Kavanaugh by SIGNYM

... stay crunchy...

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:
Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
But they're too tough for you to answer...

Wrong again - they're TOO EASY to answer. I'm guessing you got an email directive that said: "our new position is:" Blame the Democrats. "They aren't good enough." That's like blaming a women for being assaulted. "She should have known better to wear that."

Don't hold the GOP responsible.
Don't look at the insurmountable votes available.
Don't look at so many things because why would you do that when you can just shift attention elsewhere?

What's one of the main reasons women are treated like second class citizens and always will be?

Easy! Women like you.

You should probably ask second class citizen women in the Middle East. You won't find any here.

I would do that why? The sh*t you post.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 7, 2018 9:13 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:
Every little crack iz an opportunity to break America into smaller and smaller chunks.

What you're referring to here is Authoritarian Left inter-sectional identity politics.

If Trump is guilty of anything here it was taking advantage of the damage already done.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 7, 2018 9:21 AM

... stay crunchy...

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
As a disappointed Democrat ... I expect more of them.

In terms of....? Undo MATH? They tried with what they had, which should have been enough, but, yanno, there's that whole math thing and the fact that those Republicans clearly did not care who they put on the bench as long as he was a republican.

What could they have done?

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
And BTW, I've laid plenty of blame on Republicans, as you could see from my old posts. So this is an outright lie.

On this subject??? Cite them then - otherwise BS.

THEY HAD THE NUMBERS. It was a GOP math certainty and in this entire thread I saw nothing from you that holds any Republican accountable, or even Kavanaugh of being an obvious GOP stooge.

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Here's as piece of advice for everyone, including me.

Our discussions would be FAR more productive if we would stop arguing with the voices in our heads. It seems like people (like GSTRING, SHIT, and THUGR) spend FAR too much time imputing motives and points of view to others .... motives and points of view which those others don't have.

Why not just stick to responding to WHAT POSTED, instead of ranting at something that might not even exist? If we could manage to do that, as well as NOT RESORTING TO PERSONAL ATTACKS WHEN WE HAVE NOTHING RELEVANT TO POST, I'm sure our discussions will be a lot more rational. Unless people here have an interest in being IRRATIONAL, that seems like a better avenue. Right?

Translation: lots of words that mean: "quit pointing out my bullsh*t!"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 7, 2018 10:25 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
As a disappointed Democrat ... I expect more of them. - SIGNY

In terms of....? Undo MATH? They tried with what they had, which should have been enough, but, yanno, there's that whole math thing and the fact that those Republicans clearly did not care who they put on the bench as long as he was a republican.
What could they have done? - CC

The roots of the Democrats' failure go back decades. At some point, the Dems became corrupted by their campaign contributors (for Hillary that would be George Soros and family, Saudi Arabia, big pharma, and international "wealth management" firms that help you create shell companies and instant foundations, Uranium One) and stopped representing Americans, especially working Americans. At one time, they maintained the fiction that they represented blue collar Americans AND the victims of race, class, and gender oppression; but they dropped the "blue collar" vote and became instead the party of slivers of self-identified victims.

The Dem's proximate failure was to run Heir Apparent Hillary Rodham Clinton, and then to double down on that failure by NOT LEARNING from their mistake and instead spending their next two years focusing on RUSSIA!! RUSSIA!! RUSSIA!! which - polls show- most Americans don't give two shits about. The Dem's previous mistake, under Obama, was to foster a "recovery" which made the insanely wealthy even MORE wealthy but which left working Americans gasping for the hope and change that he promised.

At this point, why should anyone pay attention to the Dems? Unless you're committed to victimhood, the Democratic Party has nothing for you. And even then, all they have are words and cheap, meaningless gestures like unisex bathrooms.

I'm not saying that the Dems aren't in some ways better than the Rebups in some fashion: They still support Social Security and Medicare, and altho Dem Congress/Obama fucked up healthcare the Dems COULD fix the problems they created.

BUT, working Americans feel that the Dems don't have their back. Obama was just "more of the same/ bail out the banks/ fuck the working stiff" and Hillary promised to be even more of more of the same. They REALLY need to retool their message and their policies. Because you can fool some of the people all of the time, all all of the people some of the time, but eventually Americans clue in that they've been stiffed, again.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 7, 2018 10:50 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:
Every little crack iz an opportunity to break America into smaller and smaller chunks.

What you're referring to here is Authoritarian Left inter-sectional identity politics.

If Trump is guilty of anything here it was taking advantage of the damage already done.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

You shouldn't use words you don't understand.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 7, 2018 11:00 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Trump haz been destroying & degrading the goverment all along, so Kavenough wuz the perfect choise. Putin iz a master puppeteer. He haz widened the divide between rite & left, now this will divide men & wimin.

WHO DID THIS, JO?
TRUMP??

Allegations which SHOULD have been brought forward the week that they were received, so that they could get a thorough investigation and measured discussion, instead of sitting in someone's office for months??

Allegations that were whipped into a froth of last-minute hysteria?

The party that did this was the Dems.

They had no interest in finding out if any of this was true. All they wanted was to get a tearful woman on the stand with accusations that other women could identify with. Now, what I see are women upset at Kavanaugh because they were done dirty by SOME OTHER GUY IN THE PAST.

More bullshit, more "identity politics", more hysteria, more irrationality. Brought to you by ... the Dems.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 7, 2018 11:31 AM

... stay crunchy...

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The roots of the Democrats' failure go back decades...

zzzzzzz only half of the first sentence in and I/we it's confirmed that SIGGY is up to her usual long foam filled dodge non answer. One has to wonder what she's so afraid of? Why the hiding?

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
At some point, the Dems became corrupted by their campaign contributors ...

Hardcore Fox conservatives would be so proud of your complete capitulation.

So back to my questions:

As a disappointed Democrat ... I expect more of them. - SIGNY

In terms of....? Undo MATH? They tried with what they had, which should have been enough, but, yanno, there's that whole math thing and the fact that those Republicans clearly did not care who they put on the bench as long as he was a republican.
What could they have done? - CC

I'll add - how can you blame democrats for not being able to stop Kavanuagh?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 7, 2018 12:11 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
As a disappointed Democrat ... I expect more of them. - SIGNY

In terms of....? Undo MATH? They tried with what they had, which should have been enough, but, yanno, there's that whole math thing and the fact that those Republicans clearly did not care who they put on the bench as long as he was a republican.
What could they have done? - CC

I'm not "hiding", it's just that you purposefully misunderstood my statement, and so I have no reason to respond to your purposeful misdirection.

I've expected more of the Dems for YEARS.

Quote:
They tried hard with what they had".

The reason why "what they had" was so few votes ... AGAIN ... goes back to what they did over the long run. And in term's of

Quote:
trying hard

what they did was play dirty, and appeal, ONCE AGAIN, to hysterical identity politics. Which is what got them in this pickle to begin with.

The Dems have STILL not learned their lesson: Instead of dividing America into smaller and smaller slivers of self-identified victims groups (does a nonwhite older civilian female have more rights than a transsexual in the military?) they should get back to representing ALL Americans. Yanno, when Hillary called nearly half of the voting public "deplorables", that was emblematic of everything wrong with the Democratic Party. They paid the price when they lost that election, and if they keep up with that, they'll continue to pay the price.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 7, 2018 1:52 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by reaverfan:
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:
Every little crack iz an opportunity to break America into smaller and smaller chunks.

What you're referring to here is Authoritarian Left inter-sectional identity politics.

If Trump is guilty of anything here it was taking advantage of the damage already done.

Do Right, Be Right. :)
You shouldn't use words you don't understand.

You mean like when you constantly misuse the word Nazi?

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 7, 2018 3:19 PM

I use it perfectly. Your lack of education has left you unable to recognize common words and their correct usage.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 7, 2018 3:22 PM

Why I’m Leaving the Republican Party
The Kavanaugh confirmation fight revealed the GOP to be the party of situational ethics and moral relativism in the name of winning at all costs.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/10/tom-nichols-why-im-l
eaving-republican-party/572419/

"The Kavanaugh confirmation fight revealed the GOP to be the party of situational ethics and moral relativism in the name of winning at all costs."

... It did? Not the endless voter purges? Not the asking for Russia's help on live TV to hack your political opponents and shouting "lock her up" about a woman who your own investigations had proven not guilty of any criminal wrongdoing? Not Mitch McConnell refusing to hold a hearing for a Supreme Court Judge nominated by a liberal president, for no reason? Not the Republicans in congress stating point-blank that their entire goal during Obama's administration was to just not allow him to do anything, even if it would be good for the American people? Not the Republicans voting for a complete imbecile who can barely string sentences together, believes actual conspiracy theories, and is barely being restrained from tanking the world economy by terrified aides in his own administration?

None of that "revealed" that the GOP used moral relativism? This? This was the final straw?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 7, 2018 3:24 PM

... stay crunchy...

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I'm not "hiding", it's just that you purposefully misunderstood my statement, and so I have no reason to respond to your purposeful misdirection.

I've expected more of the Dems for YEARS.

So you blame them for not going back in time? Ok.

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The reason why "what they had" was so few votes ... AGAIN ... goes back to what they did over the long run. And in term's of
Quote:
trying hard
what they did was play dirty, and appeal, ONCE AGAIN, to hysterical identity politics. Which is what got them in this pickle to begin with.

AGAIN - So you blame them for not going back in time? Ok ok.

"Hysterical identity politics?" So that's what you think women who stand up when they are sexually are doing? You sound like a bro again. "Damn those hysterical women! Can't they just take a beating without makin' such a fuss? Is that too much to ask?!?"

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The Dems have STILL not learned their lesson: Instead of dividing America into smaller and smaller slivers of self-identified victims groups (does a nonwhite older civilian female have more rights than a transsexual in the military?) they should get back to representing ALL Americans. Yanno, when Hillary called nearly half of the voting public "deplorables", that was emblematic of everything wrong with the Democratic Party. They paid the price when they lost that election, and if they keep up with that, they'll continue to pay the price.

Oh ok, so what should they have done to keep Kavanaugh from the SC?

Undo MATH? They tried with what they had, which should have been enough, but, yanno, there's that whole math thing and the fact that those Republicans clearly did not care who they put on the bench as long as he was a republican.
What could they have done? - CC

Any time now...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 7, 2018 3:34 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by reaverfan:
I use it perfectly. Your lack of education has left you unable to recognize common words and their correct usage.

lol. Whatever you say, social terrorist.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 7, 2018 3:57 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Oh ok, so what should they have done to keep Kavanaugh from the SC?

Undo MATH? They tried with what they had, which should have been enough, but, yanno, there's that whole math thing and the fact that those Republicans clearly did not care who they put on the bench as long as he was a republican.
What could they have done? - CC

Any time now...

Just keep doing what you're doing.

It's working out splendidly for you, innit?

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 7, 2018 4:17 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

GIVEN THE SITUATION - what SHOULD democrats have done? Well, what COULD they have done? In terms of getting a different outcome, probably nothing. (And I suspect they didn't come forward with all those allegations earlier because they knew that those allegations wouldn't withstand a thorough investigation, maybe not even a far more intensive criminal investigation.)

But you know that old saying: if you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is to STOP DIGGING. Democrats should stop playing identity politics because all it does entrench the sides even more. Women may be more motivated to vote for democrats. But guess what, republicans have also become more motivated as well. So democrats need to STOP DIGGING that victim-hood hole.

What they SHOULD have done is formulate a principled stand on the issues that make Kavanaugh unsuitable. Then formulate a path to fairness and a better future for all. And express that opposition and that hope in clear terms. Repeatedly. Let people know democrats stand for something besides dirty, desperate politics, and business as usual.

It would have done absolutely nothing to keep Kavanaugh out of the Supreme Court. But it could bring democrats back to political relevance, instead of being the impotent, passing afterthought they are now.

tic tac

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 7, 2018 5:03 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
I'm not "hiding", it's just that you purposefully misunderstood my statement, and so I have no reason to respond to your purposeful misdirection.
I've expected more of the Dems for YEARS.- SIGNY

So you blame them for not going back in time? Ok.- GSTRING

No, I blame them for not learning lessons from the past

Quote:
The reason why "what they had" was so few votes ... AGAIN ... goes back to what they did over the long run. And in term's of
Quote:
trying hard
what they did was play dirty, and appeal, ONCE AGAIN, to hysterical identity politics. Which is what got them in this pickle to begin with. - SIGNY

AGAIN - So you blame them for not going back in time? Ok ok.- GSTRING

No, I blame them for not learning lessons from the past.

Quote:
"Hysterical identity politics?" So that's what you think women who stand up when they are sexually are doing? You sound like a bro again. "Damn those hysterical women! Can't they just take a beating without makin' such a fuss? Is that too much to ask?!?"- GSTRING

Is it POSSIBLE, do you suppose, for you not being a complete ass?

IF THE DEMOCRATS REALLY HAD A CONCERN THAT KAVANAUGH WAS A SEXUAL ABUSER. THEY WOULD HAVE HANDLED THIS MUCH DIFFERENTLY.

They would have brought up these allegations when then FIRST came to light, not sprung them -literally- at the very last moment. They would have pressed for a long, thorough investigation. They would have provided the SENATE COMMITTEE with COPIES of the therapy notes and COPIES of the polygraph exam ... as they had been asked THREE TIMES by Grassley ... which might have opened up new avenues of investigation, or allowed Senate delegates to visit Ford in CA as the committee offered instead of stalling and stalling and stalling and obfuscating.

Clearly, this was an orchestrated attempt to demean Kavanaugh's reputation with (as far as I can tell) a flurry of last-minute, totally unverifiable accusations. You keep asking What else could they have done?, which certainly implies that EVEN YOU recognize that this was a underhanded attempt by the Dems.

Quote:
The Dems have STILL not learned their lesson: Instead of dividing America into smaller and smaller slivers of self-identified victims groups (does a nonwhite older civilian female have more rights than a transsexual in the military?) they should get back to representing ALL Americans. Yanno, when Hillary called nearly half of the voting public "deplorables", that was emblematic of everything wrong with the Democratic Party. They paid the price when they lost that election, and if they keep up with that, they'll continue to pay the price. - SIGNY

Oh ok, so what should they have done to keep Kavanaugh from the SC? Undo MATH? They tried with what they had, which should have been enough, but, yanno, there's that whole math thing and the fact that those Republicans clearly did not care who they put on the bench as long as he was a republican.
What could they have done?- GSTRING

NOTHING. There was NOTHING the Dems could have done to keep Kavanaugh from the SC.

So, what did they do? Instead of taking a principled stand and focusing on THE ISSUES, they trot out a woman with (phony?) accusations of sexual abuse, so that other women can sympathize with her, and then attempt to use Kavanaugh's inevitable appointment as a wedge issue in November.

It's like RUSSIA!!RUSSIA!!RUSSIA!! ... completely unverifiable accusations designed to activate people's emotions. A desperate orchestrated attempt to garner votes, the likes of which have, so far, worked oppositely for the DNC.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 7, 2018 5:18 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

ETA

Just in case any of our resident trolls are going to claim that I've 'suddenly' become motivated by 'somebody' to blame democrats:

I'd like to point out that I've been harping at the so-called 'democratic' party, their decades-long unswerving march into political irrelevance, their failed victim-hood identity politics, their back-room business as usual dealings, and their corrupted presidential candidate since well before the 2016 presidential election.

tic tac

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 7, 2018 5:20 PM

rezident owtsidr

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Quote:
Trump haz been destroying & degrading the goverment all along, so Kavenough wuz the perfect choise. Putin iz a master puppeteer. He haz widened the divide between rite & left, now this will divide men & wimin.
WHO DID THIS, JO?
TRUMP??

Allegations which SHOULD have been brought forward the week that they were received, so that they could get a thorough investigation and measured discussion, instead of sitting in someone's office for months??

Allegations that were whipped into a froth of last-minute hysteria?

The party that did this was the Dems.

They had no interest in finding out if any of this was true.

Ford only wished to inform the senate and spesificly asked for her story to be kept private. This wuz BEFOR Kav wuz the nominee.

You are yoozing the standard GoP 'accuze your opponent uv your crime' tactic. Grassly & McConnel did their level best to rush Kav thru with no questionz asked. I'm sure they considered plunking hiz ass into a catapult & launching him thru the roof uv the court, but sumwun realized he mite die.

I woct the entire hearing, all 9 owrz. Partymiester Kav sed "I like beer" about 2 duzen timez, az if he wuz trying to ingratiate himself with Joe 6pak. Clearly a stratejy cooked up by Trump & hiz gang.

----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.7532020.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 7, 2018 5:48 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Ford only wished to inform the senate and spesificly asked for her story to be kept private. This wuz BEFOR Kav wuz the nominee.- JO

Here is a timeline of all of Ford's repeated contacts with the Democratic Party, as well as the Washington Post. It's not like she just sent an letter and then let the process work, she REPEATEDLY called Eshoo, Feinstein, and WaPo.

Her letter was delivered to Feinstein July 30.

Quote:
Grassly & McConnel did their level best to rush Kav thru with no questionz asked.

All of August and half of September goes by before Feinstein gives the FBI a copy of the letter. She NEVER gives a copy to her own Committee.

The Committee follows up with Kavanaugh Sept 17, Feinstein refuses to participate

Feinstein, to this date, has NEVER given a copy of the letter, nor of the polygraph exam, to the Committee, whose duty it is to evaluate Kavanaugh.

I find her activity obstructive in the extreme, but she's not the only bad actor. Ford's own attorneys apparently didn't even inform Ford of the Senate's offer to interview her in California, and Chuck Schumer has been implicated as well.

Ford was used as a political football, and IMHO she was victimized by Democrats.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/09/must-see-updated-timeline-of-
christine-blasey-fords-contacts-with-democrats/

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, October 7, 2018 6:25 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:
Ford only wished to inform the senate and spesificly asked for her story to be kept private. This wuz BEFOR Kav wuz the nominee.

Just reading this, I gotta' say JO, it makes no sense. Why would Blasey-Ford send a letter about Kavanaugh BEFORE he was nominated? Is she psychic?

As for the lack of timeliness, Signy addressed this quite a while ago - laying the blame on Feinstein for not being upfront with Blasey-Ford that this was going to end up a public part of the proceedings. When it comes to Feinsteins claim of confidentiality, it was conditional on Ford's part "As a constituent, I expect that you will maintain this as confidential until we have further opportunity to speak."

Of the three women who accused Kavanaugh, neither Blasey-Ford, Ramirez, nor Swetnick had good corroborating evidence. You'd think however, that their claims would merit at least some continuing investigation.

But what I blame democrats for is not having a case of merit, or fairness, or justice, to bring to the proceedings. The confirmation hearings began September 4, 2018. Ford's claims were made public September 16, 2018. Did democrats have NOTHING to say in intervening ~2 weeks?

To me, that speaks volumes.

tic tac

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 12:47 AM

rezident owtsidr

The offer to interview Ford wuz bogus. Grassleyz interest wuz purely to discredit her.

Wut shoud raiz questionz for you, Kiki, iz why Kav wuz not screaming for the FBI to investigate to clear hiz good name. To hell with the committee! MY reputation iz being trashed!

Its going to bakfire anyway. Cristine Blasey Ford and the 2 otherz arent going to just fade away. And Avenatti iz going to make az much noize az possible, including digging up more accuzerz, witnessez & evidens.

Fair chans I rekon, that Kav will bekum the 1st Supreme Court Justis evr impeached and removed. And ritefully imprizoned if the word 'perjury' meanz anything.

----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.7532020.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 12:54 AM

rezident owtsidr

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Just reading this, I gotta' say JO, it makes no sense. Why would Blasey-Ford send a letter about Kavanaugh BEFORE he was nominated? Is she psychic?

She saw the list uv nominee segjestionz provided by The Heritaj Foundation. Seeing that fratboy assclownz name on it outrajed her.
----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.7532020.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 2:06 AM

rezident owtsidr

How do you post links with a fone? I wanted to show the Heritaj Foundation paje 'meet the 6 stellar jujez' on Trumps short list.

----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.7532020.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 3:07 AM

SHINYGOODGUY

Hey Kiki,

As I read your response to Jo a few things came to mind:

As I remember it, the timing of the letter that Jo is referring to has to be when Ford first heard Kavanaugh's name mentioned on the short list of nominees
being considered by Trump. (of course, this is all moot now).

Feinstein did handle it poorly.

As far as corroborating evidence and witnesses, the GOP JC members had no intention of presenting, or allowing to be presented, any of it. There was
the polygraph (and the expert), The notes from her therapist (and her therapist), her husband. Mark Judge should have been subpoenaed (a letter
saying "I know nothing" is bullshit. There's nothing that beats having a
witness in person testifying as to what he knows about the case).

And as for Ramirez, she had witnesses coming forward but the JC and the FBI refused to deal with them. The other accuser I know little of, so I offer
up nothing regarding her accusations. Under normal circumstances surrounding the vetting of a SCOTUS nominee, I dare say that the JC would call for a
thorough investigation. But this circus, perpetrated by the republicans, was
far from normal procedure.

The hearing and vetting process was a sham from start to finish. First the document "musical chairs" that the Repugs played prior to the hearing. For example: delivering thousands of documents in the wee hours of the morning
of the interview, the president "classifying" certain documents that
Kavanaugh worked on while serving in the Bush Administration, and so on.
A total fucking farce. The stolen emails he received from a RNC plant within
the DNC office. Like I said, all this is moot.

As I think more on it, Kavanaugh's lies to the committee under oath should have been sufficient to disqualify him for the position.

I'm going to stop here, I'm feeling a little ill.

SGG

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:
Ford only wished to inform the senate and spesificly asked for her story to be kept private. This wuz BEFOR Kav wuz the nominee.
Just reading this, I gotta' say JO, it makes no sense. Why would Blasey-Ford send a letter about Kavanaugh BEFORE he was nominated? Is she psychic?

As for the lack of timeliness, Signy addressed this quite a while ago - laying the blame on Feinstein for not being upfront with Blasey-Ford that this was going to end up a public part of the proceedings. When it comes to Feinsteins claim of confidentiality, it was conditional on Ford's part "As a constituent, I expect that you will maintain this as confidential until we have further opportunity to speak."

Of the three women who accused Kavanaugh, neither Blasey-Ford, Ramirez, nor Swetnick had good corroborating evidence. You'd think however, that their claims would merit at least some continuing investigation.

But what I blame democrats for is not having a case of merit, or fairness, or justice, to bring to the proceedings. The confirmation hearings began September 4, 2018. Ford's claims were made public September 16, 2018. Did democrats have NOTHING to say in intervening ~2 weeks?

To me, that speaks volumes.

tic tac

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 3:32 AM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Hello to you both.

I've indicated that I think there should be continued investigation. Wrongdoing should be ferreted out, OR Kavanaugh should be definitively cleared. All applicable questions that can be answered should be answered. That said, there will be people for whom even a thorough investigation won't be enough, if it doesn't get the right answer.

Setting that aside, I still think the democrats failed in their basic political duty: to formulate a position of fairness and opportunity for all, and to represent their commitment to that position, and Kavanaugh's antithetical position to it.

The political reality is that democrats weren't going to change the outcome. But they had the opportunity to show us that they're on our side. And I don't mean just women or Hispanics, or African Americans or Native Americans, or ... I mean everybody.

I've brought this up before. And I have to ask, how hard could it be to say 'we're here to help make a country where everybody has the same fair shot at a good life'?

What is so difficult about that concept? How hard could it be to agree to that?

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 5:25 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:
The offer to interview Ford wuz bogus. Grassleyz interest wuz purely to discredit her.

Wut shoud raiz questionz for you, Kiki, iz why Kav wuz not screaming for the FBI to investigate to clear hiz good name. To hell with the committee! MY reputation iz being trashed!

Its going to bakfire anyway. Cristine Blasey Ford and the 2 otherz arent going to just fade away. And Avenatti iz going to make az much noize az possible, including digging up more accuzerz, witnessez & evidens.

Fair chans I rekon, that Kav will bekum the 1st Supreme Court Justis evr impeached and removed. And ritefully imprizoned if the word 'perjury' meanz anything.

----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.7532020.com

You seem far to intelligent to go by guilty until proven innocent, J0.

What's your deal here?

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 10:16 AM

... stay crunchy...

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
No, I blame them for not learning lessons from the past.

Learning how to change math? Again you just lob up nothing comments like they mean something.

Why don't you want to change the Republicans?

Why don't you mention the lies Kavanaugh told? I agree with Jo and many others who respect the rule of actual Law, that he should be he should be tried for perjury.

Why don't you mention how he showed himself to be unfit character-wise for being a SC judge, as was noted by judges and ex-SC judge and many law professionals?

Why don't you mention how he couldn't answer the question about wanting an FBI investigation or not when - if he was innocent - it would have proven he was telling the truth?

Why don't you mention anything about the limited FBI investigation that didn't even interview the main characters or 20+ other witnesses?

As even Kiki noted, there was no way the Dems could have done ANYTHING against MATH.

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Is it POSSIBLE, do you suppose, for you not being a complete ass?

Is it POSSIBLE, do you suppose, for you not being a complete fabricator? Witness:

SIGGY: IF THE DEMOCRATS REALLY HAD A CONCERN THAT KAVANAUGH WAS A SEXUAL ABUSER. THEY WOULD HAVE HANDLED THIS MUCH DIFFERENTLY.

Uh-huh. You being legal & political theory scholar you know all about how this should have gone?

SIGGY: They would have brought up these allegations when then FIRST came to light, not sprung them -literally- at the very last moment.

CC: Not even close to "the last moment."

SIGGY: They would have pressed for a long, thorough investigation.

CC: They did and The Republicans shot it down.

SIGGY: They would have provided the SENATE COMMITTEE with COPIES of the therapy notes and COPIES of the polygraph exam ... as they had been asked THREE TIMES by Grassley ... which might have opened up new avenues of investigation, or allowed Senate delegates to visit Ford in CA as the committee offered instead of stalling and stalling and stalling and obfuscating.

CC: They made a point of revealing thse items so they weren't hiding them. The Republicans played just as many file withholding tactics.

SIGGY: Clearly, this was an orchestrated attempt to demean Kavanaugh's reputation with (as far as I can tell) a flurry of last-minute, totally unverifiable accusations.

CC: Kavanaugh demeaned his own reputation MANY times. Sometimes in the past and sometimes right in front of the Nation on live tv.

SIGGY: You keep asking What else could they have done?, which certainly implies that EVEN YOU recognize that this was a underhanded attempt by the Dems.

CC: That's so stupid it's funny

It implies that you can't answer a simple question and all you do is dodge and lie.

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:The Dems have STILL not learned their lesson: Instead of dividing America into smaller and smaller slivers of self-identified victims groups (does a nonwhite older civilian female have more rights than a transsexual in the military?) they should get back to representing ALL Americans. Yanno, when Hillary called nearly half of the voting public "deplorables", that was emblematic of everything wrong with the Democratic Party. They paid the price when they lost that election, and if they keep up with that, they'll continue to pay the price.

What does any of that have to do with us having a new SC justice who lies and is unfit to be a Supreme?

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
So, what did they do? Instead of taking a principled stand and focusing on THE ISSUES, they trot out a woman with (phony?) accusations of sexual abuse, so that other women can sympathize with her, and then attempt to use Kavanaugh's inevitable appointment as a wedge issue in November.

Which THE ISSUES did they not focus on with respect to Kavanaugh? You're fine with having a SC justice who lies, has obvious character flaws, etc, etc? Maybe truth doens' mean that much to you?

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
It's like RUSSIA!!RUSSIA!!RUSSIA!! ... completely unverifiable accusations designed to activate people's emotions. A desperate orchestrated attempt to garner votes, the likes of which have, so far, worked oppositely for the DNC.

5 people have plead guilty - that's what they call the definition of "verified."

Let me check... yep, you didn't get a single thing right.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 10:28 AM

... stay crunchy...

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Originally posted by JO753:
The offer to interview Ford wuz bogus. Grassleyz interest wuz purely to discredit her.

Wut shoud raiz questionz for you, Kiki, iz why Kav wuz not screaming for the FBI to investigate to clear hiz good name. To hell with the committee! MY reputation iz being trashed!

Its going to bakfire anyway. Cristine Blasey Ford and the 2 otherz arent going to just fade away. And Avenatti iz going to make az much noize az possible, including digging up more accuzerz, witnessez & evidens.

Fair chans I rekon, that Kav will bekum the 1st Supreme Court Justis evr impeached and removed. And ritefully imprizoned if the word 'perjury' meanz anything.

----------------------------
6IXSTRINGJACK: You seem far to intelligent to go by guilty until proven innocent, J0.

What's your deal here?

Jo's deal is he is that intelligent.

https://www.gq.com/story/all-of-brett-kavanaughs-lies

An attempt to catalog the various lies told by the embattled Supreme Court nominee—including while under oath.

It is not that often that four of a judicial nominee's high school and college classmates go on the record to question his honesty. But so it goes with Brett Kavanaugh, Donald Trump's post-truth Supreme Court nominee.
Last Thursday, Kavanaugh testified to the Senate Judiciary Committee in a hearing, which was heavily rigged in his favor because Republicans limited senators to five minutes of questioning and disallowed any other witnesses, on Christine Blasey Ford's allegations of sexual assault against him. As in previous interviews and testimony, his statements were riddled with misrepresentations, diversions, and outright lies, so much so that The New York Times posted a fact-check, Vox made a chart of every time Kavanaugh dodged a question, and Current Affairs' Nathan Robinson dissected the testimony in an exhaustive 10,000-word refutation, "How We Know Kavanaugh Is Lying."

After the hearing, Kavanaugh's Georgetown Prep classmate Sean Hagan posted on Facebook: "So angry. So disgusted. So sad. Integrity? Character? Honesty?" Yale classmate Chad Ludington, a professor at North Carolina State University, issued a statement saying that he was "deeply troubled" by Kavanaugh's "blatant mischaracterization" and "cringed" while watching his testimony under oath. "I can unequivocally say that in denying the possibility that he ever blacked out from drinking, and in downplaying the degree and frequency of his drinking, Brett has not told the truth," wrote Ludington.

Two more Yale classmates granted interviews to CNN. "There were a lot of texts flying around that night about how he was lying to the Senate Judiciary Committee," Lynne Brookes, a college friend and registered Republican, told Chris Cuomo. Another college friend, Liz Swisher, a Democrat and professor of gynecologic oncology, was equally outraged by Kavanaugh's dissembling performance. "To lie under oath. To blur…the difference between truth and lies, that's just terrible," said Swisher in a different interview with Cuomo. "It's not about women versus men. It's not about Democrats versus Republicans. It's about the integrity of the Supreme Court."

Others:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/28/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-fact-ch
eck.html

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/9/28/17914308/kavanaugh-f
ord-question-dodge-hearing-chart

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/09/how-we-know-kavanaugh-is-lying

And I'm sure there are plenty more.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 11:20 AM

Don't you just love the "both sides are the same" fallacies Russian trolls always use?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 11:22 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:
The offer to interview Ford wuz bogus. Grassleyz interest wuz purely to discredit her.

Wut shoud raiz questionz for you, Kiki, iz why Kav wuz not screaming for the FBI to investigate to clear hiz good name. To hell with the committee! MY reputation iz being trashed!

Its going to bakfire anyway. Cristine Blasey Ford and the 2 otherz arent going to just fade away. And Avenatti iz going to make az much noize az possible, including digging up more accuzerz, witnessez & evidens.

Fair chans I rekon, that Kav will bekum the 1st Supreme Court Justis evr impeached and removed. And ritefully imprizoned if the word 'perjury' meanz anything.

----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.7532020.com

If I were falsely accused of a crime, I'd calmly answer questions, not lie, not act like a whiny little entitled bitch, and DEMAND a thorough investigation to clear my name.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 12:39 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
No, I blame them for not learning lessons from the past.- SIGNY
Learning how to change math? Again you just lob up nothing comments like they mean something.- GSTRING

I've already posted, many times, what I think they should have learned from the past. Are you incapable of reading? Learning?

Quote:
Why don't you want to change the Republicans? - GSTRING

I DO want to cahnge republicans. I have criticized Republicans often, so this is just a repeat of your previous lie.

Quote:
Why don't you mention the lies Kavanaugh told? I agree with Jo and many others who respect the rule of actual Law, that he should be he should be tried for perjury.- GSTRING

I have heard that Kavanaugh's testimony can be characterized as "lies of omission", which means he was evasive and didn't answer some questions fully. According to the part I heard, I would say that he was strictly truthful but not complete.

Quote:
Why don't you mention how he showed himself to be unfit character-wise for being a SC judge, as was noted by judges and ex-SC judge and many law professionals?

A billion flies eat shit.

Quote:
Why don't you mention how he couldn't answer the question about wanting an FBI investigation or not when - if he was innocent - it would have proven he was telling the truth?

I already addressed that the day that it happened.

Quote:
Why don't you mention anything about the limited FBI investigation that didn't even interview the main characters or 20+ other witnesses?

As I understand FBI "investigations" they would have simply conducted yet another interview of Ford and Kavanaugh. It's not a criminal investigation where they "sweat" the suspect.

Quote:
As even Kiki noted, there was no way the Dems could have done ANYTHING against MATH.

And I said the same, if you had bothered to read with comprehension. Does that mean that they have license to play dirty?

Quote:
Is it POSSIBLE, do you suppose, for you not being a complete ass?- SIGNY

Is it POSSIBLE, do you suppose, for you not being a complete fabricator? Witness:

SIGGY: IF THE DEMOCRATS REALLY HAD A CONCERN THAT KAVANAUGH WAS A SEXUAL ABUSER. THEY WOULD HAVE HANDLED THIS MUCH DIFFERENTLY.
Uh-huh. You being legal & political theory scholar you know all about how this should have gone?- GSTRING

YES.

For ONE thing, they would NOT have held back their information to the last possible moment.

Quote:
SIGGY: They would have brought up these allegations when then FIRST came to light, not sprung them -literally- at the very last moment.

CC: Not even close to "the last moment."

The last moment. Check timelines.

Quote:
SIGGY: They would have pressed for a long, thorough investigation.
CC: They did and The Republicans shot it down.

Because they presented these accusations at the last possible moment. AFTER the Committee had already interviewed Kavanaugh.

Quote:
SIGGY: They would have provided the SENATE COMMITTEE with COPIES of the therapy notes and COPIES of the polygraph exam ... as they had been asked THREE TIMES by Grassley ... which might have opened up new avenues of investigation, or allowed Senate delegates to visit Ford in CA as the committee offered instead of stalling and stalling and stalling and obfuscating.

CC: They made a point of revealing thse items

AT the last possible moment

Quote:
so they weren't hiding them. The Republicans played just as many file withholding tactics.

According to legal scholar which you claim to be so in awe of, those files belong to GWB.

Quote:
SIGGY: Clearly, this was an orchestrated attempt to demean Kavanaugh's reputation with (as far as I can tell) a flurry of last-minute, totally unverifiable accusations.

CC: Kavanaugh demeaned his own reputation MANY times.

Oh yeah? LINKS PLEASE [

Quote:
SIGGY: You keep asking What else could they have done?, which certainly implies that EVEN YOU recognize that this was a underhanded attempt by the Dems.

CC: That's so stupid it's funny It implies that you can't answer a simple question and all you do is dodge and lie.- GSTRING

I just told you. You just posted "What else" they could have done. In terms of keeping Kavanauhg off teh bench, I will tell you again: NOTHING.

OTOH, they COULD have been a lot more fair to Ford and brought these allegations up much earlier.

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:The Dems have STILL not learned their lesson: Instead of dividing America into smaller and smaller slivers of self-identified victims groups (does a nonwhite older civilian female have more rights than a transsexual in the military?) they should get back to representing ALL Americans. Yanno, when Hillary called nearly half of the voting public "deplorables", that was emblematic of everything wrong with the Democratic Party. They paid the price when they lost that election, and if they keep up with that, they'll continue to pay the price.- SIGNY

What does any of that have to do with us having a new SC justice who lies and is unfit to be a Supreme?- GSTRING

MANY legal scholars supported Kavanaugh and gave him their highest rating. YOU seem to think that theirs are a significant opinion.

Quote:
So, what did they do? Instead of taking a principled stand and focusing on THE ISSUES, they trot out a woman with (phony?) accusations of sexual abuse, so that other women can sympathize with her, and then attempt to use Kavanaugh's inevitable appointment as a wedge issue in November. - SIGNY

Which THE ISSUES did they not focus on with respect to Kavanaugh?

I'd like to know! Roe v Wade? The 10th Amendment? Campaign finance reform? Was there ANYthing that the Dems wanted to bring up besides a last-minute accusation from 36 years ago?

Quote:
It's like RUSSIA!!RUSSIA!!RUSSIA!! ... completely unverifiable accusations designed to activate people's emotions. A desperate orchestrated attempt to garner votes, the likes of which have, so far, worked oppositely for the DNC.- SIGNY

5 people have plead guilty- GSTRING

Of NOTHING TO DO WITH RUSSIA. This is like the Whitewatergate" investigation which wound up with Bill diddling a young woman.

I thought it was a witch hunt then, I think it's a witch hunt now.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 1:46 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by reaverfan:
Quote:
Originally posted by JO753:
The offer to interview Ford wuz bogus. Grassleyz interest wuz purely to discredit her.

Wut shoud raiz questionz for you, Kiki, iz why Kav wuz not screaming for the FBI to investigate to clear hiz good name. To hell with the committee! MY reputation iz being trashed!

Its going to bakfire anyway. Cristine Blasey Ford and the 2 otherz arent going to just fade away. And Avenatti iz going to make az much noize az possible, including digging up more accuzerz, witnessez & evidens.

Fair chans I rekon, that Kav will bekum the 1st Supreme Court Justis evr impeached and removed. And ritefully imprizoned if the word 'perjury' meanz anything.

----------------------------
DUZ XaT SEM RiT TQ YQ? - Jubal Early

http://www.7532020.com

If I were falsely accused of a crime, I'd calmly answer questions, not lie, not act like a whiny little entitled bitch, and DEMAND a thorough investigation to clear my name.

lol. You don't even know the definition of the word calm. You're a lunatic and all you do all day is act like a whiny entitled bitch and make demands.

You're a never ending source of amusement.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 1:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Jo's deal is he is that intelligent.

(Followed by a bunch of stuff nobody read)

J0 can answer for himself. He certainly doesn't need the likes of you answering for him.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 1:55 PM

... stay crunchy...

Quote:
Originally posted by reaverfan:
Don't you just love the "both sides are the same" fallacies Russian trolls always use?

Too funny - literally just last night I went out to dinner with some people I had not seen in a couple years and that was one of the things on the list of "the stupid sh*t pro-Trumpers want you to believe" that we shared.

"They never talk about Republicans." That was popular too.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 1:58 PM

... stay crunchy...

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Jo's deal is he is that intelligent.

(Followed by a bunch of stuff nobody read)

J0 can answer for himself. He certainly doesn't need the likes of you answering for him.

Of course he can. You had an opinion about Jo and so did I. You want to limit my free speech?

Sorry about all those sentences!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 2:06 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Jo's deal is he is that intelligent.

(Followed by a bunch of stuff nobody read)

J0 can answer for himself. He certainly doesn't need the likes of you answering for him.

Of course he can. You had an opinion about Jo and so did I. You want to limit my free speech?

Sorry about all those sentences!

You're free to say whatever you want to.

J0 doesn't need you to give your opinions and apply them to his own.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 2:43 PM

... stay crunchy...

SIGGY: I've already posted, many times, what I think they should have learned from the past. Are you incapable of reading? Learning?
CC: Yeah, I read it and it had nothng practical to do with this hearing. You through out a bunch of spoke bombs, "Identitiy politics," *cough* etc etc.

SIGGY: I DO want to cahnge republicans. I have criticized Republicans often, so this is just a repeat of your previous lie.
CC: My previous statement was correct: you haven't said one thing about the fake outrage from Graham and the other 11 rep on the committee and the rush job and the worthless extra week FBI background check that was limited into nothing.

SIGGY: I have heard that Kavanaugh's testimony can be characterized as "lies of omission", which means he was evasive and didn't answer some questions fully.
CC: "Lies of omission" - popular these days. Here, since I know you like text so much, here's 10,000 words on how we know he lied:
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/09/how-we-know-kavanaugh-is-lying

SIGGY: A billion flies eat shit.
CC: That is so telling - getting tired running out of misdirection? It must be emotionally draining keeping up the pretense.

SIGGY: As I understand FBI "investigations" they would have simply conducted yet another interview of Ford and Kavanaugh. It's not a criminal investigation where they "sweat" the suspect.
CC: They didn't even talk to them though. Are you suggesting it wasn't limited? They even had until Friday and wrapped it Wed.

SIGGY: And I said the same, if you had bothered to read with comprehension. Does that mean that they have license to play dirty?
CC: No, you said what they should have done was learn from the past. Play dirty? There is so much coming out now from Kavanaugh's past on top of what Ford had happen to her it's way past Dems playing dirty.

SIGGY: IF THE DEMOCRATS REALLY HAD A CONCERN THAT KAVANAUGH WAS A SEXUAL ABUSER. THEY WOULD HAVE HANDLED THIS MUCH DIFFERENTLY.
For ONE thing, they would NOT have held back their information to the last possible moment.
CC: why does that suggest they didn't care if he was a sexual abuser? They played it quite well timing-wise if you ask me. They bought a lot of time which they used to expose the GOP on the committee as self-serving, past it old white dudes who have lost their minds, and they exposed Kavanuagh himself as bought and paid for made man of the Right.

SIGGY: They would have brought up these allegations when then FIRST came to light, not sprung them -literally- at the very last moment.
CC: Ok, just checked and you were right and I was wrong - it was last minute. As you would imagine, I still don't see why that is a problem - well played even. They are under no obligation to do so sooner. What would you do if you were out gunned?

SIGGY: Clearly, this was an orchestrated attempt to demean Kavanaugh's reputation with (as far as I can tell) a flurry of last-minute, totally unverifiable accusations.
CC: The old non-committal way to shovel propoganda, "As far as I can tell..." I got one, "as far as I can tell Russia paid off all the Republicans to pass Kavanaugh."

SIGGY: (CC: Kavanaugh demeaned his own reputation MANY times.) Oh yeah? LINKS PLEASE
CC: did you watch any of the coverage of his testimony? Asking a senator if she ever had too much to drink? It was like he was drunk himself.

SIGGY: I just told you. You just posted "What else" they could have done. In terms of keeping Kavanauhg off teh bench, I will tell you again: NOTHING.
CC: 2 steps forward!

SIGGY: OTOH, they COULD have been a lot more fair to Ford and brought these allegations up much earlier.
CC: 5 steps back! Yeah, those Dems were so awful the way they treated her helping her have a voice to address her attacker! *spew* You owe me another keyboard!

SIGGY: MANY legal scholars supported Kavanaugh and gave him their highest rating. YOU seem to think that theirs are a significant opinion.
CC: cites - I have plenty for those who diagree including an ex-Supreme judge.

SIGGY: I'd like to know! Roe v Wade? The 10th Amendment? Campaign finance reform? Was there ANYthing that the Dems wanted to bring up besides a last-minute accusation from 36 years ago?
CC: don't blame the Dems for that. There was definitely early talk about Roe v. Wade. They were not in control of what the MSM wanted to focus on.

SIGGY: CC: "5 people have plead guilty." Of NOTHING TO DO WITH RUSSIA.
CC: Nothing??? Paul Manafort is "nothing to do with Russia?" Flynn lying about his talks with Russia is nothing to do with Russia? Yeah, they are all intertwined with Russia!!! Plus 13 indictments of Russian nationals and 3 Russian companies. We'll see what Mueller comes up with next I guess.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 4:12 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Those 10,000 words that you linked?

90% bullshit.

I'm not going to pick apart every single line by an author who is determined to find fault with every single word that Kavanaugh spoke. Instead, I'll give you my impression of what I heard.

There were a few related lines of questioning that I found significant:

The first line of questioning had to do with whether or not Kavanuagh attacked Ford. He denied that accusation unequivocally, and since there is absolutely no corroborating testimony of the assault ... or even that a party with those attendees ever took place ... this is probably a dead issue.

The issue of Kavanaugh's drinking, and whether or not he ever blacked out, was approached. He was asked, explicitly, whether he had ever woken up in a place where he didn't know how he got there, or with his clothes in such a condition that he couldn't recall how it happened, and he also denied this unequivocally.

However, when asked about he much he drank, he answered "we drank beer", which isn't an answer. There was also an entry in some book somewhere about a university baseball outing where he stumbled off the bus and had to "piece things together" and so he was questioned whether he couldn't remember what happened and he answered "I know what happened". But it's not clear whether he knew what happened from his OWN memories, or whether he had to piece together fragmentary memories into some kind of narrative ("I know that must have happened in the 7th inning because...") or whether he had to rely on what other people told him. So he was evasive about how much he drank overall.

*****

There was an UNRELATED line of questioning about military tribunals versus civilian jury trials which is directly related to Trump's Executive Order. I'm surprised that you didn't notice it.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 4:30 PM

Yeah. Answering "we drank beer" is not an actual answer. I can vouch for that.

I'm not going to say that I never drank hard liquor. I know there was a time there where I had tried switching over because my beer intake was making me really fat. I didn't like it though, and I would get drunk far too quickly, so I don't think I did it very long.

Most of my drunken posts here back when I was drinking were anywhere from 5 beers in to about 40 beers in. I had a lot more free time than most people do though, so the tail end of my binge sessions could have been up to 36 hours after I started drinking.

I think that to most people specifying beer over hard liquor would mean that you're not a serious drinker. In some cases this is just not true.

Do Right, Be Right. :)

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 5:03 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

I think the reason why some people focused so heavily on Kavanaugh's drinking was because that would make Ford's allegation more "plausible". However, the question isn't whether or not Kavanaugh was a heavy drinker, or whether or not Ford's allegation is "plausible" but whether or not it actually happened. We can only go back to the people that Ford said were there, none of whom can corroborate what she said.

There are two other allegations. It's not uncommon for women to come forward only after OTHER women have come forward, so that "pile on" effect is common; I don't see any "conspiracy" behind this. I think Ramirez' allegations were investigated, Swetnick's were not. Again, it's too bad that Feinstein sat on Ford's accusations for so long because these other allegations would have had more time.

But investigations can be continued, so let the lawyers continue.

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 6:43 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Hope y'all don't think I forgot …

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 6:54 PM

... stay crunchy...

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Yep - Trump's good at taking care of himself! I'm surpised there's any money left in the Treasury. Wait, there isn't. Ha! Joke's on us!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 6:57 PM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by captaincrunch:

Yep - Trump's good at taking care of himself! I'm surpised there's any money left in the Treasury. Wait, there isn't. Ha! Joke's on us!

Obama doubles the national debt... no big deal. Trump keeps yet another campaign promise, a foundational reason for his running, to turn the court conservative, and wut ?? OMG ! Spending is out of control!!

( Which, to be fair, it is, but hell, it's not like he's not grown the economy too, so there's that. Yes, he and the GOP need to work on cutting more, but for now, in year 2, ya gotta give the man his due )

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 7:04 PM

... stay crunchy...

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Those 10,000 words that you linked?

90% bullshit.

Those 10,000 posts you made?

99% bullsh*t.

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
I'm not going to pick apart every single line by an author who is determined to find fault with every single word that Kavanaugh spoke.

Yep - there's a ton of Kavanaugh lying to pick through.

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:The first line of questioning had to do with whether or not Kavanuagh attacked Ford. He denied that accusation unequivocally, and since there is absolutely no corroborating testimony of the assault ... or even that a party with those attendees ever took place ... this is probably a dead issue.

Why? She's guilty of lying until proven innocent? Shame we didn't have an FBI investigation. Hey, who was it that limited it so it couldn't find anything? Republicans.
Also, there's an entry on his calendar that supports that party and those attendees.

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
The issue of Kavanaugh's drinking, and whether or not he ever blacked out, was approached. He was asked, explicitly, whether he had ever woken up in a place where he didn't know how he got there, or with his clothes in such a condition that he couldn't recall how it happened, and he also denied this unequivocally.

He said sometimes he drank too much. He equivocated actually - that's where he tried to flip it on Klobuchar and he embarrassed himself and his great name (and his family).

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
There was an UNRELATED line of questioning about military tribunals versus civilian jury trials which is directly related to Trump's Executive Order. I'm surprised that you didn't notice it.

No idea - that reminds me though about other Dem problems with Brewski: It was well established early on that he was a Trump top choice because of his views on basically not being able to legally touch a sitting president, and that's why Trump picked him. Why an innocent man would need a get-out-of-jail free judge on the SC is hard to answer.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 7:17 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Those 10,000 words that you linked?
90% bullshit.- SIGNY

Those 10,000 posts you made?
99% bullsh*t.-GSTRING

And yet, you've never been able to refute a single one.

Quote:
The first line of questioning had to do with whether or not Kavanuagh attacked Ford. He denied that accusation unequivocally, and since there is absolutely no corroborating testimony of the assault ... or even that a party with those attendees ever took place ... this is probably a dead issue. - SIGNY

Why? She's guilty of lying until proven innocent? - GSTRING

You appear to be TOTALLY unfamiliar with the USA system of justice. Are you sure you're not a Russian troll??

First of all, there is no verdict called "innocent". Think back, son; what do juries find??
It's not guilty. There are different approaches to hypothesis testing, and the Founding Fathers, being logicians, realized that you can never prove a negative. (In other words, you can never prove that a person did NOT commit a crime) However, you can FAIL TO PROVE that s/he committed the crime. They believed that it was better to let potentially guilty person go than convict an innocent person.

Second, who said Ford is LYING?? I have posted OVER AND OVER AGAIN that she might be MISTAKEN. Old, incomplete memories are fragile. In an effort to reconstruct them, there may be some "construction" going on. It's a common phenomenon, it even has a name: false memory.

Quote:
Shame we didn't have an FBI investigation.

Again, you seem to be terribly confused about what the FBI does. This is not a CRIMINAL investigation, it's a background check. They would simply have re-interviewed Ford and/or Kavanaugh if they thought it was necessary.

Quote:
Hey, who was it that limited it so it couldn't find anything? Republicans.

Prove it.

Quote:
Also, there's an entry on his calendar that supports that party and those attendees.

No, there is an entry that supports A party and SOME of the attendees. None of whom remember being at a party with Ford.

Quote:
The issue of Kavanaugh's drinking, and whether or not he ever blacked out, was approached. He was asked, explicitly, whether he had ever woken up in a place where he didn't know how he got there, or with his clothes in such a condition that he couldn't recall how it happened, and he also denied this unequivocally.- SIGNY

He said sometimes he drank too much. He equivocated actually - that's where he tried to flip it on Klobuchar and he embarrassed himself and his great name (and his family).

It was awkward.

Quote:
There was an UNRELATED line of questioning about military tribunals versus civilian jury trials which is directly related to Trump's Executive Order. I'm surprised that you didn't notice it.- SIGNY

No idea - that reminds me though about other Dem problems with Brewski: It was well established early on that he was a Trump top choice because of his views on basically not being able to legally touch a sitting president, and that's why Trump picked him. Why an innocent man would need a get-out-of-jail free judge on the SC is hard to answer.

Not the point. Alt media claims that Trump signed an executive order in order to round up those of the deep state who could be convicted of sedition, and that they could be tried before a military tribunal. Now, they have been saying this for a long time ... looong before the Kavanaugh hearing. This line of questioning, which appeared to be almost random and out-of-the-blue, seems to support the alt media's contention. Military tribunals in the future??? It's as possible as Trump being "untouchable".

-----------
Pity would be no more,
If we did not MAKE men poor - William Blake

"The messy American environment, where most people don't agree, is perfect for people like me. I CAN DO AS I PLEASE." - SECOND

America is an oligarchy http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.aspx?tid=57876

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, October 8, 2018 9:36 PM