Politics Kavanaugh Confirmation Hearing, now with New allegations!

Discussion in 'Blazers OT Forum' started by MarAzul, Sep 4, 2018.

?

Will Kavanaugh be confirmed?

  1. Yes

  2. No

  3. Burn it all down

Results are only viewable after voting.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. dviss1

    dviss1 Emcee Referee

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2011
    Messages:
    29,479
    Likes Received:
    27,329
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Get this, he signs the letter "Bart"

    Like Bart O'Kavanaugh from Judge's book.

    The story Kavanaugh has testified doesn't make sense and if it doesn't make sense, it's not true.

    He has also proven to be partisan and impartial. Blaming "the left" and"the Clintons".

    He needs to have his CURRENT judgeship revoked.
     
  2. julius

    julius I wonder if there's beer on the sun Staff Member Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    44,411
    Likes Received:
    32,712
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Vagabond
    Location:
    Water Valley, Alberta Ca
    dviss1 likes this.
  3. e_blazer

    e_blazer Rip City Fan

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    24,052
    Likes Received:
    30,037
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Consultant
    Location:
    Oregon City, OR
  4. CupWizier

    CupWizier Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2009
    Messages:
    11,265
    Likes Received:
    7,664
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired
    The fear of flying controversy is just another ruse. My wife has flown many times as we use to go to a several tournaments a year out of state to watch our kids play soccer and she usually would take something to help calm her nerves. One can still fly and have a fear of flying.

    What makes you wonder is why did this guy choose to go to Faux News rather than testify to the FBI? One outlet you can say anything you want without consequences where the other your testimony is guarded by the law of perjury.
     
    dviss1 and Chris Craig like this.
  5. e_blazer

    e_blazer Rip City Fan

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2008
    Messages:
    24,052
    Likes Received:
    30,037
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    Consultant
    Location:
    Oregon City, OR
    I don’t know him or anything about him. I don’t know if he gave a copy of the letter to the FBI or not. I don’t know her and I don’t know Kavanaugh. I have no reason to believe any one of them over another. There are plenty of other stories linked in this thread that come from other news outlets that notably lean to the left. I’m just sitting here trying to remain as neutral on this as possible and get as much information as I can. I think we’re way too likely in this country to let our ideologies guide our sense of “truth”. That really needs to stop.
     
    Last edited: Oct 3, 2018
    Cippy91, Titan, Shaboid and 1 other person like this.
  6. Hoopguru

    Hoopguru Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2014
    Messages:
    21,669
    Likes Received:
    17,904
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You hit the nail on the head!
     
  7. CupWizier

    CupWizier Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 21, 2009
    Messages:
    11,265
    Likes Received:
    7,664
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Occupation:
    retired
    Too many red flags and there are plenty of others that have clean records to put in this position. His demeanor and personal attack on a political party during his hearing is enough for me to say the guy doesn't deserve a lifetime appointment to the highest court.
     
    dviss1 likes this.
  8. Hoopguru

    Hoopguru Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 16, 2014
    Messages:
    21,669
    Likes Received:
    17,904
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I agree because of his attack against the Clintons showed bias, and wouldn't pass him through only because of that. And you know how I feel about them. But even they are innocent till proven guilty.
     
  9. yankeesince59

    yankeesince59 "Oh Captain, my Captain".

    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2013
    Messages:
    30,827
    Likes Received:
    13,808
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "Ford is a professor at Palo Alto University, where she teaches in consortium with Stanford University. She was, in the past, a visiting professor at Pepperdine University, where she earned a master’s degree in psychology, followed by a doctorate at the University of Southern California and a master’s in education from Stanford.
    The idea that she would toss all that aside — the salary and possibly the chance to put any of her degrees into practice again — for some strangers’ cash is preposterous."
     
  10. EL PRESIDENTE

    EL PRESIDENTE Username Retired in Honor of Lanny.

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    50,346
    Likes Received:
    22,531
    Trophy Points:
    113
    They can't fire her for coming forward. That is the preposterous idea.
     
    DaLincolnJones likes this.
  11. EL PRESIDENTE

    EL PRESIDENTE Username Retired in Honor of Lanny.

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    50,346
    Likes Received:
    22,531
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If he is not 100% sure, he is not 100% sure. A lot of nothing here. Nitpicking just to make a mountain out of a molehill.
     
  12. BrianFromWA

    BrianFromWA Editor in Chief Staff Member Editor in Chief

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    Messages:
    26,073
    Likes Received:
    9,027
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This whole "lifetime (20-30 years) job interview means this investigation is ok" thing is interesting to me. I get the logic of it, but I did a check on the Senate tenure of each of the members of the committee, and how long they'd been elected politicians. 40% of them had been politicians longer than 30 years, and only 20% had been in politics <10 years. That may be skewed based on how the Judiciary spots are filled (maybe they're a reward for longer-tenured people, I don't know), but I find it interesting that people who've been in politics for 50 years are turning high-school details into good questions for a job interview.

    Grassley 38 years/59 years
    Hatch 41 years/41 years ("Among other issues (in the 1976 election), Hatch criticized Moss's 18-year tenure in the Senate, saying "What do you call a Senator who's served in office for 18 years? You call him home.")
    Graham 15 years / 26 years
    Cornyn 16 years / 20 years
    Lee 7 years / 7 years
    Cruz 5 years / 5 years
    Sasse 4 years /4 years
    Flake 6 years / 6 years
    Crapo 20 years / 34 years
    Tillis 3 years / 10 years
    Kennedy 1 year / 19 years
    Feinstein 26 years / 49 years
    Leahy 44 years / 52 years
    Durbin 21 years / 36 years
    Whitehouse 10 years / 20 years
    Klobuchar 12 years / 20 years
    Coons 8 years / 18 years
    Blumenthal 7 years / 33 years
    Hirono 6 years/32 years (took over after the retirement of Asaka, who'd been in Senate 23 years)
    Booker 5 years / 20 years
    Harris 1 year / 14 years

    I also find it interesting that someone who is hyper-attuned to police brutality and perceived systematic injustice wants to "retire" the American judicial concept of innocent until proven guilty. Going back to Beria's "show me the man, I'll show you the crime." It's like we don't learn from history.
     
  13. dviss1

    dviss1 Emcee Referee

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2011
    Messages:
    29,479
    Likes Received:
    27,329
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Huh? What did he say he wasn't 100% sure about?
     
  14. dviss1

    dviss1 Emcee Referee

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2011
    Messages:
    29,479
    Likes Received:
    27,329
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Apples to oranges.

    You can vote senators out. You can't do that with the SCOTUS.
     
  15. dviss1

    dviss1 Emcee Referee

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2011
    Messages:
    29,479
    Likes Received:
    27,329
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Also, presumed innocence bullshit argument needs to stop.

    He's not on trial, he's in an interview.

    One he's failing miserably at.

    His credibility is just shot and it's becoming more and more obvious that regardless of whether or not he did it, they'd confirm the assaulter anyway.

    Watching both of their testimonies made that abundantly clear.

    He did that shit man. He lied too many times and his demeanor was not the one of an innocent man.

    The fact that he made his career off of prosecuting the Clintons also proves he's partisan and NOT impartial.

    He's not fit for the judgeship he currently holds, let alone the SCOTUS.
     
  16. EL PRESIDENTE

    EL PRESIDENTE Username Retired in Honor of Lanny.

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2010
    Messages:
    50,346
    Likes Received:
    22,531
    Trophy Points:
    113

    On Sept, 22nd, Yarasavage texted Berchem that she had shared the photo with “Brett’s team.”

    But when Kavanaugh was asked about the wedding during a committee interview on Sept. 25th, he said he was “probably” at a wedding with Ramirez. Asked if he interacted with her at the wedding, Kavanaugh replied, “I am sure I saw her because it wasn’t a huge wedding,” but added that he “doesn’t have a specific recollection.” Lying to Congress is a felony whether testimony is taken under oath or not.




     
  17. dviss1

    dviss1 Emcee Referee

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2011
    Messages:
    29,479
    Likes Received:
    27,329
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Stop. Really. No one wants to argue against all of the red herrings you caught. Throw those bitches back because no one in the history of this country has suggested that.

    But you'll happily parrot a right wing talking point like it's the truth.

    Again, Kavanaugh ain't on trial so stop attacking that strawman.
     
  18. dviss1

    dviss1 Emcee Referee

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2011
    Messages:
    29,479
    Likes Received:
    27,329
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The FBI investigation says it's true that he exposed his junk to her.

    So again, your guy's a goddamn liar.
     
  19. BrianFromWA

    BrianFromWA Editor in Chief Staff Member Editor in Chief

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2008
    Messages:
    26,073
    Likes Received:
    9,027
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Unless I'm mistaken (which is possible, of course), that seemed like exactly what you said in post 1620. If I misread, then forget it. That post, though, wasn't even the first one in the thread suggesting that victims "always be believed".
     
  20. barfo

    barfo triggered obsessive commie pinko boomer maniac Staff Member Global Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    34,043
    Likes Received:
    24,914
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Blazer OT board
    Not that weird given that they are subject to the same sort of scrutiny when they run for reelection - if an opponent can dig up something from their past and use it, they will.

    Who are you referring to here? [Edit: oh, I see, dviss1. I thought you meant one of the senators on the judiciary committee...]

    barfo
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page