Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think that right there is a valid reason to extend the deadline. I was a bit disheartened to hear that the FBI won't be investigating Kavanaugh's drinking habits. He's under oath saying he never passed out. Seems like people that knew him in high school and college are saying otherwise.
Glad to know you (and other Republicans) support giving a liar a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land.
I've not heard any claim that he has passed out! The have claimed he slurred his words, stumbled and was belligerent.
As far as being a liar....time will tell but keep in mind that Dems have supported MANY liars for positions in the past! Nobody can reasonably say that Dems have the "high ground" on this one. Just look at their past!
Are you forgetting that her original therapists notes left 4 blank slots for assailants/accomplices to be filled in?
Anyway, how many people can one alleged victim credibly accuse. The nominee had to be someone she could establish history/ties/connections with.
I don't know anything about slots or how to interpret it. Cite? I'd be interested in the context.
Again, not a therapist here with little familiarity with "best practices." Ford didn't want to then name them (but mentioned a name in a subsequent sessions and the therapist never went back in time)? The slots were always meant to be blank, actual names never to go in the notes? Mitchell didn't mention this.
Regardless, is the contention that her husband is lying - and how does that tie into a plot and/or unstable Ford scenario?
Please understand, my take is that this situation is problematic. I would not blindly accept Ford's story wholesale and as I've said believe she would have done better not to go public. Even if her intentions were to serve the public good or some such stuff, an unprovable assertions only increases the national divide.
Too, out of all the various "questions," the one I find most compelling (as Mitchell likewise appears to have done) is that Ford does not remember how she got home. Not where the house was ... not how she got there ... but home after the incident.
We all tend to interpret thru our individual frameworks and that *I* find surprising. Sure, it could be evidence the story is fabricated or it could be evidence of substantial trauma. And I am willing to question how good a reporter a profoundly traumatized individual might be. I wrote earlier that if she had not previously known Kavanaugh that would be highly problematic.
I don't get cable television so I've no idea if the airwaves (or cable lines) are filled with armchair psychologists analyzing "typical" traumatic behavior. Calling Dr. Phil ...
Looks like we are going round and round with the same arguments from both sides. No one is going to change the other's POV.
Fortunately the senators don't care one iota of what is written here on CD. At this point there is a good chance 48 democrats will vote NO. Forty seven Republicans will vote YES.
The only uncertain votes are Flake, Collins, Murkowski and Manchin. Let us suppose that the FBI investigation is inconclusive as the testimony was, and no clear cut lies were told either side.
Flake is unpredictable. He is not seeking reelection and might vote NO. Collins and Murkowski might need to satisfy their constituents and their party if they want to win reelection. If they vote YES then Manchin might vote YES to save his seat. But if one of them vote NO he is in a quandary. Does he vote NO and defeat Kavanaugh and in the process cause his defeat a month later or does he vote YES to confirm (via Tiebreaker) and also increase his chances of winning.
Yes, I tend to "hate" people who sexually assault women and steal pay from labor (contractors he stiffed) and hard-earned money from innocent consumers (his Trump "university") and lie and call people names on a daily basis--and are ignorant and stupid, in general, in the extreme. Go figure.
You hate anyone who doesn't support your left wing ideology, stop trying to act dignified, it's humorous at best.
Of course Kavanaugh is upset, angry, and extremely frustrated. He has been falsely accused, his life long work is in peril, his family has been attacked and his future career has been jeopardized. Disgusting vile e-mails sent to his family calling his wife an f'ng B and worse.
And all of this because the dems are panicking over a conservative serving on the Supreme Court.
Any conservative that is nominated will be viciously attacked. All they want is to delay, delay and delay to hold off voting until after the midterms with the false sense of security that the left will control congress and then they can jump and down with glee with the prospect of impeaching President Trump.
I'd question Kavanaugh's mental state IF he didn't throw it right back at them.
Actually we don't know (and we may never know) if he's been falsely accused. You may not believe Ford, but you do not know the truth, nor do I.
In both cases, falsely accused as well as having the truth come out, would cause an aggressive response. But I'm sorry, this is not a street fight, and a judge and candidate for the Supreme Court is held to a higher standard of behavior than Joe Blow at the ABC Company. As angry as he may be for whatever reasons, he needs to be respectful at the hearings and give measured responses. Sure, he can show some ire but some of the stuff he was doing was just being a belligerant A-hole and that's not the place for it. I know he's "your guy" and you probably get off on that sort of behavior, but it certainly is not what I expect of any nominee of any party.
As to your comment of any conservative being nominated will be viciously attacked, I disagree. I don't thing Neil Gorusch had a fraction of these problems.
You can't do that, it would send a message to the democrats that all they have to do to derail nominee is conduct a smear campaign, and that they can circumvent the whole process, and destroy innocent people.
It is imperative that they show the democrats that this kind of vile behavior will not be tolerated.
I would like to see people prosecuted for lying, and members of the judicial committee removed over this. This is the only way to fix this, and prevent it from happening again.
I don't buy that.
I know it is the theme right now for conservatives -- all this is just made up. I don't think it is made up. I do think Democrats are using it and Republicans would do the exact same.
It almost sounds like you are saying that one Justice can act unilaterally to prevent a President from being charged with a crime.
I don't think one Justice has that kind of power.
I also don't believe the Supreme Court has the power to stop or prevent Impeachment hearings and Senate Impeachment trials from happening, except that the Chief Justice shall preside over all Senate Impeachment trials.
I refer you to the United States Constitution, Article I, Section 3, last paragraph; and Article II, Section 2, Paragraph 1.
Actually we don't know (and we may never know) if he's been falsely accused. You may not believe Ford, but you do not know the truth, nor do I.
In both cases, falsely accused as well as having the truth come out, would cause an aggressive response. But I'm sorry, this is not a street fight, and a judge and candidate for the Supreme Court is held to a higher standard of behavior than Joe Blow at the ABC Company. As angry as he may be for whatever reasons, he needs to be respectful at the hearings and give measured responses. Sure, he can show some ire but some of the stuff he was doing was just being a belligerant A-hole and that's not the place for it. I know he's "your guy" and you probably get off on that sort of behavior, but it certainly is not what I expect of any nominee of any party.
As to your comment of any conservative being nominated will be viciously attacked, I disagree. I don't thing Neil Gorusch had a fraction of these problems.
Sad to say, you're very wrong. Pathetic situation where those who are against President Trump will speak against anyone who is nominated by him. That worn out and ludicrous hatred is tearing our country apart.
So Kavanaugh can scream and yell, manifesting a clearly unstable personality, and yet still deserve a seat on the SC, while women protesters who do so deserve to be imprisoned? Got it.
I don’t know why I even bother, but obviously you are misrepresenting what I said. Yes, the women protesters interrupting against senate rules went to jail, as they knew they would since they were getting their bail money ahead of time. Kavanaugh has every right to be angry at being accused with absolutely NO evidence that he groped Ford and nearly killed her, exposed himself to Ramirez at a party, and was part of some sort of gang rape ring by Swetnick.
Did you believe her by the way? Her interview was on MSNBC yesterday, and what a doozy that was!
Swetnick is the epitome of why people should ditch the “Believe All Women” motto.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
