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

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

[AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy]

2 hours ago, Kilmer17 said:

 

I think Ford believes what she is saying.  That doesnt mean she's right though.

You keep saying this. We’re talking about two reputable, intelligent people here in the prime of their lives. Not two elderly patients with dementia.

 

The whole “they could both think they are telling the truth” is hot garbage.

[AsburySkinsFan]

This line of stupidity doesn’t help either. Mathhew Dowd in his quest has now advocated that because of the sins of our past we should make new sins, just in the opposite direction.

That isn’t justice, that’s malice.

 

[Kosher Ham]

16 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

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

 

I recall the pics of Clockwork. I appreciate the constraints when it gets to a younger version. I have some pics of myself....

That I laugh about.... how I looked back in the day.

Ehh... I had hair. 

 

[visionary]

 

[tshile]

39 minutes ago, NoCalMike 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. 

 

Even beyond that, I think it can DQ him. Him being 17 and it being a long time ago is not enough to make it ok

 

and if we’re going to demand better treatment of women then demand it - you cannot just be ok with this or let it slide. 

 

The problem, for me, is getting past accusation and having credible evidence while also acknowledging the difficulty in defending yourself from an accusation about something from that long ago. 

 

Thats is a tough thing to do for either party. 

[twa]

Her consent is not required for a platform offered.

[Kilmer17]

1 hour ago, mcsluggo said:

 

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

Honestly, I thought Bidens actions and inactions during the Anita Hill hearing were common knowledge.

 

 

33 minutes ago, AlvinWaltonIsMyBoy said:

You keep saying this. We’re talking about two reputable, intelligent people here in the prime of their lives. Not two elderly patients with dementia.

 

The whole “they could both think they are telling the truth” is hot garbage.

If trauma and alcohol were involved, it's a definite possibility.  It would also explain why she cant remember other easy details like the year it happened or place.

22 minutes ago, tshile said:

 

Even beyond that, I think it can DQ him. Him being 17 and it being a long time ago is not enough to make it ok

 

and if we’re going to demand better treatment of women then demand it - you cannot just be ok with this or let it slide. 

 

The problem, for me, is getting past accusation and having credible evidence while also acknowledging the difficulty in defending yourself from an accusation about something from that long ago. 

 

Thats is a tough thing to do for either party. 

I have no doubt that after the hearing if its just Ford and BK, that every Dem will believe Ford is telling the truth and every GOP will believe BK is telling the truth.

 

We need more than just those two making statements.

Edited September 18, 2018 by Kilmer17

[Jumbo]

If I were advising Ford, unless she has demonstrated exceptional ability in control, strength, resolve, and preparation to me, I would tell her not to agree to the hearing as currently offered. I would make it dependent on some investigation, very publicly, if she wants to do this at all, and to have witnesses, as only fair, and even then it really isn't a fair setting for her imo---it's his natural turf and he's surrounded by both a multitude of friends and a whole herd of his powerful allies, plus all the media.

[tshile]

13 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

 

I have no doubt that after the hearing if its just Ford and BK, that every Dem will believe Ford is telling the truth and every GOP will believe BK is telling the truth.

 

Of course, we couldn’t have it any other way. 

 

The best part is that if you reverse the roles you’ll watch everyone shuffle around so they can switch places 

Edited September 18, 2018 by tshile

[AsburySkinsFan]

9 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

If I were advising Ford, unless she has demonstrated exceptional ability in control, strength, resolve, and preparation to me, I would tell her not to agree to the hearing as currently offered. I would make it dependent on some investigation, very publicly, if she wants to do this at all, and to have witnesses, as only fair, and even then it really isn't a fair setting for her imo---it's his natural turf and he's surrounded by both a multitude of friends and a whole herd of his powerful allies, plus all the media.

100% inviting her in there is the lions den. Kavanaugh is adept as are ALL of the Senators sitting there, they will ALL be pushing their agendas, and unless she’s just superior then they will run her over.

5 minutes ago, tshile said:

 

Of course, we couldn’t have it any other way. 

 

The best part is that if you reverse the roles you’ll watch everyone shuffle around so they can switch places 

Not me, seriously. I have no idea if she’s telling the truth or not. And my feelings on Kavanaugh Inthink have been made pretty clear. 

What I see though are the accusations agaibst her from the Right who have already tried to malign her character. And then there are those on the Left who don’t need a hearing to determine guilt.

Both are stupid.

[Kilmer17]

I have to agree.  I would tell her no way are you going there.  She cannot win (IE prevent BK from being confirmed) in that venue.  But maybe she has a different agenda that no one (even DiFi) is aware of.

 

Monday will be nothing but alot of "I dont remember, I cant recall, I have no recollection, Im not sure, I dont know why" etc etc.  It will fuel the circus, but wont change anything.

[The Evil Genius]

Firstly, Ford has a doctorate. I think she can and will be fine.

 

Secondly, even without one the assumption she is going to get run over isn't an idea that that I'd float out there. Personally I think it belittles her without knowing much about her.

Edited September 18, 2018 by The Evil Genius

[Kilmer17]

2 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

Firstly, Ford has a doctorate. I think she can and will be fine.

 

Secondly, even without one the assumption she is going to get run over isn't an idea that that I'd float our there. Personally I think it belittles her without knowing much about her.

Do you think she can convince a single GOPer that she's telling the truth and BK is lying without any other evidence or witness?  Just his word vs hers?

[NoCalMike]

Also, if you think Ford is lying, then you'd also have to believe she was lying to her therapist in 2012, then again in 2013 when she named Kavanaugh outright.  What was her motivation at that time to simply make this up, let alone clearly remember and name her accuser?  Oh and then pass a lie detector test?

 

 

[mcsluggo]

17 minutes ago, The Evil Genius said:

Firstly, Ford has a doctorate. I think she can and will be fine.

 

Secondly, even without one the assumption she is going to get run over isn't an idea that that I'd float out there. Personally I think it belittles her without knowing much about her.

 

it doesn't belittle her to say that she would (probably) be out of of her natural element.   

 

Its a specific skill set to sit in front of those panels for a looooong time.   Keep your composure and wits about you, and present an even and consistent account of WHATEVER you can recall about a traumatic night 30-plus years ago.   It would be a sucky situation if you were talking to a caring therapist, that wanted to help you tease out the truth from your memories.    Instead you get grilled by a bunch of assholes, some of which don't actually want to know what you know, just want to make you look non-credible.    

 

I have a PhD, and i am sure i would look like a booger-eating-moron in that situation.      

 

 

 

(probably safer, and more accurate, to say... i would look even MORE like a booger-eating-moron than i normally do......)

[NoCalMike]

As far as "should this even DQ him if it is all true" question goes.

Something that was eluded to earlier in the thread.  There are people in this world that win the lottery in life from birth.  From day one they are on the fast track to success and everything that comes with it.  They are prepped for success and "hand-held" every step of the way to ensure it. (Nothing inherently wrong with that, admittingly)However as a bi-product, often the entitlement sets in from an early age and they know it.  Some of them take advantage of it with bad behavior, sometimes even worse behavior.  You constantly over and over see the attitude of these individuals and those around them be it their families, their friends (fellow elites from their peer groups) treat stuff like this as a minor inconvenience on their road to prosperity.  

 

Look at the trials of guys like Brock Turner, or the Affluent kid that got drunk and killed people.....what do you *ALWAYS* hear at their trials....it is always about how this is going to affect them and the awesome life they were on track and supposed to have.  It is the narcissism of the privileged that the rest of society simply doesn't matter and they should simply shut up and get out of the way.

 

So when I hear people trying to craft the argument of "So....yeah....maybe he did do it, but...." No, there is no but.  If he did it, he has no business being on the Supreme Court, period.    

[Jumbo]

Ford's being very smart right now, or is getting very smart advice. Sit tight. Require investigation effort. allow for/call witnesses etc.

 

I think the gop leadership will fold and go along with that unless ford or her claims fall apart beforehand.

 

If Ford's actions here are not totally sincere, she, the left, and me too, will be seriously dinged (me too undeservedly)

 

I can't stand shcumer or mcconnel as people

[bearrock]

6 minutes ago, mcsluggo said:

 

it doesn't belittle her to say that she would (probably) be out of of her natural element.   

 

Its a specific skill set to sit in front of those panels for a looooong time.   Keep your composure and wits about you, and present an even and consistent account of WHATEVER you can recall about a traumatic night 30-plus years ago.   It would be a sucky situation if you were talking to a caring therapist, that wanted to help you tease out the truth from your memories.    Instead you get grilled by a bunch of assholes, some of which don't actually want to know what you know, just want to make you look non-credible.    

 

I have a PhD, and i am sure i would look like a booger-eating-moron in that situation.      

 

 

 

(probably safer, and more accurate, to say... i would look even MORE like a booger-eating-moron than i normally do......)

 

You could throw everyone off and actually start eating booger on national tv.

 

But yeah, especially where the setting is going to be her vs. Kavanaugh, it's going to be a difficult thing to sit through hours of questioning from members of Congress.  But I'm sure her attorney will do a lot of prep with her.  GOP members of the senate are in a delicate situation too, though.  If they act like how they behaved during the Anita Hill hearing, I think you can expect electoral repercussion for the foreseeable future.

[visionary]

I’m curious what Mark Judge has to say about that.

Edited September 18, 2018 by visionary

[StillUnknown]

4 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

As far as "should this even DQ him if it is all true" question goes.

Something that was eluded to earlier in the thread.  There are people in this world that win the lottery in life from birth.  From day one they are on the fast track to success and everything that comes with it.  They are prepped for success and "hand-held" every step of the way to ensure it. (Nothing inherently wrong with that, admittingly)However as a bi-product, often the entitlement sets in from an early age and they know it.  Some of them take advantage of it with bad behavior, sometimes even worse behavior.  You constantly over and over see the attitude of these individuals and those around them be it their families, their friends (fellow elites from their peer groups) treat stuff like this as a minor inconvenience on their road to prosperity.  

 

Look at the trials of guys like Brock Turner, or the Affluent kid that got drunk and killed people.....what do you *ALWAYS* hear at their trials....it is always about how this is going to affect them and the awesome life they were on track and supposed to have.  It is the narcissism of the privileged that the rest of society simply doesn't matter and they should simply shut up and get out of the way.

 

So when I hear people trying to craft the argument of "So....yeah....maybe he did do it, but...." No, there is no but.  If he did it, he has no business being on the Supreme Court, period.    

 

well said

 

there are a mere 9 spots on the supreme court, something as serious as this should be grounds for a disqualification. If the conservative bench is as long as they like to proclaim, surely they can find another candidate to carry out their destructive policies, but without the rapey actions attached.

[Kilmer17]

2 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

Ford's being very smart right now, or is getting very smart advice. Sit tight. Require investigation effort. allow for/call witnesses etc.

 

I think the gop leadership will fold and go along with that unless ford or her claims fall apart beforehand.

 

If Ford's actions here are not totally sincere, she, the left, and me too, will be seriously dinged (me too undeservedly)

 

I can't stand shcumer or mcconnel as people

I don’t know.  I think Grassley inviting her to testify Monday puts her in a corner.  If she doesn’t,it’s over in terms of ability to prevent BK from becoming a Justice

1 minute ago, StillUnknown said:

 

well said

 

there are a mere 9 spots on the supreme court, something as serious as this should be grounds for a disqualification. If the conservative bench is as long as they like to proclaim, surely they can find another candidate to carry out their destructive policies, but without the rapey actions attached.

If the allegations are proven he’s toast. But the next nominee will be just as “extreme” according to the Dems. 

[StillUnknown]

1 minute ago, Kilmer17 said:

If the allegations are proven he’s toast. But the next nominee will be just as “extreme” according to the Dems. 

 

'extreme' is something that can be debated and voted on with some sense of normalcy, in which I expect it to favor whoever has numbers. Kavanaugh falls into a different category for me, this is another morality check for America. We have failed many recently, so I have very low expectations for a different outcome

[NoCalMike]

12 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

 

If the allegations are proven he’s toast. But the next nominee will be just as “extreme” according to the Dems. 

 

As long as the next nominee didn't sexually assault a girl (allegedly) he will be confirmed regardless. 

[visionary]