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

tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted

@DogofWar1

i guess the short version of why I think you’re being absurd:

impeachment if a scotus judge is going to require an immense amount of political capital. And you’ll spend all of it. And if you lose it’s gone and not coming back 

 

I don’t think they’ll have that political capital. And if they do I don’t think they’re going to spend it on that, I think they’ll spend it on trump. 

 

Ive certainly been wrong before, I just think you got a little ahead of yourself on that particular idea. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, bearrock said:

Just because it's true doesn't mean it's right.

 

Agreed. 100%

 

its not right. So much about how our politicians behave is not right  

 

 But to pretend there never was a timeline and many of these other claims requires a severe lack of understanding about how our politics work. 

 

And none of the people making these arguments in this thread have that severe lack of understanding. They’re doing it for another reason. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, bearrock said:

If any senator feels differently, they are not fit for office.

 

By the way, our senators have left **** on the table time and time and time again so that they can get back to another vacation. To not ruin their plans. To campaign 

 

over and over and over for DECADES

 

so

a) lol at everyone forgetting that this how this works every single year/holiday/break

 

b) yeah, most of them are scamming us. They’re not doing half the job they should be, and there not doing that part half as well as they should be. 

Edited by tshile
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
DogofWar1

DogofWar1

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, sacase said:

Yet she leaked it to the public. Yet Ford said it was her civic duty. Feinstein could have still brought it to the committee to handle it privately. 

 

Except Feinstein and her office have denied leaking it.

 

And the first guy to reveal the existence of a letter says it wasn't Feinstein or her staff.

 

 

So, again, Feinstein held onto the letter because she was asked and she honored that request.

 

 

 

Please just admit you were wrong and drop this point because I'm about to launch into a rant about rape and power differentials and misogynistic tendencies to take power away from women and I don't particularly care to do that because it's late.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Evil Genius

The Evil Genius

Posted
Posted (edited)
6 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

N00B question here, when are their votes due?  

 

Last I heard they are anticipating a floor vote Sat morning.

 

Personally, I think the result of them still voting him through will be felt in 2018 and 2020. I expect a larger than normal female voter turnout.

 

Edit edit..read that how you will..larger than normal females and how I actually meant it. ?

Edited by The Evil Genius
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Spaceman Spiff said:

N00B question here, when are their votes due?  

Whenever they decide?

i think the original plan was to vote tomorrow. I don’t see it happening. 

 

Edit: eh TEG would know more. Guess it’s saturday

Edited by tshile
Link to comment
Share on other sites
The Evil Genius

The Evil Genius

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, tshile said:

Whenever they decide?

i think the original plan was to vote tomorrow. I don’t see it happening. 

 

Edit: eh TEG would know more. Guess it’s saturday

 

I think they have to vote him out of committee (?) first and that's what I think is happening tomorrow. I'm sure it will be strictly party line.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
tshile

tshile

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

Personally, I think the result of them still voting him through will be felt in 2018 and 2020

 

I cant get a feel for it. 

 

I’ve been surprised by what I hear come out of conservative women’s mouths. Someone posted a video pages and pageant ago of a panel of them. They are not the fringe. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DogofWar1

DogofWar1

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, tshile said:

 

Until she didn’t honor that request and gave it to someone

 

who was that and when was that?

 

Do you have any proof she gave it to anyone?  The reporter said it wasn't Feinstein, so there needs to be another transaction, and we have no proof or info of such a transaction.

 

This article gives a good likely theory on it: 

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/9/19/1797133/-Thoughts-On-How-Dr-Ford-s-Letter-Leaked-Who-Leaked-It-amp-The-65-Women-Letter

 

Quote

But the larger story that I think keeps getting lost is that Senator Feinstein followed Dr. Ford’s wishes from the beginning to try and keep her (Dr. Ford) anonymous.    There appears to have been some back & forth (which one Kossack insists is mostly Feinstein actively working to silence Dr. Ford — like others I argued back & forth with him to no avail) about whether the allegation could be explored and still maintain Dr. Ford’s confidentiality.   As of tonight we now know that Senator Feinstein saw a possibility via the Senate Ethics Committee which has a provision for using outside counsel to maintain confidentiality in investigations.   She had her staff check with that committee’s staff and once it was determined she (Senator Feinstein) would have to get both the (GOP) Ethics Chair and Grassley to sign off on that procedure that it wouldn’t work.   That to obtain their consent Dr. Ford’s identity would be compromised.

 

However, people talk.   The juicier the secret the more many people want to share it, even if only with someone they “really, really trust who would never, ever tell anyone else.”   Of course real life doesn’t work that way.   An old saw I once heard about security is that the likelihood of a secret being revealed is the square of the square of the number of people who know about it.

 

So even if the exact nature of the allegation wasn’t revealed in those quiet discussion with Ethic Committee staffers the knowledge their was a serious allegation of personal misconduct by Kavanaugh was known outside Senator Feinstein’s office.   In the #MeToo era I don’t think it’s a leap for those “Ethics” staffers to make the mental leap from “confidential & sensitive personal conduct allegations” to sexual misconduct.

 

That is to say, Feinstein gave the letter to no one, tried to figure out a way to investigate before it came without having to reveal Dr. Ford's name, realized she couldn't manage it, withdrew the attempt, but by then, people knew there was SOMETHING out there about Brett.

 

Then SOMEONE ELSE, NOT Feinstein or her office, per the actual reporter, leaked information about it to the Intercept.

 

 

Which is to say, AGAIN, Feinstein did not leak the letter for political purposes.

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...