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

[Kilmer17]

3 hours ago, mistertim said:

 

Dude, your routine isn't working. Might want to try something else.

Exposing liberal idiocy and obvious hypocrisy doesn’t work on extremeskins?   Shocking. 

 

Im sure you folks have a totally legit reason for not wanting a complete investigation now that it’s over 

I’ve been calling for a complete investigation since Ford testified and I believed her.  

 

Its only now that it could possibly hurt Democrat’s does the left no longer want the same thing. 

 

 

[skinny21]

A full investigation of what exactly? 

 

I think it’s pretty understandable people are questioning your motivation for continuing to talk about a full investigation.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Mooka]

2 minutes ago, skinny21 said:

A full investigation of what exactly? 

 

I think it’s pretty understandable people are questioning your motivation for continuing to talk about a full investigation.  

 

This.

We're asking you a question Kilmer. 

 

What investigation and for what purpose? 

 

[Kilmer17]

All of it.  Her accusation. The way it was treated by DiFi.  The allegation by Ramirez.  The Swetnick issue. All of it. 

 

If any any of it is true.  Arrest him.  If it turns out it was a coordinated hit piece, take them all down too. 

 

That should be what all of us want to see. 

I am confident that some reporter somewhere will do a full investigation 

Here is my opinion on why people are questioning MY motives. 

 

I think most most of the posters here have the exact same opinion on this.  

 

I bet bet most of you believe her.  But know theees enough doubt about whether or not it was him or one of the other seemingly identical prep school d bags at the time.  And I bet most of you think the rest of allegations are complete bull****.  And I’m betting most of you think the dem leadership knows that too.  And a full investigation could possibly reveal that they knew that even while they were claiming it during senate proceedings 

[tshile]

They didn’t block the justice they knew they couldnt

 

 but they sure pumped up the get out and vote stuff with it. At least they think they did. 

 

Earlier in the year everything was indicating a gop bloodbath. I haven’t followed it in a few months. Will be fun to watch either way. 

[Mooka]

42 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

All of it.  Her accusation. The way it was treated by DiFi.  The allegation by Ramirez.  The Swetnick issue. All of it. 

,

If any any of it is true.  Arrest him.  If it turns out it was a coordinated hit piece, take them all down too. 

 

That should be what all of us want to see. 

I am confident that some reporter somewhere will do a full investigation 

Here is my opinion on why people are questioning MY motives. 

 

I think most most of the posters here have the exact same opinion on this.  

 

I bet bet most of you believe her.  But know theees enough doubt about whether or not it was him or one of the other seemingly identical prep school d bags at the time.  And I bet most of you think the rest of allegations are complete bull****.  And I’m betting most of you think the dem leadership knows that too.  And a full investigation could possibly reveal that they knew that even while they were claiming it during senate proceedings 

 

Eh.... really not following you. 

 

Most posters are on the exact same position on this except you: 

 

That's its impossible to prove a sexual assault of this nature from 30 years ago in a criminal proceeding; thus making an investigation pointless, especially directly after a pointless FBI investigation. 

 

We're not questioning your motives, that you said that is a little weird, nor is anyone fearing an investigation because it could expose a coordinate hit piece; that also sounds a little weird. Maybe I'm just not up to speed on the conversation.

[SoulSkin]

Investigate ALL that ****, by all means. Agreed. Also, yes, vote. That'll work.

[skinny21]

I’d be happy to have an ‘actual’ investigation.  

 

Kinda weird to seemingly call people out about the issue though.  It was a BS investigation and dems hands are tied now.  Considering the limits apparently put in place by the WH (and the fact it was treated as a 302 or whatever), I can’t see the WH or the GOP pushing for a new, more complete investigation, particularly one addressing the other allegations.  

 

Dems aren’t pushing anymore because there’s no recourse, not because they’re worried it will be found out that dems we’re playing games or the allegations (some or all) will be proven false. 

 

From my perspective, knowing that you (I assume) already knew all of the above, makes me question your motives.  Given your previous posts, I’d guess you’d hope to prove the dems handled the situation poorly and/or that all allegations are false, which you can then use against those calling the investigation, et all BS.  Of course, even if I’m right I wouldn’t expect you’d own up to it.  

 

On the flip side, you have no idea if I’m telling the truth when I say I’d welcome a full investigation... so, we’re sort of at an impasse I think.  Going on about it probably gets us nowhere... yet you keep bringing it up, and now here I am responding to a hypothetical that literally will not happen.  

 

For the record, I am 99% convinced that Kavanaugh attempted to rape Ford, 99.9% sure about Ramirez’ allegation, and I have no clue about Swetnick.  As for the dems, I have no doubt they played some games, even if the reporter said they did not get their info from Feinstein.  She tried the proper channels, realized it would require releasing Ford’s name and she pulled back.  Perhaps she then passed it along to a 3rd party (to leak to reporters), perhaps it came from somewhere else, I have no idea.  

 

Edit:  @Mooka I believe there was some motive questioning actually, and it seems very reasonable to do so IMO.  

Edited October 11, 2018 by skinny21

[tshile]

3 hours ago, Mooka said:

thus making an investigation pointless,

 

So you mean all that ****ing over the course of a week a bit ago about how there better be an investigation, that they better wait for an investigation, then that the investigation was being messed with was pointless ****ing about something they knew was pointless?

 

hmmmm

[Burgold]

I'd be for an all-out investigation, but what you pointed out isn't even the all out investigation required. I want to know if he lied under oath in mishandling sensitive top secret information to benefit Republicans during an election. I want to know if he was lying under oath about his drinking habits and who he was as a person. I want to know if he lied under oath to intentionally misrepresent himself. More, if found guilty, I want him to either step down from SCOTUS or be forced out.

 

I don't think a perjurer belongs on the bench. I don't think an extreme political ideologue and operative does either though, unfortunately that isn't actually disqualifying. I don't think someone who perpetrated or was accomplice to multiple heinous acts of sexual assault should be a Justice on the Supreme Court. I'm perfectly fine with an investigation, especially if it has teeth. If it's for show and a waste of money so people can wag their fingers... like the Republican way of having 14 Benghazi hearings that each time find nothing and serve no purpose (and have no purpose) other than rallying their base's anger... I'd rather save the taxpayer's money.

 

I think it's clear that Kavanaugh is a perjurer. I think it's clear that Kavanaugh thinks he has something to hide or he wouldn't have behaved as he did. I think a full out independent investigation is warranted not just because of what I think, but because of what judges said about him, what the American Bar Association said about him, multiple times, and many other legitimate, serious, sober groups and associations said when they urged his nomination be withdrawn.

 

As long as it's not a circus, I'd be for an investigation. To be clear, the Mueller Investigation has not been a circus. It's been a diligent, careful, and effective (so far) investigation that has discovered guilty parties and whose findings have led to guilty verdicts and pleas. I want that type of investigation.

[grego]

How did we go from full investigation to investigation is pointless in one week? 

[Burgold]

1 hour ago, grego said:

How did we go from full investigation to investigation is pointless in one week? 

I don't think it's pointless. As I said above, I think it's warranted and useful. I reject investigations as theater. A real investigation that has the power to do more than shame or slap a wrist (if guilt is discovered) is something I would fully support. I suspect Kilmer would too.

[Kilmer17]

8 hours ago, Mooka said:

 

Eh.... really not following you. 

 

Most posters are on the exact same position on this except you: 

 

That's its impossible to prove a sexual assault of this nature from 30 years ago in a criminal proceeding; thus making an investigation pointless, especially directly after a pointless FBI investigation. 

 

We're not questioning your motives, that you said that is a little weird, nor is anyone fearing an investigation because it could expose a coordinate hit piece; that also sounds a little weird. Maybe I'm just not up to speed on the conversation.

Every single left wing poster here was screaming for an investigation.  Now all of a sudden they don’t think it would help?   Why?  

18 minutes ago, Burgold said:

I don't think it's pointless. As I said above, I think it's warranted and useful. I reject investigations as theater. A real investigation that has the power to do more than shame or slap a wrist (if guilt is discovered) is something I would fully support. I suspect Kilmer would too.

I’ll wear an “impeach Kavanaugh” shirt every day if an investigation proves he asaaulted Ford.  

[Burgold]

4 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

Every single left wing poster here was screaming for an investigation.  Now all of a sudden they don’t think it would help?   Why?  

I’ll wear an “impeach Kavanaugh” shirt every day if an investigation proves he asaaulted Ford.  

... and if he's proven to be a perjurer?

[Llevron]

So no one on the right here has any reason to distrust an investigation at all? 

[Larry]

I'll try and express some of the conflicting feelings on the issue. 

 

I have a real distrust of the notion of "investigate EVERYTHING". 

 

For one thing, in my experience, it's often simply an excuse for a political fishing expedition. (Can't imaging how I got that impression over the last 20 years). 

 

I think there needs to be something to justify an investigation, before you have one. 

 

Now, I think the question of whether he assaulted Ford, not much point investigating. Unless something new comes out, we're not going to learn anything new. 

 

Whether Kav was a sloppy drunk in high school?  That's maybe a valid topic at a job interview, but not for Congress or the FBI. 

 

Now, looking into the actions of the principles, last few months?  I could see that an investigation might well reveal some really ugly, new things. But would any such revelations be important enough to justify things?  

 

Suppose it was revealed, say, that Kav was actually calling aquaintences and telling them what to say. That might be new, and dirty, but is it important enough to justify an investigation of that scale?  

[Burgold]

1 minute ago, Larry said:

Suppose it was revealed, say, that Kav was actually calling aquaintences and telling them what to say. That might be new, and dirty, but is it important enough to justify an investigation of that scale?  

Maybe. Again, if it were proven that Kavanaugh was engaging in behaviors that would be considered "witness tampering" or "obstructing justice" had this been a trial and they set the bar there so that if it's proven we get to throw the bum out... I think that's a worthy investigation. If the result would be to say, "shame on you, sir! You should know better!" then I don't see a point.

 

It does seem to me that if he was worried enough to tamper with testimony and badger, bribe, or coerce witnesses to lie... heck, even if he asked and they happily agreed to do him a favor... that does suggest much more than a guilty conscience. If nothing else, he knew exactly who to talk to, to coach, and to warn away.

 

[Kilmer17]

30 minutes ago, Burgold said:

... and if he's proven to be a perjurer?

Absolutely.  I'll caution though that said investigation into perjury should really matter with regards to his time on the Starr team etc.  If we are going to get stuck on whether his claim that he never drank until he was "passed out drunk", we're going to get caught in a loop of "His friends saw him, yeah but BK said he was regular drunk and tired etc etc".

17 minutes ago, Larry said:

I'll try and express some of the conflicting feelings on the issue. 

 

I have a real distrust of the notion of "investigate EVERYTHING". 

 

For one thing, in my experience, it's often simply an excuse for a political fishing expedition. (Can't imaging how I got that impression over the last 20 years). 

 

I think there needs to be something to justify an investigation, before you have one. 

 

Now, I think the question of whether he assaulted Ford, not much point investigating. Unless something new comes out, we're not going to learn anything new. 

 

Whether Kav was a sloppy drunk in high school?  That's maybe a valid topic at a job interview, but not for Congress or the FBI. 

 

Now, looking into the actions of the principles, last few months?  I could see that an investigation might well reveal some really ugly, new things. But would any such revelations be important enough to justify things?  

 

Suppose it was revealed, say, that Kav was actually calling aquaintences and telling them what to say. That might be new, and dirty, but is it important enough to justify an investigation of that scale?  

I hate it when Larry's right before 930 in the morning.

Is anyone here worried that an investigation that includes the Avenatti/Swetnick allegations will come back to haunt the Dems?

[Burgold]

9 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

 

Is anyone here worried that an investigation that includes the Avenatti/Swetnick allegations will come back to haunt the Dems?

I'm not. If they were false charges or were dirty tricks meant to slander Kavanaugh's good name, I'd want that ferreted out too. The people behind that should face penalties.

 

Truth matters. Sides should not.

[Kilmer17]

2 minutes ago, Burgold said:

I'm not. If they were false charges or were dirty tricks meant to slander Kavanaugh's good name, I'd want that ferreted out too. The people behind that should face penalties.

 

Truth matters. Sides should not.

Then we have an accord.  Now what?

[Burgold]

2 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

Then we have an accord.  Now what?

We'll find out. First comes the election for we've already learned that the Republicans have no interest in truth, justice, or the American way.

[Kilmer17]

1 minute ago, Burgold said:

We'll find out. First comes the election for we've already learned that the Republicans have no interest in truth, justice, or the American way.

I'm afraid you will learn that Dem controlled House has about the same level of interest.  Maybe they'll prove me wrong.  But I'm guessing they will have very targeted, limited and politically motivated investigations.

[Mooka]

9 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

Every single left wing poster here was screaming for an investigation.  Now all of a sudden they don’t think it would help?   Why?  

 

Because they wanted an investigation to disqualify Kavanaugh from the court, prove he gave dishonest testimony.

 

And they got one. BK was still confirmed. 

 

 

2 hours ago, grego said:

How did we go from full investigation to investigation is pointless in one week? 

 

Because no one can explain what a full investigation is and whom is investigating and for what purpose.

 

The Democratic Committee of whatever is going to get to the bottom of this... how? And again, to prove BK was lying? To prove he committed the crime? To impeach him? I think I'm just behind on this conversation. 

[Burgold]

2 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

I'm afraid you will learn that Dem controlled House has about the same level of interest.  Maybe they'll prove me wrong.  But I'm guessing they will have very targeted, limited and politically motivated investigations.

Dems

 

 

Republicans

 

[tshile]

3 hours ago, grego said:

How did we go from full investigation to investigation is pointless in one week? 

 

Look at the bright side, at least they finally admit it would be pointless. 

 

They still choose to believe her fully and unquestionably, but at least they know it’s not  something that can be proven. 

 

Probably the best we can hope for. 

 

Certainly wont get them to recognize they **** all over the rest of us for saying the same thing earlier on. 

 

Or to consider why they so easily and readily believe such things in certain situations.