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

[DogofWar1]

23 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

My uncle the conspiracy nut told me the other day that Ford is a GOP plant.

 

I laughed.   Then paused for a second..........

Crazier **** has happened.

 

Donald Trump is President, anything can happen.

 

Realistically, Brett has a lot more problems than your average nominee.  I mean, look how smooth Gorsuch's hearings went compared to this.

 

I think either there was a gross underestimation of his problems and how strongly Dems would go after him, or Trump hand picked him for reasons and the rest of the GOP has to go along despite knowing deep down he had these skeletons in his closet.

 

I keep coming back to his debt.  The explanations offered for 1) how he got into such debt, and 2) how he got out, have been weak at best.  No itemizing, no names of people who paid him back for tickets, no none of that.

 

Makes me think there's blood in the water.  Maybe its ketchup.  But the fact that everyone in the GOP keeps INSISTING its ketchup and to ignore the body shaped object we keep seeing just beyond the next wave makes one wonder.

[Popeman38]

6 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

You're not going to get it.

The only thing you're going to get are the trail of indictments, convictions, and cooperating witnesses.

We won't know his direction until he's done.

This is the guy who took down John Gotti, he's not about to start playing loose with his cards now.

That's my point. Mueller has been tight lipped, and all the stuff on the internet is speculation. So saying to anyone you are listening to the wrong source is foolish. Saying that Donald Trump is definitively under criminal investigation is foolish. We all think he is the target of a criminal investigation. All signs point that he should be the target of a criminal investigation. But none of us know he is the source. So saying he is illegitimate or that he shouldn't be allowed to nominate people? 

[The Evil Genius]

4 hours ago, RedskinsFan44 said:

Lets not forget that the Republicans magically had a letter from 60 of his classmates ready to drop the second this was revealed. It's not like they were blindsided by the allegation, and it seems like their impulse was to automatically defend Kavanaugh rather than investigate.

 

3 hours ago, twa said:

 

Are you calling the women that put it together liars?

 

Tbf,  having read more about how the list came to be, I have no problems in believing it to be spontaneous and legit. That said, it has been exposed as questionable because at least one person has admitted to not knowing Kavanaugh and signing the support letter.

Edited September 20, 2018 by The Evil Genius

[justice98]

36 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

Here is a question just out of curiosity.

 

For the purpose of this, let's say everyone in this thread is 50/50 on whether Kavanaugh sexually assaulted Ford. Split right down the middle evenly. 

 

Would you personally be okay with basing your final decision off just the testimony of those two? Let's say at the end of their testimony you still haven't heard anything to move you from the 50/50 probability?

 

1) If you feel there was a 50% chance it happened, are you still comfortable voting Kavanaugh in.

 

2)If you feel there was a 50% chance it happened, are you comfortable making a decision either way without attempting to gather more information?

 

I am asking this because as of now it looks like we're basically going to get the testimony of two people.  We know what they are going to say (for the most part).  I am curious how all of us would proceed in this situation.

 

My position is just dont make a decision until you get more information where it's not 50/50.  

 

Frankly, Kavanaugh should be pushing for an investigation more than Ford, if he's telling the truth.

Edited September 20, 2018 by justice98

[RedskinsFan44]

3 hours ago, twa said:

 

Are you calling the women that put it together liars?

Never said that, though I saw some had recanted support after Ford came forward somewhere.

[twa]

1 minute ago, justice98 said:

 

My position is just dont make a decision until you get more information.  

 

Frankly, Kavanaugh should be pushing for an investigation more than Ford, if he's telling the truth.

 

That is reasonable, though if she rejects testifying or cannot provide more I think the vote should be held.

 

I think Kav should encourage her to report it to the police

Just now, RedskinsFan44 said:

Never said that, though I saw some had recanted support after Ford came forward somewhere.

 

 

Women can be fickle.?

[AsburySkinsFan]

9 minutes ago, Popeman38 said:

That's my point. Mueller has been tight lipped, and all the stuff on the internet is speculation. So saying to anyone you are listening to the wrong source is foolish. Saying that Donald Trump is definitively under criminal investigation is foolish. We all think he is the target of a criminal investigation. All signs point that he should be the target of a criminal investigation. But none of us know he is the source. So saying he is illegitimate or that he shouldn't be allowed to nominate people? 

I've been saying he's illegitimate from the start, so don't ask me.

I think the trail of breadcrumbs that is the list of indictments, convictions, guilty pleas, and cooperating witnesses has a general direction at this point, and all roads lead to Rome as they say. Unless, Trump decides to sacrifice his son, but then Trump had better have some serious plausible deniability.

Do I think Trump should be allowed to make nominations? Hell no, I think once he's out we should do an entire reset to where things were the day before he first lied under oath...ummm I mean took the oath.

[The Evil Genius]

So Kav likes his clerk's that look a certain way, huh? Yeah, that's not a little creepy.

 

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5ba2f051e4b0181540d9e2bb/amp?ncid=engmodushpmg00000004

 

In other news...

 

 

 

Edited September 20, 2018 by The Evil Genius

[Sacks 'n' Stuff]

4 hours ago, Popeman38 said:

Mueller’s team hasnt said anything publicly about anyone being under investigation. Everything reported on what Mueller is doing is leaked to the media by people on either side of the issue, but with no direct knowledge of what is actually happening. It’s all speculative. Mueller has been running the tightest ship in the history of Washington, DC. 

Alright fine but everything else that was speculative yet very obvious has been proven true. I'm willing to bet large sums of money that he is under investigation.

[Kilmer17]

Kavanaugh denies it.  Ford is the one claiming it happened but wont give any more details.  What exactly should Kavanaugh ask the authorities to investigate?  I suppose he could file a complaint against her for slander and they could investigate that.

[Dan T.]

Some may find this article, about a high school cheerleader in Arlington, Texas who reported a sexual assault, to be instructive as to why more women EDIT don't report, EDIT  didn't report in years past.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/opinions/arlington-texas/?utm_term=.8cf9b240b900

Edited September 20, 2018 by Dan T.

[AsburySkinsFan]

22 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

So Kav likes his clerk's that look a certain way, huh? Yeah, that's not a little creepy.

 

https://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/us_5ba2f051e4b0181540d9e2bb/amp?ncid=engmodushpmg00000004

 

In other news...

 

 

That quote of him saying, "What happens at Georgetown Prep, stays at Georgetown Prep" is going to come back and bite him.

Seriously, why do all of these junior masters of the universe feel the perverse need to join one of these secret societies with other junior masters of the universe?

It's like they are living out some pubescent cartoon of what it means to be a man.

[twa]

Yes reporting crimes can be problematic, so can false allegations......we can list examples all day long of both.

 

Both can be decided in court IF REPORTED, the other in the court of public opinion if you choose to avoid the legal avenue.

 

If you choose the court of public opinion ya need to be prepared for different opinions as well.

[AsburySkinsFan]

8 minutes ago, Dan T. said:

Some may find this article, about a high school cheerleader in Arlington, Texas who reported a sexual assault, to be instructive as to why more women don't report.

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2018/opinions/arlington-texas/?utm_term=.8cf9b240b900

Yeah, I'm not even going to read that article. I don't have the stomach this morning.

1 minute ago, twa said:

Yes reporting crimes can be problematic, so can false allegations......we can list examples all day long of both.

 

Both can be decided in court IF REPORTED, the other in the court of public opinion if you choose to avoid the legal avenue.

 

If you choose the court of public opinion ya need to be prepared for different opinions as well.

I'm just going to post this directly under the article I'm not reading...I'm guessing the latter won't look well under the former.

[Fresh8686]

3 minutes ago, AsburySkinsFan said:

Yeah, I'm not even going to read that article. I don't have the stomach this morning.

That **** ruined my day yesterday. I completely understand where you're coming from.

But, the sheltered people who blithely arm-chair quarterback these situations need to read it and feel what these women actually face and risk in coming forward.

I don't think people realize how much a woman loses when this happens to them. How much their life is stunted, how so much gets puts on hold just trying to put the broken pieces back together. And how much rage and pain they feel about having to do all that and suffer so, while the assholes who committed the act get to move on like nothing ever happened.

 

I hate the destruction these self-entitled toxic masculinity "golden boys" leave in their wake.

Edited September 20, 2018 by Fresh8686

[Kilmer17]

1 minute ago, Fresh8686 said:

That **** ruined my day yesterday. I completely understand where you're coming from.

But, the sheltered people who blithely arm-chair quarterback these situations need to read it and feel what these women actually face and risk in coming forward.

That story is horrifying.  And irrelevant to this accusation.  

[twa]

4 minutes ago, Fresh8686 said:

But, the sheltered people who blithely arm-chair quarterback these situations need to read it and feel what these women actually face and risk in coming forward.
 

 

I can promise you "sheltered" is not how my life has been.

[Fresh8686]

15 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

That story is horrifying.  And irrelevant to this accusation.  

For you maybe. But, in my view your posts in this thread make it relevant for me. For me, you're a lower intensity example of the people who react towards victims like her with disbelief and suspicion rather than empathy. It characterizes that pattern of behavior which is present in many people, including those who will be hearing Dr. Ford's testimony on Monday.

Of course I don't expect you to accept or agree with that characterization, but for me that's irrelevant.

Edited September 20, 2018 by Fresh8686

[DogofWar1]

17 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

Kavanaugh denies it.  Ford is the one claiming it happened but wont give any more details.  What exactly should Kavanaugh ask the authorities to investigate?  I suppose he could file a complaint against her for slander and they could investigate that.

 

Investigate her claims?

 

It's a crime to lie to the FBI.  She wants an investigation, go nuts.  They find nothing, he stands tall and she looks bad, even if they don't charge her.  If she really steps in it, they charge her.

 

 

Wasn't that the whole thing that many of these same GOP Senators talked about with regards to the Patriot Act?  If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear?

 

But this isn't even monitoring internet traffic level of investigation, it's merely asking some witnesses and seeing where they lead.

 

Brett is under no threat from this relatively narrow investigation UNLESS there are specific issues that could be uncovered from such a narrow investigation.

Which is why it's weird he is sitting idly by and letting Trump and the GOP cover for him, and why it's weird Mark Judge preemptively noped-out so hard.

 

 

 

This is also why the slippery slope argument doesn't really work based on what Senate Dems are asking for.  It won't be the accusation alone that derails Brett, but rather the corroborating evidence that makes the accusation credible that would.

 

I think everyone for the most part agrees that killing careers based solely on an accusation is stupid.

 

I think everyone for the most part agrees that thoroughly investigated accusations that lead to credible and well vetted theories of wrongdoing are not unfair as career killers.

 

But what we have here is Senate Dems asking for the FBI to investigate or at least for Grassley to hold thorough hearings, Trump and the GOP refusing to do either, and then the GOP accusing Dems of trying to set a standard that a mere accusation can kill a nomination, which is very obviously NOT what is happening, but it IS very politically expedient for large swaths of the GOP and undecideds to think that's what Dems are doing.

[NoCalMike]

From what I understand Mark Judge stated he "doesn't recall/has no memory" of the party, and then stated he'd rather not testify in front of the senate under oath, however can't he be subpoenaed anyway?  If they think he might have relevant information or just want to ask him questions. 

[DogofWar1]

2 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

From what I understand Mark Judge stated he "doesn't recall/has no memory" of the party, and then stated he'd rather not testify in front of the senate under oath, however can't he be subpoenaed anyway?  If they think he might have relevant information or just want to ask him questions. 

He absolutely can.

 

Guess who is letting him off the hook.

[NoCalMike]

3 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

He absolutely can.

 

Guess who is letting him off the hook.

 

Regardless of anything else, Mark Davis sounds like a real piece of work. I am sure he will do anything possible to not be asked questions about his past. Another creep that won't stand by his actions against public scrutiny. He will just deny deny deny instead of trying to make the argument that he was young & dumb, as if that is even a valid excuse for half his actions in the first place.

 

That is another thing that constantly bothers me about the "He was 17 years old, made a mistake" crowd.  So even if you believe that, why do these people get a pass for refusing to own up to what they did.  (allegedly) 

Edited September 20, 2018 by NoCalMike

[Bozo the kKklown]

Like I said before, nothing good will come from their testimony as there will be some very angry men who do not want to believe her story. In a civil and just society, this would be investigated. A position on the hugest court of the land where we ask them to understand and rule on laws, yet no one wants to actually apply said laws on this matter. This country is done and probably going to rot because of actions like this. 

Edited September 20, 2018 by BenningRoadSkin

[NoCalMike]

1 minute ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

Like I said before, nothing good will come from their testimony and there will be some very angry men who do not want to believe her story. In a civil and just society, this would be investigated. A position on the hugest court of the land where we ask them to understand and rule on laws, yet no one wants to actually apply said laws on this matter. This country is done and probably going to rot because of actions like this. 

 

Nothing like a country where an increasingly minority mind set shapes our laws.

[Kilmer17]

15 minutes ago, Fresh8686 said:

For you maybe. But, in my view your posts in this thread make it relevant for me. For me, you're a lower intensity example of the people who react towards victims like her with disbelief and suspicion rather than empathy. It characterizes that pattern of behavior which is present in many people, including those who will be hearing Dr. Ford's testimony on Monday.

Of course I don't expect you to accept or agree with that characterization, but for me that's irrelevant.

Because I wait for details?  And dont assign the crimes of another to this accusation for a political point?

 

I have no idea how to relate the crime committed in that story to empathy for Ford.  None.  They have no connection whatsoever.

16 minutes ago, DogofWar1 said:

 

Investigate her claims?

 

It's a crime to lie to the FBI.  She wants an investigation, go nuts.  They find nothing, he stands tall and she looks bad, even if they don't charge her.  If she really steps in it, they charge her.

 

 

Wasn't that the whole thing that many of these same GOP Senators talked about with regards to the Patriot Act?  If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear?

 

But this isn't even monitoring internet traffic level of investigation, it's merely asking some witnesses and seeing where they lead.

 

Brett is under no threat from this relatively narrow investigation UNLESS there are specific issues that could be uncovered from such a narrow investigation.

Which is why it's weird he is sitting idly by and letting Trump and the GOP cover for him, and why it's weird Mark Judge preemptively noped-out so hard.

 

 

 

This is also why the slippery slope argument doesn't really work based on what Senate Dems are asking for.  It won't be the accusation alone that derails Brett, but rather the corroborating evidence that makes the accusation credible that would.

 

I think everyone for the most part agrees that killing careers based solely on an accusation is stupid.

 

I think everyone for the most part agrees that thoroughly investigated accusations that lead to credible and well vetted theories of wrongdoing are not unfair as career killers.

 

But what we have here is Senate Dems asking for the FBI to investigate or at least for Grassley to hold thorough hearings, Trump and the GOP refusing to do either, and then the GOP accusing Dems of trying to set a standard that a mere accusation can kill a nomination, which is very obviously NOT what is happening, but it IS very politically expedient for large swaths of the GOP and undecideds to think that's what Dems are doing.

For any of that to happen, she has to do more than write a letter to a politician and hire an attorney.  She should go to the police and report the crime.  THEN the next step can happen.

16 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

From what I understand Mark Judge stated he "doesn't recall/has no memory" of the party, and then stated he'd rather not testify in front of the senate under oath, however can't he be subpoenaed anyway?  If they think he might have relevant information or just want to ask him questions. 

Yes.  And he should be subpoenaed if she wants to move forward Monday.