looks like a firing or resignation seem less and less likely... I think Axios might have had some of that NYT Kool-Aid too.

EDIT: And Sarah Slanders just put out a statement saying nothing to see here, Rod and Donnie Treason have a meeting Thursday to discuss the NYT article.
DOUBLE EDIT: Thursday, right around the time Dr Ford testifies I presume. Obvious smoke and mirrors are obvious.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2018/09/trump-wanted-to-nuke-rosenstein-to-save-kavanaughs-bacon

According to a source briefed on Trump’s thinking, Trump decided that firing Rosenstein would knock Kavanaugh out of the news, potentially saving his nomination and Republicans’ chances for keeping the Senate. “The strategy was to try and do something really big,” the source said. The leak about Rosenstein’s resignation could have been the result, and it certainly had the desired effect of driving Kavanaugh out of the news for a few hours.

 

[OrbitalDawn]

Trump: No statehood for Puerto Rico with critics in office

Absurd authoritarianism.

 

[OrbitalDawn]

Two Kavanaugh Allies Withdraw From Statement Disputing New Yorker Allegation

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh's Yale roommate says he believes second accuser

"It is from this experience that I concluded that although Brett was normally reserved, he was a notably heavy drinker, even by the standards of the time, and that he became aggressive and belligerent when he was very drunk. I did not observe the specific incident in question, but I do remember Brett frequently drinking excessively and becoming incoherently drunk."

Kavanaugh’s Yearbook Page Is ‘Horrible, Hurtful’ to a Woman It Named

Brett Kavanaugh’s page in his high school yearbook offers a glimpse of the teenage years of the man who is now President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee: lots of football, plenty of drinking, parties at the beach. Among the reminiscences about sports and booze is a mysterious entry: “Renate Alumnius.”

The word “Renate” appears at least 14 times in Georgetown Preparatory School’s 1983 yearbook, on individuals’ pages and in a group photo of nine football players, including Judge Kavanaugh, who were described as the “Renate Alumni.” It is a reference to Renate Schroeder, then a student at a nearby Catholic girls’ school.

Two of Judge Kavanaugh’s classmates say the mentions of Renate were part of the football players’ unsubstantiated boasting about their conquests.

“They were very disrespectful, at least verbally, with Renate,” said Sean Hagan, a Georgetown Prep student at the time, referring to Judge Kavanaugh and his teammates. “I can’t express how disgusted I am with them, then and now.”

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

Four. The count is now four.

Four, four hundred, doesn't matter in the least until at least one has actual evidence.

Hearsay != evidence
Shouting loudly != evidence
Having 24/7 news coverage fitting the lefty agenda != evidence

Come back when there is actual evidence, until then have fun counting the number of false accusers, the number really makes zero difference.

 

[NarrowBandFtw]

Trump: No statehood for Puerto Rico with critics in office
Absurd authoritarianism.

Absurd to call something so trivial "authoritarian" yes. He has declared his position, nothing more, he hasn't acted, signed any legislation or executive orders, he hasn't refused to sign new legislation, he has done absolutely nothing but speak his mind.

"Authoritarian"

 

[rietrot]

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-09-24/real-red-wave-republican-sentiment-soars-record-high

With stocks at record highs and President Trump gloating at the "record strength" of the US economy, it appears confidence is coming back as sentiment among Republicans reached an all-time record high in the latest Bloomberg Consumer Comfort index.
The peak spread in confidence between Democrats and Republicans occurred in July 2004 (heading into George W Bush's 2nd term election)... President Trump is currently very close to that peak...
Additionally, Gallup reports forty-five percent of Americans now have a favorable view of the Republican Party, a nine-point gain from last September's 36%. It is the party's most positive image since it registered 47% in January 2011, shortly after taking control of the House in the 2010 midterm elections. Forty-four percent give the Democratic Party a favorable rating.

 

[Tman*]

Clinton will win and a Blue wave is coming ~ MSM

I think I have heard this before?

 

[Emjay]

And the 'playing politics' card is quite rich, given how Republicans held a seat open for almost a year for literally no reason other than 'playing politics'. Not even giving Garland a hearing, much less a vote. They also filibustered an Obama nominee until she died explicitly because it would hurt Obama.

Like I said. No one wins. We are now using someone's actions as a minor against them. I am sure both sides have done this countless times. If there was really an attempted rape, there should be a case opened with the Maryland authorities, and it should be investigated properly by the correct authorities, and both should testify in front of Congress without either person trying to dictate how the process should be dealt with. Senator Feinstein should also testify as to why the timelines played out in that manner that it did.

Love Trey Gowdy. He goes into a little more detail as to the FBI's role. Sad he retired.

 

[Emjay]

I don't know what on earth you're talking about. These women have come out independently to testify of their own experiences. The Dems had nothing to do with it. The very least they deserve is a fair hearing and to be taken seriously. Ford doesn't have much corroborating evidence, but Ramirez has at least two classmates who heard of the event and can verify some of her details. By all accounts Kavanaugh was a drunken lout as a student and he did some very reprehensible things to women that are coming back to bite him. Don't blame it on anyone but him.

I will say it again. Hearsay is NOT evidence! I don't blame anyone as both are credible. How can you even make an assessement when Ford has not done any interviews? Kavanaugh has already testified under oath. I am not saying no to a fair hearing. Please tell me where I said that?

And what is the point of a hearing when in your mind Kavanaugh is already guilty? It's really just a formality, and if there are hearings and investigations, and they find nothing, it will be the Republicans "filibustering" or "railroading" the process.

Amy Coney Barrett is going to be so much fun. She is pro life and religious. She has 7 kids, 2 adopted from Haiti, and she went to an all girl's school.

 

[cerebus]

I will say it again. Hearsay is NOT evidence! I don't blame anyone as both are credible. How can you even make an assessement when Ford has not done any interviews? Kavanaugh has already testified under oath. I am not saying no to a fair hearing. Please tell me where I said that?

You're putting words in my mouth. I'm saying that you're blaming the dems for this whole Kavanaugh abortion, when really the blame is squarely at Kavanaugh's feet.

And what is the point of a hearing when in your mind Kavanaugh is already guilty?

Sometimes it seems like you're making a point but when I look closer I just can't figure out what you're trying to say. What's the point of a hearing? So the accused and the accuser can have a chance to defend themselves. Kavanaugh has basically accused Blasey Ford and Ramirez of outright lying and conducting a smear campaign; does he get to be the only one whose voice is heard in all this?

 

[Emjay]

You're putting words in my mouth. I'm saying that you're blaming the dems for this whole Kavanaugh abortion, when really the blame is squarely at Kavanaugh's feet.



Sometimes it seems like you're making a point but when I look closer I just can't figure out what you're trying to say. What's the point of a hearing? So the accused and the accuser can have a chance to defend themselves. Kavanaugh has basically accused Blasey Ford and Ramirez of outright lying and conducting a smear campaign; does he get to be the only one whose voice is heard in all this?

My point is that guilt is already pre-determined even though Ford has not testified, nor has there been an investigation. Look at your own bias. You once again state Kavanaugh was guilty. The guilt of this guy is drawn down to the politics.

My second point is that you will never accept a not-guilty outcome as you are looking for confirmation bias, so there is really no need for all this to play out.

 

[cerebus]

My point is that guilt is already pre-determined even though Ford has not testified, nor has there been an investigation. Look at your own bias. You once again state Kavanaugh was guilty.

That is simply my response to your own statement above:

There is no way to defend against this. It's pretty vile behaviour if it's truthful. They should just can the nominee tbh.

After which you tried to shift blame from Kavanaugh (if he is guilty) to the Dems:

Sadly, the Dems played the political game far better

And my point is, if he is guilty, the Dems are not to blame. Actually the Democrats have had very little to do with this whole unfolding process of accusations against Kavanaugh. It's been led by media figures like Ronan Farrow. The Democrats could and should have been more assertive to obstruct Kavanaugh until the truth can be elicited from a legitimate inquiry at state or FBI level.

My second point is that you will never accept a not-guilty outcome as you are looking for confirmation bias, so there is really no need for all this to play out.

So you don't want a hearing then?

 

[Cray]

I love how Kav has a detailed calendar from 1983 that shows every party he ever went to.

Soooooo convenient. I am glad that this is normal behaviour.

Never mind the sexual assault stuff, the fact that a Judge thinks that a blank calendar is proof of anything is for more concerning...

 

[konfab]

And my point is, if he is guilty, the Dems are not to blame. Actually the Democrats have had very little to do with this whole unfolding process of accusations against Kavanaugh. It's been led by media figures like Ronan Farrow. The Democrats could and should have been more assertive to obstruct Kavanaugh until the truth can be elicited from a legitimate inquiry at state or FBI level.

Yeah, that is why they left it to the last possible moment instead of bringing it up in June...

 

[cerebus]

Yeah, that is why they left it to the last possible moment instead of bringing it up in June...

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...llegations-timeline-supreme-court/1408073002/

Timeline:

July 30
Christine Blasey Ford, a psychology professor in California, quietly sends a letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, the top Democrat on the Senate Judiciary Committee. In the letter, she alleges that Kavanaugh physically and sexually assaulted her while they were in high school. Feinstein does not release the letter publicly, at Ford's request.

Sept. 12
Feinstein sends Ford's letter to the FBI after several days of rumors about its existence leaking out from Democratic senators. The bureau puts the letter in Kavanaugh's background check file but does not launch a criminal investigation, in part because the statute of limitations on the alleged sexual assault expired years earlier.

Sept. 14
Ford's allegations against Kavanaugh first publicly surface in a story by The New Yorker magazine. The bare bones story does not include Ford's name.

Just to be clear on the facts.