SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,452
|
Post by SSHoya on Sept 28, 2018 8:45:26 GMT -5
Trump corrodes everything he contacts -- including the GOP. I had thought it actually believed in something based upon discussions with many friends/acquaintances (political appointees) in the Bush Administration who are appalled and have basically dropped out of politics except for one who accepted an appointment at Commerce.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Sept 28, 2018 8:56:25 GMT -5
Dr. Ford was very credible. Judge Kavanaugh was very credible. First hand "witnesses" support Kavanaugh. Second hand witnesses support Dr. Ford. If this were a court of law, Kavanaugh would be acquitted. Since it is not we have a quandry. I acknowledge my bias, but if I had a vote, I would vote yea. I accept that others will not agree with me and that is okay. Some, but not all, who so choose also have biases. Those without biases can, with clear conscience, vote either way.
|
|
hoya9797
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,234
|
A New Low
Sept 28, 2018 8:57:46 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by hoya9797 on Sept 28, 2018 8:57:46 GMT -5
You are a terrible person.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2018 9:00:06 GMT -5
Dr. Ford was very credible. Judge Kavanaugh was very credible. First hand "witnesses" support Kavanaugh. Second hand witnesses support Dr. Ford. If this were a court of law, Kavanaugh would be acquitted. Since it is not we have a quandry. I acknowledge my bias, but if I had a vote, I would vote yea. I accept that others will not agree with me and that is okay. Some, but not all, who so choose also have biases. Those without biases can, with clear conscience, vote either way. You're right that it isn't a court of law. But it is basically a job interview. If these types of things were to come out about me in a job interview (even if not provable in a court of law), I wouldn't get the job. And I'd probably lose the job I have now. I'm a relatively privileged white male. Just not as privileged as Brett Kavanaugh, I guess. And if you truly believe that Dr. Ford was credible, and Kavanaugh was too, why not propose taking the time to explore things further? Why does the "tie" go to Kavanaugh? |
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,452
|
Post by SSHoya on Sept 28, 2018 9:07:40 GMT -5
Why is Kavanaugh so fearful of a further FBI investigation including interviews of all the witnesses who were not called by the Committee? Wouldn't that exonerate Kavanaugh if he were telling the truth? Why is he so fearful of Mark Judge being put under oath?? The GOP's statement that the FBI investigation is not necessary because the Senate investigators have questioned Kavanaugh and that witnesses have submitted "statements" and letters is ludicrous. It is no substitute for a professional investigation to determine the facts. The talking point that the FBI does not reach conclusions is irrelevant. The GOP simply wants to stick its head in the sand and is not interested in finding any facts. Cowards. Graham criticized Dr. Ford because she hired an attorney and took a polygraph exam. Well, Kavanaugh hired an attorney and did NOT take a polygraph exam. Who should I believe?? www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/politics/bs-md-moco-delegation-kavanaugh-20180926-story.html |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2018 10:17:05 GMT -5
The mask is off all these dudes. Can we stop with the notion that Republicans are against identity politics because it's the biggest joke ever. Conservatives have been running on White resentment since the Civil War era...
Smh...
It's a job interview. You have 1,000 qualified guys but you choose the "she has a problem" and this is an attack on White males angle??
|
|
hoya9797
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,234
|
Post by hoya9797 on Sept 28, 2018 10:32:12 GMT -5
Pearl Jam’s 1994 song “WMA” has never felt more relevant.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,452
|
Post by SSHoya on Sept 28, 2018 10:54:05 GMT -5
The mask is off all these dudes. Can we stop with the notion that Republicans are against identity politics because it's the biggest joke ever. Conservatives have been running on White resentment since the Civil War era... Smh... It's a job interview. You have 1,000 qualified guys but you choose the "she has a problem" and this is an attack on White males angle?? Classic white male privilege at work: Brett Kavanaugh may not be telling the whole truth. When President George W. Bush nominated him to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in 2006, he told senators that he’d had nothing to do with the war on terror’s detention policies; that was not true. Kavanaugh also claimed under oath, that year and again this month, that he didn’t know that Democratic Party memos a GOP staffer showed him in 2003 were illegally obtained; his emails from that period reveal that these statements were probably false. And it cannot be possible both that the Supreme Court nominee was a well-behaved virgin who never lost control as a young man, as he told Fox News and the Senate Judiciary Committee this week, and that he was an often-drunk member of the “Keg City Club” and a “Renate Alumnius ,” as he seems to have bragged to many people and written into his high school yearbook. Then there are the sexual misconduct allegations against him, which he denies. Kavanaugh’s privilege runs deep, and it shows. He grew up in a wealthy Washington suburb where his father spent three decades as CEO of a trade association. There has been a sense among his supporters that his place is deserved, which mirrors the climate of aristocratic inheritance he grew up around. His peers from the party of personal responsibility have largely rallied around him, seeking to protect his privilege. As a Bush-era White House press secretary, Ari Fleischer, put it: “How much in society should any of us be held liable today when we lived a good life, an upstanding life by all accounts, and then something that maybe is an arguable issue took place in high school? Should that deny us chances later in life?” American Conservative editor Rod Dreher wondered “why the loutish drunken behavior of a 17 year old high school boy has anything to tell us about the character of a 53 year old judge.” www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/kavanaugh-is-lying-his-upbringing-explains-why/2018/09/27/2b596314-c270-11e8-b338-a3289f6cb742_story.html?utm_term=.3e380c48f7a8 |
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,452
|
Post by SSHoya on Sept 28, 2018 11:20:05 GMT -5
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,680
|
Post by tashoya on Sept 28, 2018 11:37:20 GMT -5
Why is Kavanaugh so fearful of a further FBI investigation including interviews of all the witnesses who were not called by the Committee? Wouldn't that exonerate Kavanaugh if he were telling the truth? Why is he so fearful of Mark Judge being put under oath?? The GOP's statement that the FBI investigation is not necessary because the Senate investigators have questioned Kavanaugh and that witnesses have submitted "statements" and letters is ludicrous. It is no substitute for a professional investigation to determine the facts. The talking point that the FBI does not reach conclusions is irrelevant. The GOP simply wants to stick its head in the sand and is not interested in finding any facts. Cowards. Graham criticized Dr. Ford because she hired an attorney and took a polygraph exam. Well, Kavanaugh hired an attorney and did NOT take a polygraph exam. Who should I believe?? www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/politics/bs-md-moco-delegation-kavanaugh-20180926-story.htmlWould it matter? We've seen that perjury is a non-issue for these folks anyway. |
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,452
|
A New Low
Sept 28, 2018 12:21:28 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by SSHoya on Sept 28, 2018 12:21:28 GMT -5
Why is Kavanaugh so fearful of a further FBI investigation including interviews of all the witnesses who were not called by the Committee? Wouldn't that exonerate Kavanaugh if he were telling the truth? Why is he so fearful of Mark Judge being put under oath?? The GOP's statement that the FBI investigation is not necessary because the Senate investigators have questioned Kavanaugh and that witnesses have submitted "statements" and letters is ludicrous. It is no substitute for a professional investigation to determine the facts. The talking point that the FBI does not reach conclusions is irrelevant. The GOP simply wants to stick its head in the sand and is not interested in finding any facts. Cowards. Graham criticized Dr. Ford because she hired an attorney and took a polygraph exam. Well, Kavanaugh hired an attorney and did NOT take a polygraph exam. Who should I believe?? www.baltimoresun.com/news/maryland/politics/bs-md-moco-delegation-kavanaugh-20180926-story.htmlWould it matter? We've seen that perjury is a non-issue for these folks anyway. Of course you are right. At least it confirms the abject moral bankruptcy of the GOP under the corrupt leadership of Trump. Trump and GOP to truth and facts - Edited. |
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Post by EasyEd on Sept 28, 2018 12:27:39 GMT -5
Dr. Ford was very credible. Judge Kavanaugh was very credible. First hand "witnesses" support Kavanaugh. Second hand witnesses support Dr. Ford. If this were a court of law, Kavanaugh would be acquitted. Since it is not we have a quandry. I acknowledge my bias, but if I had a vote, I would vote yea. I accept that others will not agree with me and that is okay. Some, but not all, who so choose also have biases. Those without biases can, with clear conscience, vote either way. You're right that it isn't a court of law. But it is basically a job interview. If these types of things were to come out about me in a job interview (even if not provable in a court of law), I wouldn't get the job. And I'd probably lose the job I have now. I'm a relatively privileged white male. Just not as privileged as Brett Kavanaugh, I guess. And if you truly believe that Dr. Ford was credible, and Kavanaugh was too, why not propose taking the time to explore things further? Why does the "tie" go to Kavanaugh? A person is presumed innocent until proven guilty. |
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,382
|
Post by EtomicB on Sept 28, 2018 12:35:34 GMT -5
You're right that it isn't a court of law. But it is basically a job interview. If these types of things were to come out about me in a job interview (even if not provable in a court of law), I wouldn't get the job. And I'd probably lose the job I have now. I'm a relatively privileged white male. Just not as privileged as Brett Kavanaugh, I guess. And if you truly believe that Dr. Ford was credible, and Kavanaugh was too, why not propose taking the time to explore things further? Why does the "tie" go to Kavanaugh? A person is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Did you like his answer about the "Renate Alumni" entry in his year book Ed? How about his answer on the " beach Ralph club"? |
|
|
|
Post by sleepyjackson21 on Sept 28, 2018 12:41:10 GMT -5
In a court of law. This is for a position on the Supreme Court, completely different. I want someone beyond reproach. If Kavanaugh is truly innocent and he gets denied and is collateral damage, so be it.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,452
|
Post by SSHoya on Sept 28, 2018 12:44:57 GMT -5
A person is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Did you like his answer about the "Renate Alumni" entry in his year book Ed? How about his answer on the " beach Ralph club"? And who believes that "Devil's Triangle" is a drinking game? And how about more Yale classmates saying that Kavanaugh drank a lot more than he is willing to admit? None of that precludes him from getting good grades or being on sports teams, which seemed to be his primary defense. Those who choose to believe Kavanaugh are willfully blind to the circumstantial evidence that he hasn't been wholly truthful about his drinking habits. As I have said before, drinking even excessively in your youth is not disqualifying, but lying it about it surely is. Once again, the GOP engages in a "faith based initiative." They don't want facts, but simply want to believe. Cowards with their heads in the sand. "I'll tell you, Chris, I watched the whole hearing, and a number of my Yale colleagues and I were extremely disappointed in Brett Kavanaugh's characterization of himself and the way that he evaded his excessive drinking question" and "was lying to the Senate Judiciary Committee today," Brookes said. "There is no doubt in my mind that while at Yale, he was a big partier, often drank to excess, and there had to be a number of nights where he does not remember." She said she can "almost guarantee" he doesn't remember a night she witnessed where he was "stumbling drunk, in a ridiculous costume, saying really dumb things" to pledge a fraternity. theweek.com/speedreads/798739/republican-yale-drinking-buddy-kavanaughs-tells-cnn-lied-senate-judiciary-committee |
|
|
|
Post by sleepyjackson21 on Sept 28, 2018 12:53:13 GMT -5
Brookes quote is meaningless. About as meaningless as Chris Dudley's quote. One for, one against. Drawn up by party lines.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,452
|
Post by SSHoya on Sept 28, 2018 12:54:52 GMT -5
In a court of law. This is for a position on the Supreme Court, completely different. I want someone beyond reproach. If Kavanaugh is truly innocent and he gets denied and is collateral damage, so be it. Correct, it is not a court of law. I can draw an inference that if Dr. Ford requests an FBI investigation and willing undertook a polygraph (regardless of how it was paid for) and Kavanaugh declines to ask for an FBI investigation (and in fact refuses to directly answer the question as to whether he would) and refuses to take a polygraph that Kavanaugh is fearful of a reopening of an FBI background investigation because of what it might turn up. If he were truly innocent, it would exonerate him. |
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,452
|
Post by SSHoya on Sept 28, 2018 12:57:36 GMT -5
Brookes quote is meaningless. About as meaningless as Chris Dudley's quote. One for, one against. Drawn up by party lines. No, a reopened FBI background investigation would discover more facts -- these are simply leads to be pursued. And Brookes is a Republican. FBI can interview Brooks to give specific times/dates/circumstances in which he saw Kavanaugh so drunk that he would not remember his actions. FBI could ask Brookes for other Yalies who agreed with him who may have other circumstances reflecting the same. Explain why Kavanaugh is so fearful of such a reopening of a background investigation? Why will he not sit for a polygraph -- which is merely an investigative tool and the fact that it is not admissible in a court of law is irrelevant. Even one of Kavanaugh's own opinion recognized the utility of the polygraph. And who believes that he was unaware that purloined emails he received when in the Bush WH from Manny Miranda were not stolen??? To me this should have merited more discussion by the committee. |
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,452
|
Post by SSHoya on Sept 28, 2018 13:06:33 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by sleepyjackson21 on Sept 28, 2018 13:12:01 GMT -5
I stand corrected she is a self identified republican.
|
|
