Jump to content
thelawlorfaithful

The Kavanaughcalypse!

Recommended Posts

25 minutes ago, Old_SD_Dude said:

Please explain to me how she could gain credibility in your eyes.

Remember the day.

Remember the house.

Remember how she got there.

Remember how she got home.

Edit =>  Perhaps, she can't do much to gain credibility.  Everyone should consider that possibility as a real possibility.  Who's problem is that?  It appears to me that the Dems are trying to make that Kavanaugh's problem.  Weird, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

It appears that's where all you Republicans don't get it.

Because I can see the big picture, I would rather see Barrett nominated. First of all, that would delay the sitting of a right-winger a bit longer. But much more than that, Republicans don't seem to understand that through the Garland thing and this nomination, they/you are cutting off their/your noses/nose to spite their/your faces/face.

In case you guys haven't looked, the proportion of this country that is old white people is diminishing with each passing year. Younger people of color are far less inclined to be conservative Born Agginers and the best way for the Democrats to regain control of the White House, the Senate AND the House of Representatives is to (1) keep from doing foolish things like Booker and Harris recently did and not to foul up opportunities provided to them like Feinstein has while (2) biding their time as the population gets younger and less white. Short of deporting millions of immigrants the Republicans can't do anything about the changing demographics of America but they CAN stop kowtowing down to dinosaurs like Orrin Hatch. Putting Barrett on the Supreme Court would scream "Orrin Hatch."

Yes, demographics are changing in California, but are they really changing in places like Utah, Idaho, etc, etc?   

Remember, those smaller states have the exact same political power as California, when it comes the the Senate.

And Orrin Hatch is retiring....and will be replaced by Mitt Romney (an old white guy).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, #1Stunner said:

Yes, demographics are changing in California, but are they really changing in places like Utah, Idaho, etc, etc?   

Remember, those smaller states have the exact same political power as California, when it comes the the Senate.

And Orrin Hatch is retiring....and will be replaced by Mitt Romney (an old white guy).

Did you just say “old white guy”???  @Akkula is ....

q2zhezz9v2vz.gif

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, #1Stunner said:

Yes, demographics are changing in California, but are they really changing in places like Utah, Idaho, etc, etc?   

Remember, those smaller states have the exact same political power as California, when it comes the the Senate.

And Orrin Hatch is retiring....and will be replaced by Mitt Romney (an old white guy).

I don't know.  Younger people have historically been more progressive and identify more with the Dem party.  I did.  Most all my friends did.  As a person ages, gains solid employment perhaps owning their own business, they shift and become more moderate and more conservative.  I did.  Most all my friends did.  Gender doesn't matter.  Race doesn't matter.

When you're young, you've got that free spirit, you own little, nothing's tying you down.  As you age, your values change.

You guys might be right.  Perhaps it's all about race.  I don't think it is.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, pokebball said:

I don't know.  Younger people have historically been more progressive and identify more with the Dem party.  I did.  Most all my friends did.  As a person ages, gains solid employment perhaps owning their own business, they shift and become more moderate and more conservative.  I did.  Most all my friends did.  Gender doesn't matter.  Race doesn't matter.

When you're young, you've got that free spirit, you own little, nothing's tying you down.  As you age, your values change.

You guys might be right.  Perhaps it's all about race.  I don't think it is.

I'll grant you that I've become more moderate politically after years in the workforce, kids, etc. But Stunner is being naive in thinking Utah will remain as conservative as it now is once the state is no longer about 2/3 Mormon. As to race, what we're really talking about is Hispanics. Living in California my entire life, I've always known some but in my youth, nowhere near as many as now and from that will say the younger Hispanics are, just like younger white kids, much less inclined to be as staunchly Catholic as their parents and particularly their grandparents.

All that said, I remain convinced that if Ford testifies and Hatch goes off on her like he did on Anita Hill or even more modestly with his silly "I think she's confused" nonsense and if some of the other old white guys on that committee do, as many in the media are saying, it's going to turn off a lot of politically moderate suburban women. Heck, I'm actually looking forward to the Republicans making fools of themselves like Diane Feinstein and a few Democrats have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

I'll grant you that I've become more moderate politically after years in the workforce, kids, etc. But Stunner is being naive in thinking Utah will remain as conservative as it now is once the state is no longer about 2/3 Mormon. As to race, what we're really talking about is Hispanics. Living in California my entire life, I've always known some but in my youth, nowhere near as many as now and from that will say the younger Hispanics are, just like younger white kids, much less inclined to be as staunchly Catholic as their parents and particularly their grandparents.

All that said, I remain convinced that if Ford testifies and Hatch goes off on her like he did on Anita Hill or even more modestly with his silly "I think she's confused" nonsense and if some of the other old white guys on that committee do, as many in the media are saying, it's going to turn off a lot of politically moderate suburban women. Heck, I'm actually looking forward to the Republicans making fools of themselves like Diane Feinstein and a few Democrats have.

Too much identity politics.   

I don't see Utah really trending liberal, and that doesn't really have that much to do with the Mormon population or race.  The Hispanic population in Utah is probably majority Republican.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, bluerules009 said:

They have talked to the 2 friends of his that witnessed this 6 times already.  The other 2 have been talked to a couple of times.  All his teachers and faculty have been talked to.

What the +++++ else is there to talk about?

Ford gets her chance to testify and character assassinate her hated enemy. She won't testify because this isn't about facts.  Anyone else, which of course she has no one to corroborate her story can testify.  Then lets get on.

None of you care much about that Minnesota politician beating his wife and she has police reports and medical reports.  Funny how it doesn't matter when there is evidence and it is a democrat.

link?

The Minnesota politician already explained how his wife got the black eyes. The were playing basketball in the driveway, and he cleared a rebound little over aggressively, and accidentally caught her in the face with an elbow.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, bluerules009 said:

In a divorce proceeding while they were married and she recanted.

 

You and Jack are two of a kind.  Nothing is sacred, no lie too far.

 

Fifteen women have now gone on record to say that Donald Trump sexually assaulted them. Out of all of their stories, one is the most explosive and bizarre — a woman who says Trump violently raped her at an orgy when she was just 13 years old. But the horrific details of her accusation have gotten the least attention.

It seemed like that was all going to change Wednesday, when the woman, who has gone by the pseudonyms “Katie Johnson” and “Jane Doe,” was set to appear at a press conference at the law offices of Lisa Bloom, a high-profile civil rights attorney and TV commentator. But the woman didn’t come to the press conference. Bloom told a room full of waiting reporters that Johnson was afraid to show her face after receiving multiple death threats, and that they would have to reschedule.

Then on Friday, Bloom announced that Johnson had dropped her lawsuit:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2016/11/3/13501364/trump-rape-13-year-old-lawsuit-katie-johnson-allegation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Bronco22 said:

Until proven in a court of law, they are innocent, period. No if's and but's about it. Kavanaugh's accuser keeps changing the conditions on which she would testify. This bitch better get her conditions straightened out. The Red Storm is coming in November!!!

#TheStorm

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pokebball said:

So, what does the board think about the first few paragraphs in this article?  Doesn't help Ford if true.

https://www.wral.com/from-the-anonymity-of-academia-to-the-center-of-a-supreme-court-confirmation/17859489/

 

Maybe I read it wrong, but why does it hurt her credibility?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, pokebball said:

I don't know.  Younger people have historically been more progressive and identify more with the Dem party.  I did.  Most all my friends did.  As a person ages, gains solid employment perhaps owning their own business, they shift and become more moderate and more conservative.  I did.  Most all my friends did.  Gender doesn't matter.  Race doesn't matter.

When you're young, you've got that free spirit, you own little, nothing's tying you down.  As you age, your values change.

You guys might be right.  Perhaps it's all about race.  I don't think it is.

Utah has the lowest median age of any state.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pokebball said:

Perhaps, she can't do much to gain credibility.  Everyone should consider that possibility as a real possibility.  Who's problem is that?  It appears to me that the Dems are trying to make that Kavanaugh's problem.  Weird, right?

There is nothing anyone can do, really, to impact the credibility on either side, save proof of someone clearly lying. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, smltwnrckr said:

There is nothing anyone can do, really, to impact the credibility on either side, save proof of someone clearly lying. 

What if their both telling the truth, as they each remember (or not remember) it?  

What if she was lured into a dark room and she was pushed on a bed and she only thought it was Kavanaugh? 

What if a lot of things happened differently than she says?  There's no way to ever know for sure. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, jackmormon said:

link?

The Minnesota politician already explained how his wife got the black eyes. The were playing basketball in the driveway, and he cleared a rebound little over aggressively, and accidentally caught her in the face with an elbow.

Yeah and OJ was throwing his knife at the ground and accidentally caught Nicole in the jugular. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, pokebball said:

The senate confirmation committee should, in this instance, allow the prepared statement to be read under the penalties of perjury (she should not be allowed to state anything unless it is so).  Then he should be confirmed and she should file charges in an appropriate manner and we'll see where the chips fall.

The more I think of this, the more I believe this is the compromise that fairly holds all party's interests at this time in the best way possible.

As I believe Blues posted, we'll never have another appointment to the SCOTUS.  It has devolved that far.

She doesn't get to file charges, the only thing she could do herself is file a lawsuit against Kavanaugh about the incident. To have charges filed she has to go through law enforcement and DA's office.  

However pretty much almost any federal appointment tends to be based on party line votes now. I don't think we will see SC nominees get 60 votes anymore unless someone has a vast majority in the senate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, smltwnrckr said:

Maybe I read it wrong, but why does it hurt her credibility?

I didn't say it hurt her credibility.

A couple of thoughts.  Some classmates of hers claim that the incident was well known and talked about around school, soccer practice, etc.  If she didn't tell her best friend, bridesmaid, roommate, etc.  how did that happen?  It certainly conflicts with her classmates that seem to want to collaborate her claim.  I think it hurts the credibility of those classmates' claims.

Secondly, if there was a person that she confided in, wouldn't her best friend be a probable person?  We now know that she didn't even confide to her best friend, a person she roomed with.

I don't know how badly it might hurt her claim.  It does appear to remove a couple of sources that could help her claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, wolfpack1 said:

She doesn't get to file charges, the only thing she could do herself is file a lawsuit against Kavanaugh about the incident. To have charges filed she has to go through law enforcement and DA's office.  

However pretty much almost any federal appointment tends to be based on party line votes now. I don't think we will see SC nominees get 60 votes anymore unless someone has a vast majority in the senate. 

My understanding is that she could file charges as there is no statute of limitations.  Help me out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, pokerider said:

What if their both telling the truth, as they each remember (or not remember) it?  

What if she was lured into a dark room and she was pushed on a bed and she only thought it was Kavanaugh? 

What if a lot of things happened differently than she says?  There's no way to ever know for sure. 

Man, some of you are getting pretty liberal with the word truth.  Each may have a perception of what happened that may or may not be reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SleepingGiantsFan said:

I definitely don't like arrogant BS artists like Donald Trump. However, I also don't like phonies and that's exactly what Murkowski and Collins are. They try to portray themselves as being completely open-minded about big issues coming before them but when push comes to shove, they toe the party line as most of us have known for weeks they would do on Kavanaugh.

And to pokebball, I have no idea why you've reached the conclusion you've reached. I would also respectfully point out that even if I've somehow missed something, you are probably taking something out of context because that article read in its entirety can't in any way, shape or form be detrimental to Ford.

You can say that about any politician right now in Congress. They say what they want but when push comes to shove you can almost predict with 100% certain on the 100 senators how they will vote on certain issues because they are going to toe the party line. I don't trust what any of them say publicially about voting because again at the end of the day they are going to vote pretty much along party lines on the major issues.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×