General Lets talk about the Kavanaugh allegations and confirmation

[jason73]

 

[HEATH VON DOOM]

It was just a joke. Jokes mean nothing

 

[HEATH VON DOOM]

So you still support Roy Moore?

What has he been convicted of again? Besides your opinion

 

[MMAHAWK]

Thanks to YouTube and twitter Joe Biden is truly the gift that keeps giving.


View: https://twitter.com/elliosch/status/1044713343569858562?s=21

 

[Freeloading Rusty]

Roy Moore drops defamation lawsuit

Roy Moore has dropped the lawsuit he filed in July concerning his failed Senate bid.

Moore had filed the suit against multiple political action committees. He claimed they ran misleading and defamatory commercials related to allegation of sexual misconduct against him.

The motion to dismiss did not explain why he is dropping the suit.

The misconduct allegations claimed Moore pursued teen girls when he was in his 30s.

Earlier this week, Moore filed a lawsuit against comedian Sacha Baron Cohen over a prank TV appearance that made light of the allegations.

Earlier this week, Moore filed a lawsuit against comedian Sacha Baron Cohen over a prank TV appearance that made light of the allegations.

One of his accusers, Leigh Corfman, is suing Moore for defamation.

 

[Freeloading Rusty]

Roy Moore Weighs in on Brett Kavanaugh Accusation – Rolling Stone
The accused pedophile thinks Republicans should “take a stand” in the face of the sexual assault accusation against Brett Kavanaugh

Roy Moore’s Alabama Senate candidacy sank last year after the rootin’, tootin’ judge was bombarded with allegations of sexual misconduct just over a month before the election. Not surprisingly, he has some thoughts on Brett Kavanaugh. The man responsible for a Democrat now holding a Senate seat in one of the reddest states in the nation recently called into the One America News Network to sound off on what he perceives as unfair treatment of conservative candidates. Moore, who never officially conceded in the Alabama Senate race he lost last December, is currently suing several of the women who accused him of sexually predatory behavior.

“I think it’s reflective of what’s really happening, that these allegations come in the midst of a Senate confirmation for a position on the United States Supreme Court, as they did in my case, just 32 days before the election,” Moore said of the allegation against Kavanaugh. “I think they don’t care about transparency. They just use it because it’s effective. They know that on the one hand you offend women if you believe somebody that says they weren’t guilty of sexual misconduct. On the other you, if you don’t believe them, then you’re condemning the person accused [before they can] prove their own innocence. It’s a catch-22.”


Though Kavanaugh’s accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, alerted her representatives of the alleged assault following Kavanaugh’s nomination this summer, the details of the allegation, and Ford’s identity, were only revealed on Sunday. The proximity of the claim’s publication to the vote to confirm Kavanaugh, which had been scheduled to take place this week, has led many Republicans to cry foul. Some have dismissed Ford’s account out of hand. Others have called for her to testify publicly on Monday. All of them have struck down the prospect of an FBI investigation, which Ford requested in a letter sent to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-IA) earlier this week. “It is imperative the Judiciary committee move forward on the Kavanaugh nomination and a committee vote be taken ASAP,” tweeted Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-SC), who also accused Democrats of “delaying the process till after the midterm elections.”

While speaking with OANN, Moore agreed that Republicans should press on, while criticizing the Republicans who have expressed a desire to hear what Ford has to say. “I think they need to take a stand,” he said. “They need to do what their conscience dictates. They know what’s happening. It’s so obvious that these tactics are used just days before a very important event like a confirmation, right in the midst of a confirmation hearing … I think Republicans need to take a stand. A lot of them don’t. They don’t like criticism.”

Sen. Doug Jones (D-AL), who holds the Senate seat Moore had been favored to win before he was flooded with allegations of sexual misconduct, called not only for an FBI investigation, but for Mark Judge, the friend who was allegedly in the room when the alleged assault took place, to be subpoenaed.

Though Moore’s rich history of alleged sexual assault may preclude him from offering a legitimate opinion on Ford’s claim, he isn’t the only politician accused of misconduct by multiple women to dismiss the need for an investigation. “It would seem that the FBI really doesn’t do that,” President Trump told reporters, falsely, on Wednesday. “They’ve investigated about six times before, and it seems that they don’t do that.”

 

[kneeblock]

a couple more weeks and you will never hear from any of these accusers either . the left will be on to their next manufactured outrage and drop this like a hot potato

Let's abstract this from the usual left/right duality for a moment. Do you believe SCOTUS nominees merit the highest possible level of scrutiny? Like anal cavity level? I feel like any POTUS should get that too by an independent body, but SCOTUS due to its lifetime status should be near spotless. Sonia Sotomayor was raked over the coals and it was suggested that she was racist by some in Congress for what she said in this speech decades before her nomination. It was a valid thing to question her about, even though her rulings showed no racial biases.

Kavanaugh, meanwhile, has been shielded from producing most documentation on his time working in the Bush administration and now we have this latest situation. The Republican majority has the right to push through a nominee, but in selecting a SCOTUS nominee, the general rule is not innocent til proven guilty, it's where there's smoke there's fire. There is likely a shortlist of ostensibly pre-vetted conservative jurists the administration has and it wouldn't hurt to take a harder look at whoever is #2. Kavanaugh won't suffer from going back to his regular job any more than Merrick Garland did.

 

[MMAHAWK]

Let's abstract this from the usual left/right duality for a moment. Do you believe SCOTUS nominees merit the highest possible level of scrutiny? Like anal cavity level? I feel like any POTUS should get that too by an independent body, but SCOTUS due to its lifetime status should be near spotless. Sonia Sotomayor was raked over the coals and it was suggested that she was racist by some in Congress for what she said in this speech decades before her nomination. It was a valid thing to question her about, even though her rulings showed no racial biases.

Kavanaugh, meanwhile, has been shielded from producing most documentation on his time working in the Bush administration and now we have this latest situation. The Republican majority has the right to push through a nominee, but in selecting a SCOTUS nominee, the general rule is not innocent til proven guilty, it's where there's smoke there's fire. There is likely a shortlist of ostensibly pre-vetted conservative jurists the administration has and it wouldn't hurt to take a harder look at whoever is #2. Kavanaugh won't suffer from going back to his regular job any more than Merrick Garland did.

None of that matters when one side has vowed to resist at all costs. Kavanaugh has an impeccable record and a voting record that 90% lines up with Garland. The left has cried wolf at every step since the trump nomination and it makes it hard to take anything they argue seriously anymore.

 

[Disciplined Galt]

The left is using salami tactics.

Conservatives Are Losers – Return Of Kings


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Y-yyaWCgiQ

 

[kneeblock]

None of that matters when one side has vowed to resist at all costs. Kavanaugh has an impeccable record and a voting record that 90% lines up with Garland. The left has cried wolf at every step since the trump nomination and it makes it hard to take anything they argue seriously anymore.

You should take a look at those circuit court cases and rulings and you'd see why it's not so odd that they would vote in line with one another. I can't believe you're parrroting a line you heard from Ted Cruz. That is a clumsily thrown together talking point, not a genuine analysis. The point of my post is that it doesn't matter what the left or right say. It matters that SCOTUS nominees should be given full scrutiny and that there should be no haste in the confirmation process. Delay should be the default state of either party in this case if they have cause, whether it be unanswered questions about the prospective justice or upcoming elections that could alter the political composition of the country. I support either approach. Delaying Garland was obviously political, but made sense. Rushing or even continuing with Kavanaugh doesn't. It doesn't have anything to do with the what the Democratic party thinks or wants. The guy has a job. He'll be fine. It just makes sense to get someone in with a little less baggage.

 

[MMAHAWK]

You should take a look at those circuit court cases and rulings and you'd see why it's not so odd that they would vote in line with one another. I can't believe you're parrroting a line you heard from Ted Cruz. That is a clumsily thrown together talking point, not a genuine analysis. The point of my post is that it doesn't matter what the left or right say. It matters that SCOTUS nominees should be given full scrutiny and that there should be no haste in the confirmation process. Delay should be the default state of either party in this case if they have cause, whether it be unanswered questions about the prospective justice or upcoming elections that could alter the political composition of the country. I support either approach. Delaying Garland was obviously political, but made sense. Rushing or even continuing with Kavanaugh doesn't. It doesn't have anything to do with the what the Democratic party thinks or wants. The guy has a job. He'll be fine. It just makes sense to get someone in with a little less baggage.

He has no baggage other then these likely false allegations. To reward a political party that is smearing a good man would be the crime here.

 

[kneeblock]

He has no baggage other then these likely false allegations. To reward a political party that is smearing a good man would be the crime here.

We have no way of knowing whether he's a "good man." We know he may have advised President Bush on the acceptable use of torture and we have allegations that he could have sexually assaulted someone. There is no evidence linking any political party to the emergence of either of these charges. He can be whatever kind of man he is on the circuit court of appeals. The dirt is on him and both parties have plenty of precedent for pouncing on it when they're not in control. To say we should protect an individual's reputation over the integrity of the highest court in the land makes no sense at all.

 

[MMAHAWK]

We have no way of knowing whether he's a "good man." We know he may have advised President Bush on the acceptable use of torture and we have allegations that he could have sexually assaulted someone. There is no evidence linking any political party to the emergence of either of these charges. He can be whatever kind of man he is on the circuit court of appeals. The dirt is on him and both parties have plenty of precedent for pouncing on it when they're not in control. To say we should protect an individual's reputation over the integrity of the highest court in the land makes no sense at all.

Not gonna argue with you,you know I respect your opinion. But he’s gonna be confirmed and Democrats are going to have to deal with the repercussions of the way they’ve played this in the future. I hope you keep the same stance when a liberal with an impeccable record is accused of any accusations by far right wing lawyers clients.

 

[Deleted member 1]

He has no baggage other then these likely false allegations.

I'm actually offended that Kav was a party animal and lied about it. lol, as stupid as that sounds.

It's a job interview and there was his answer about what kind of young man he was in high school:

I went to an all-boys Catholic high school, a Jesuit high school where I was focused on academics and athletics, going to church every Sunday at Little Flower, working on my service projects and friendship

There were several more answers painting the same picture. Perfect quiet kid, no wrong doing, one single line of saying sometimes his friends got in trouble when he was asked about, college the same, life a shade of grey outside of his work and current family. Nothing to see here folks.

I'm interviewing someone that's blowing smoke up my backside like that? I move on.

Kav should have just laid his cards on the table. He was a rambunctious frat kid that drank to excess. The 1980's prep school culture endorsed this. Some of his closest friends grew up battling alcoholism. He's lucky he didn't go down that same route. He hasn't had a problem with alcohol in 40 years, but he looks back at his party years as a cautionary tale of how close any of us are to the precipice. Knowing that even well to do prep school kids can go down the wrong path, but also that his friends have learned a lesson and continued to progress in their sobriety, gives him a balanced view of society.

And Fin.

He was later confronted as evidence came out that he was a party animal and that his answer didn't jive with reality. His response was something to the effect of, "ha, that's what I meant by my friends".

Don't lie to me Kav. I don't like liars.

 

[Deleted member 1]

Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford offers Senate four people who corroborate her assault claims

 

[madmav]

honestly.. this is all bill cosby's fault and his go to spanish fly 70's shit.. #banpudding

 

[Hauler]

But he’s gonna be confirmed and Democrats are going to have to deal with the repercussions of the way they’ve played this in the future.

It's politics.

If the situation was flipped the Republicans probably would have played it the same way. When Scalia died, the Republican Senate came right out and said they wouldn't vote on any nomination that Obama put in front of them. That went on for almost a year. That wasn't very fair to Merrick Garland - the guy who was up for the nomination. So the "This is bullshit!" cries from the Republicans are a bit hypocritical.

This tactic by the Dems is certainly dirty as shit, but unfortunately partisan obstruction is sort of expected at this point.

 

[Hauler]

Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford offers Senate four people who corroborate her assault claims

But if Ford is loonie toons and is remembering something (or someone) incorrectly, it doesn't get us any closer to the truth of what did or did not happen that night.

The only thing this proves is she didn't invent the entire story when Trump nominated Kavanaugh...
unless this is all part of a long con...

 

[Deleted member 1]

The only thing this proves is she didn't invent the entire story when Trump nominated Kavanaugh.

A pretty important step in response to the "timing" argument against the accuser.

 

[Hauler]

A pretty important step in response to the "timing" argument against the accuser.

I think the "timing" argument is aimed more at Feinstein for sitting on it.

Waiting 30 years to bring it up is odd, but whatever. So she told her friend about it in 2013 - it's still hearsay.

 

[Freeloading Rusty]

The left is using salami tactics.

Conservatives Are Losers – Return Of Kings


View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Y-yyaWCgiQ

reeeeeeeeeee

 

[Deleted member 1]

New Kavanaugh accuser Julie Swetnick details parties where girls allegedly were drugged and raped

Swetnick said these efforts by Kavanaugh and his buddy Mark Judge were done so the girls "could then be 'gang raped' in a side room or bedroom by a 'train' of numerous boys." She said "I became the victim" of one such rape "where Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh were present."

During the incident, I was incapacitated without my consent and unable to fight off the boys raping me, I believe I was drugged using Quaaludes or something similar placed in what I was drinking."

Kinky Kav is gonna be hit with the one two punch going into the weekend.

 

[ConorMcGregor NutHugger]

New Kavanaugh accuser Julie Swetnick details parties where girls allegedly were drugged and raped





Kinky Kav is gonna be hit with the one two punch going into the weekend.

Aren't they voting on friday?

 

[Deleted member 1]

Aren't they voting on friday?

I suspect that will be midterm disaster if that happens.

Here's the context of the Friday vote:


View: https://twitter.com/ChuckGrassley/status/1044719849098874880


With new accuser, surely demanding her day to testify as well, I suspect the vote is delayed in light of "this new information".

 

[Deleted member 1]

The vote was 50/50 that kav did it and should harm him vs kav didn't do it.


Poll reset to a new question


WILL KAV SURVIVE THE PROCESS AND BE NOMINATED ONTO THE SUPREME COURT?


I think he gets one two punched next week and the Republicans look to save face and withdrawal the nomination.
The vote failing is too harmful to midterm momentum and better to reset quickly to #2 option before midterms.

Unless I'm missing something on timing that prevents them pushing a #2, other than its short timing for Kav or anybody.