Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

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

Burgold

By Burgold
in The Tailgate

 Share

Recommended Posts

TheGreatBuzz

TheGreatBuzz

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, BenningRoadSkin said:

You may be right

 

But wouldn't an actual investigation into the veracity of these claims by an independent body be doing what's right? The Dems have asked for this, but not the Repubs. Why?

My understanding is that the FBI wouldn't look into this because the details of what she claimed happened wouldn't warrant their attention and statue of limitations based on her allegations have passed at both the state and federal level.

 

Like I said earlier, there is zero hope of getting the actual facts here.  There will be both sides of the story but unfortunately that is all you will get after 30+ years.  Which means it would only serve to fan the flames of each base with no hope of actual truth coming out.  And that is not what the FBI is for.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kilmer17

Kilmer17

Posted
Posted

The Dems should issue a statement supporting a different far right potential nominee.  Let it be known they will allow that person a fast vote. 

 

Unless this is really about aomething thing other than just trying to prevent Trump from ANY nominee now. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
StillUnknown

StillUnknown

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, visionary said:

 

 

this is what I come back to. What the hell makes Kavanaugh so special that he just HAS to be the guy? Surely they could find another conservative individual that will fulfill the madness they have planned, but without the baggage of sexual assault allegations? 

 

Gorsuch was every bit as conservative as Kavanaugh, but he didn't bring all this mess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
GhostofSparta

GhostofSparta

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, StillUnknown said:

 

this is what I come back to. What the hell makes Kavanaugh so special that he just HAS to be the guy? Surely they could find another conservative individual that will fulfill the madness they have planned, but without the baggage of sexual assault allegations? 

 

Gorsuch was every bit as conservative as Kavanaugh, but he didn't bring all this mess.

https://theconcourse.deadspin.com/brett-kavanaugh-is-a-man-the-right-can-get-behind-1829225731

 

Quote

It has to be this guy. It has to be this guy now more than ever. It has to be this guy, now, because he has been accused, credibly, of attempting to rape a 15-year-old girl in 1982—moreover because people believe this should be considered a disqualifying blight on his record. The thing that must happen is that those people must be defeated. That is the whole point. What must be shown to the whole world is that this, even this, cannot stop him. The bigger the outrage that can be brushed aside, the more thorough the defeat for the people who thought something, anything, might take precedence over this white man being the pick of another white man.

 

Edited by GhostofSparta
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SkinsHokieFan

SkinsHokieFan

Posted
Posted
4 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

The Dems should issue a statement supporting a different far right potential nominee.  Let it be known they will allow that person a fast vote. 

 

Unless this is really about aomething thing other than just trying to prevent Trump from ANY nominee now. 

 

After the “Bart O’Kavanaugh” debacle why the hell should Trump get another shot. They clearly half assed this thing and have no idea what they are doing 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
visionary

visionary

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

The Dems should issue a statement supporting a different far right potential nominee.  Let it be known they will allow that person a fast vote. 

 

Unless this is really about aomething thing other than just trying to prevent Trump from ANY nominee now. 

I thought about that, but every nominee should have a thorough vetting process.   

They could say they won't object to another conservative judge replacing him, but that judge will still need to go through an appropriate process.  

Putting forward a judge without a long paper trail or making info available quickly could speed things up.  

Edited by visionary
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kilmer17

Kilmer17

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, SkinsHokieFan said:

 

After the “Bart O’Kavanaugh” debacle why the hell should Trump get another shot. They clearly half assed this thing and have no idea what they are doing 

Who should?   

 

Have we changed the constitution?

2 minutes ago, visionary said:

I thought about that, but every nominee should have a thorough vetting process.   

They could say they won't object to another conservative judge replacing him, but that judge will still need to go through an appropriate process.  

Putting forward a judge without a long paper trail or making info available quickly could speed things up.  

There will always be the potential for the left to say “that’s not enough”. 

 

Ill still  bet anyone even money BK is confirmed. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
SkinsHokieFan

SkinsHokieFan

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

Who should?   

 

Have we changed the constitution?

There will always be the potential for the left to say “that’s not enough”. 

 

Ill still  bet anyone even money BK is confirmed. 

 

We can go a few sessions with 8 justices. These clowns in the WH ****ed this up. 

 

I do agree though still at least 50/50 Kav gets through 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Hersh

Hersh

Posted
Posted
11 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

The Dems should issue a statement supporting a different far right potential nominee.  Let it be known they will allow that person a fast vote. 

 

Unless this is really about aomething thing other than just trying to prevent Trump from ANY nominee now. 

 

You mean they should issue a list like Hatch did when Obama was POTUS? Ya know, the list that had Merrick Garland’s name on it as acceptable to the GOP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kilmer17

Kilmer17

Posted
Posted
1 minute ago, SkinsHokieFan said:

 

We can go a few sessions with 8 justices. These clowns in the WH ****ed this up. 

 

I do agree though still at least 50/50 Kav gets through 

I think it’s more likely Trump and Congress day **** you and decide to increase the Court from 9 to 15 and pack it. 

Just now, Hersh said:

 

You mean they should issue a list like Hatch did when Obama was POTUS? Ya know, the list that had Merrick Garland’s name on it as acceptable to the GOP.

Until he wasn’t.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
thegreaterbuzzette

thegreaterbuzzette

Posted
Posted (edited)

Something to think about.

"GOP" didn't vote in Trump

Liberals didn't cause this by not knowing whether to vote Bernie or Clinton.

 

The largest group of people that had an effect on the 2016 election....were the NON-VOTERS.

Everyone get out and vote in November!!!

And educate yourselves on who you are voting for....not just using their campaign ads, or the campaign ads of their opponents, but good ol' REAL research. Don't go off buzz words.....what does lowering taxes REALLY mean? At what cost? what does getting rid of RoeVWade really mean?

Edited by thegreaterbuzzette
typo
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bozo the kKklown

Bozo the kKklown

Posted
Posted
17 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

My understanding is that the FBI wouldn't look into this because the details of what she claimed happened wouldn't warrant their attention and statue of limitations based on her allegations have passed at both the state and federal level.

And that is incorrect.

 

The FBI is waiting for the White House to request an investigation.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/can-fbi-investigate-allegation-against-brett-kavanaugh-n911036

 



President Donald Trump has said the FBI doesn't want to investigate Christine Blasey Ford's assertion that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh assaulted her, and that it's "not what they do."

In fact, the FBI could certainly investigate Ford's claim, but only if the White House asks the bureau to do so. She has no authority to request it. Neither does the Senate.

 

When the FBI conducts a background investigation of a presidential nominee, it vacuums up all kinds of information about the nominee, including claims from people interviewed by agents, and dumps it into the file. It does not, however, investigate whether or not derogatory information is true — unless it's asked to follow up by the White House. Several current and former Justice Department and FBI officials say this has always been the practice, and there is actually a longstanding formal memorandum of understanding between DOJ and the White House that specifies these limits.

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
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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