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

[LadySkinsFan]

This is the guy who needs to testify and not about the assault accusations.  David Brock has a lot to say about Kavanaugh and writes that he shouldn't be on the Court.

 

This article is pretty scathing and my main criticism of Kavanaugh.

 

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/i-knew-brett-kavanaugh-during-his-years-republican-operative-don-ncna907391

 

 

[mcsluggo]

3 hours ago, Kilmer17 said:

The credible accusation against Biden is that he suppressed corroborating witnesses and potential additional accusers.  

 

why would he do that for Reagan? and for a supreme court candidate that was already known to be ultra-right-wing-conservative?   what is POSSIBLE motivation ?

[Kilmer17]

18 minutes ago, mcsluggo said:

 

why would he do that for Reagan? and for a supreme court candidate that was already known to be ultra-right-wing-conservative?   what is POSSIBLE motivation ?

It's a question many on the left should ask him when he runs in 2020.

[Cooked Crack]

What?

[mcsluggo]

1 hour ago, DogofWar1 said:

I think to make sure you get the most out of the hearing, you need:

 

Ford

Brett

Ford's Husband (present during therapy)

Therapist

Mark Judge

 

And anyone else identified as a potential witness to either the events directly or corroborating events.

 

Key on that will be if anyone else attended the party, who was it?  They can corroborate whether the party happened, even if they didn't witness it directly.

 

Unfortunately, I have a feeling its gonna be Ford v. Brett and call it a day.

 

 

 

 

I personally can't remember much of anything from ANY parties i went to in high school, in the mid 1980s.   I wouldn;t even remember if i was there, much less any details of any events that might have happened to OTHER people

[Jumbo]

what should have been 3-4 posts has become 1 long post due to interrupts  and i haven't read recent posts here yet so i'll prob regret that 

 

 

https://www.google.com/search?q=tapes+of+anita+hill+heairngs&oq=tapes+of+anita+hill+heairngs&aqs=chrome..69i57j33l2.8153j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

 

I was reviewing the Anita Hill tapes ^^^------bad memories. Huge stain in our history imo. And yes, Biden (who is getting mentioned a lot lately for this in rigthwing upside-down world) is far from perfect, he's just in the "less foul of a supremely foul lot" subset.

 

 Watching that stuff again, so many years later, did provoke my john wick side and I was left with a powerful desire to haul hatch and grasserly out into the hallway and kick their ass up and down the corridors until closing time. Just ****ing pigs (an unfair slight to a fine species). I also wanted to do that to hatch yesterday when he just announced to the camera out of hand that ford must be "confused" and "no way she is telling the truth."  The dems are a troubled and flawed bunch, but the goper brand is just so chock-full of super sick and bad it may not be worth keeping.

 

Awhile back I noted past reporting that kav was not on the original federalsit list. As I've posted, it was trump thru mcgahn who picked him out for addition, with much of the speculation for the pick centering around kav's writings on extensiveness of pres power and its isolation from various forms of legal challenges. And the two dons got a lot of blow-back from leading gopers, especially mcconnel who was very opposed. 

 

The general line was he "just wasn't as strong a candidate as many others" but I do wonder why they thought that,  given how glowingly they've packaged him since trump decided that was his guy.  More just curious as to exactly what the foundation of their reluctance was and am not assuming it was "they knew" at all. It seems unlikely to me it was anything in his positions I can see as maybe  being "too far right", even if they thought moderate right was the way to go---which they don't. You'd expect a fairly far right choice under this group. 

 

Back to how Ford's situation is being discussed: in established events of this nature, recall not only can come in fits and starts when it occurs, it can indeed change somewhat in details as the process continues. The trauma itself and resulting emotional impact can dominate memory retrieval but not on the major factors, usually--like who did it or what they did, physically. It is also common for memory to become more complete as such a process, including shifts in mental state via the matter now being "out', continues.

 

 Also, the way memory works, from long term to short term and every other way, is rarely well-understood by most people, and once again, tossing 'time' around like you know what you're talking about is full of pitfalls and easily leads to false assumptions. 

 

All this is just a part of why this is a complex and challenging situation, particularly if it's not a fraud that can be 'busted' sooner rather than later---that would be the easiest outcome to handle, if disastrous for the dems.

 

Aside mental health pros, I see a few high-profile talking-head lawyers discussing relevant cases they've seen where all these dynamics I discuss are confirmed. None of this goes to "proving" Ford's veracity, it is just meaningful grist for the mill. 

 

Fwiw, to me former rick gates atty Shan Wu has seemed for quite some time to be an impressive source of intelligent objective analysis wherever I find his work.  I know tv-wise he does cnn and pbs and npr radio.

 

I'm open on this matter, do have compassion for kav and co., at this point, and do not endorse any rush to judgment. I accord Ford full respect and sensitivity, again, at this point.

 

 The idea that Ford (or almsot anyone), especially after considering all her info/output to date, would knowingly produce a false claim on such a stage choosing such a target is also hard to wrap your head around with all the risks to one's entire life situation that results. If she's not playing straight, or she's sincere but her claim becomes less factually credible and it turns out she was being used for politics, then the dems deserve any bad that results, though they wouldn't be the only ones that suffer. 

[The Evil Genius]

Fwiw, Biden has already said he owed Hill an apology.

 

From last year.

 

https://www.cnn.com/2017/12/14/politics/biden-anita-hill-teen-vogue/index.html

 

 

 

 

Edited September 18, 2018 by The Evil Genius

[StillUnknown]

 

The pivot is beginning

[mcsluggo]

42 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

It's a question many on the left should ask him when he runs in 2020.

 

that is a total bul**** answer.   

 

you say something that, to my knowledge has no supporting facts whatsoever, AND doesn;t seem to have any motivation/motive consistent with what we would expect to be in his self interest     

 

I ask you what motivation there could be... and you say:   "people on the left will have to ask the senator whether he has stopped beating his wife or not.... "

 

complete, and utter bul**** response.   

 

 

edit >>> although.. there should be a smile upt here, as well

Edited September 18, 2018 by mcsluggo

[Jumbo]

alright...i scanned the recent posts and still feel relatively safe about mine 

 

 

it is common, too, that the attitude some people bring to accusers often takes a more hostile tone in challenging than merited-, usually because they have their own "personal"  stake in the event

 

the hurt is felt by those closely connected to "both sides" in such matters

 

 

[NoCalMike]

4 minutes ago, StillUnknown said:

 

The pivot is beginning

 

 

Haha here we go with the Trump playbook:

 

"No, it never happened"

"I Don't remember anything like that"

"Ok, it happened, but...."

"Nothing wrong with horseplay"

 

The fact that the GOP is already starting to pull the "So what, it was 35 years ago, and it was just...." card tells you that they think there is or at least could be validity to these accusations and they are desperately trying to get out in front and skew perception of them.

 

2018 GOP folks.

[Cooked Crack]

 

[Jumbo]

@StillUnknown  yeah, been waiting for that as one possibility, and been seeing her and another woman atty from the judicial crisis network---another rigthwing nutjob/nra/russia backed mob ---all over channels where they'd never been sounding like good ole trumpworld drones---iow, they're worse than useless

 

 

[twa]

The 'pivot' is from the presumptive question 

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Jumbo]

12 minutes ago, twa said:

The 'pivot' is from the presumptive question 

 

 

I prefer it when they actually twirl. Pivoting is so basic.

[Kosher Ham]

 

 @twa , @Jumbo ,   Actually this is what happens usually...

 

 

Edited September 18, 2018 by Kosher Ham

[twa]

2 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

 

 

I prefer it when they actually twirl. Pivoting is so basic.

 

But if we presume it is swirling it is likely already flushing.

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

 

[NoCalMike]

13 minutes ago, visionary said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

In short? Yes. Lets say after all the testimony, people are more or less convinced Ford is telling the truth, but give Kavanaugh the benefit of the doubt that it was something very stupid, he regrets it, and has changed as a person.

There would *still* be the issue that he lied about it and denied it ever happened.

 

That right there would DQ him, IMO. 

[Llevron]

That whole rough horseplay thing is such a republican way to debase rape its not even shocking. Im more disappointed it took them this long to use it. 

[Forehead]

If I may interject a slight bit of humor...his last name is Kavanaugh, and using Wikipedia, I saw that his mother's maiden name was Murphy.  So we're talking really Irish and apparently, really drunk in his youth.

 

Was that enough for his friend Judge?  Nope...in his "fictional" stories, he has to change his name to "O'Kavanaugh" to make him even more Irish and potentially even more drunk.  Stereotypes I tell you.

[Jumbo]

@Kosher Ham  when i saw you quoted me i decided that no matter what you posted, all i was going to say was 'i love you' 

 

but, now you get a grandpa story cuz of what you posted---that's iconic for me

 

i will spare you a reproduction of Polaroid-produced evidence of a 7 year old jumbo doing the twist to chubby checker on the jukebox in my mom's restaurant in anchorage back then....after seeing rock around the clock when i was 6 i knew my path would be full of the devil's music

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 18, 2018 by visionary

[AsburySkinsFan]

7 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

 

Are you ****ing kidding me? 

To quote Ari: “If every one of us on the Right were barred from public office because of the sexual assaults we committed when we were 18, who would be left yo lead the party?”

That’s not a direct quote BTW.