Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

SCOTUS: No longer content with stacking, they're now dealing from the bottom of the deck


Burgold

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Kilmer17 said:

I'll just sit back and patiently await the full investigation and it's findings.

 

I'm really confused about what most of the left-wingers here are wanting.  Do you folks want an investigation or not?  Not do you think there will or should be one, but do YOU want one?  And if it's limited in scope, why and where is it to be limited?  

I say we investigate EVERYTHING from both parties... or, I can just tell you what the results are going to be if you want. It's all pretty obvious. Sort of like if we knew everything that went on in every major college football program. They'd all have some shady dealings but a few would be outrageously horrific.

 

The democratic party has problems. The GOP is an absolute ****ing disgrace.

  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

I say we investigate EVERYTHING from both parties... or, I can just tell you what the results are going to be if you want. It's all pretty obvious. Sort of like if we knew everything that went on in every major college football program. They'd all have some shady dealings but a few would be outrageously horrific.

 

The democratic party has problems. The GOP is an absolute ****ing disgrace.

I think the findings would be something akin to

 

Democrats guilty of jaywalking and three counts of littering

Republicans guilty of serial murder, child interment, kidnapping, and rape

 

Soon followed by conservatives saying... See, both the parties are the same. They were both found guilty.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

If discussing the flu, then you shouldn't always have to point out the cancer also.  

 

As a conservative and being strongly against the current GOP, I get frustrated when I say something negative about the Left and have to always include a statement that the GOP is worse.  Sometimes you should be able to acknowledge that both sides suck at something and be able to discuss the issue alone.

 

I have no problem at all saying that the left and Democrats have issues and have done bad things, nor do I have a problem with them being called out on it; I think it's necessary. What I have a problem with is when people try to defend something really awful that the Republicans or the right are doing or are at the very lest implicitly condoning by saying "well both sides suck" when things the "other side" has done really and truly pale in comparison. At that point IMO it has nothing to do with honestly wanting to have a conversation about what could be done better by x, y, or z groups and everything to do with throwing **** at the wall in order to obfuscate and deflect.

Edited by mistertim
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

I’m perfectly happy for it all to be exposed.  I’m not the one dismissing the idea. 

You seem to be on a crusade after getting a "yes."

 

We have agreed that we want investigations as long as it's not political theater. We also (or I can speak for myself) ...I want those found guilty to suffer consequences whether that's Kavanaugh, Grassely, the GOP, the accusers, Feinstein, the Democrats or anyone else who has misbehaved.

 

The reality is that as voters, we should want what's best for the country. That ought to stand above party affiliation. If my party does wrong I wanted it rooted out. If your party does wrong I want the same. If your party does well I benefit. If my party does well you benefit. This sportization of politics is mindblowingly stupid, tiresome, and destructive. It has led to a perjurer and unfit man to sit on the Supreme Court just so "a side" could win.

 

You and all the other conservatives in this thread (probably excluding twa) said that Kavanaugh should be withdrawn or his nomination should be pulled because he had so much wrong with him in terms of temperament, credible accusations, and his own criminal perjury that he could never be voted through. As expected, team Trumps everything. The only reason Kavanaugh was voted through is because he is an impartial, biased, and wholey partisan person and that's what the GOP desired.

 

I still contend that previous to Trump every other Administration would have, for the best interests of the country, pulled the Kavanaugh nomination. We are worse off as a nation for having him on the bench.

  • Like 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Burgold said:

 

I still contend that previous to Trump every other Administration would have, for the best interests of the country, pulled the Kavanaugh nomination. We are worse off as a nation for having him on the bench.

 

I think this literally has no meaning to the Trump admin. It's like in Deadpool 2 when Wade tells Weasel he wants to be more selfless and Weasel has to explain that when he asked "yeah, but what does that even mean?" he meant that he literally didn't know what the word selfless meant. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/12/2018 at 11:55 AM, mcsluggo said:

 

honestly... i can stay friends with people that support the current republican party.   but i have lost serious respect for them, both in my opinion of their ethics and my opinion of their intelligence.   

 

and (if it were the case) losing that much respect for my spouse would be a very serious thing

 

 

(fortunately, i chose wisely, and my spouse is much too ethical and intelligent for that ****)

 

To be clear, this was not my own marriage, but it is someone in my extended family.  Just two people with wildly different views who have gotten older, less tolerant of each other, arguing a lot more, and this I guess finally did it.  To be honest, they probably should have separated years ago.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think what is most frustrating to me is that it seems like more and more people simply don't vote on the actual issues, which when I was younger, always assumed was the #1 reason to vote for a candidate.


When people talk about "America needs to come together" I feel like on more issues than they will admit, they are united already, or at least in enough agreement that there is always a clear candidate over the other that will work and fight for those issues, however so much other BS gets thrown into the mix that by the time people are at the voting booth they have all these other ridiculous reasons they can't/won't vote for the other person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/12/2018 at 11:20 AM, Kilmer17 said:

I'll just sit back and patiently await the full investigation and it's findings.

 

I'm really confused about what most of the left-wingers here are wanting.  Do you folks want an investigation or not?  Not do you think there will or should be one, but do YOU want one?  And if it's limited in scope, why and where is it to be limited?  

 

1) i want a full investigation, too.  throw the wolves at anyone on either side that is shown to have conspired to obstruct justice in this investigation (and lack thereof)

2) chances are that much of it will boil down as inconclusive ...from a prosecutor standpoint.   much "he said/she said" is inherent in any sort of harassment action (by DEFINITION.. harassers get to control when they harass, and usually choose to set up situations where it is hard to bust them .. while on the other hand false accusers ALSO get to set up the fake scenario for false accusations, to their own advantage)  as a result these types of accusations are  ALWAYS very hard to prove one way or another beyond a reasonable doubt.   However, "beyond a reasonable doubt" is NOT the burden of proof in a job interview.

3) in any case, i think the multitude of obvious mistruths (OUTSIDE of the unverifiable hesaid/shesaid portions of discussion) and the temperament he displayed were already EASILY sufficient to not hire a candidate in ANY job interview, much less such a lofty, important, and lifelong appointment such as this one.   

 

is that clear?    

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, visionary said:
Tweet about Grassley...

He is an old, out of touch, man that has no business being on any committee outside of the retiree village ROA, much less in Congress.

 

35 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

I think what is most frustrating to me is that it seems like more and more people simply don't vote on the actual issues, which when I was younger, always assumed was the #1 reason to vote for a candidate.


When people talk about "America needs to come together" I feel like on more issues than they will admit, they are united already, or at least in enough agreement that there is always a clear candidate over the other that will work and fight for those issues, however so much other BS gets thrown into the mix that by the time people are at the voting booth they have all these other ridiculous reasons they can't/won't vote for the other person.

I posit that 80% of voters enter a booth and vote based on one simple criteria - party affiliation. They don't care about anything else.

Edited by Popeman38
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/senate-report-finds-apos-no-091359636.html

 

 

Senate Report Finds 'No Credible Evidence' of Sexual Misconduct by Kavanaugh

 

he Republican-led Senate Judiciary Committee issued a 414-page summary reportSaturday night on its investigations into alleged sexual abuse by then-Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, concluding that none of the incidents alleged during his confirmation hearing had any merit.
“This was a serious and thorough investigation that left no stone unturned in our pursuit of the facts,” said Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman of the committee. “In the end, there was no credible evidence to support the allegations against the nominee.”The report focused primarily on the high-profile accusations by Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who claimed Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her in the early 1980s at a high school party. In addition to her explosive public testimony on Sept. 27, the committee contacted 17 people with information relevant to her allegations.

 

 

Not really that interesting.  Pretty much what we all expected from the Senate investigation.  We'll get more details when reporters or a Dem lead House investigates it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...