Kavanaugh said a nice thing to/about the guy who wrote the 2005 and 2007 torture memos. He is a war criminal
I saw somebody say that this shouldn’t be treated as a criminal trial. Kavanaugh isn’t innocent until proven guilty. He needs to prove himself worthy of a lifetime position as one of the most powerful people in this country. He hasn’t done so.
Exactly. Which is also why it’s odd that Republicans care. It’s not like they can’t insert some other Ivy League conservative judge who hasn’t been accused of attempted rape to take Kavanaugh’s place.
Exactly. Which is also why it’s odd that Republicans care. It’s not like they can’t insert some other Ivy League conservative judge who hasn’t been accused of attempted rape to take Kavanaugh’s place.
Exactly. Which is also why it’s odd that Republicans care. It’s not like they can’t insert some other Ivy League conservative judge who hasn’t been accused of attempted rape to take Kavanaugh’s place.
Aren't they required to go through hearings? Accomplish due diligence? Allow majority and minority senators to ask questions to the candidate? I am not a McConnell guy, but I don't think you can just straight vote in a Supreme Court Justice without going through the proper procedure. Perhaps you can, and this is all just for public perception...I could be wrong on that.
Democrats started this chain of events by reducing the filibuster rule to simple majority in 2013 (You can blame it on Republicans for being hardheaded during that time, but there have been plenty of times in our country's history where a minority party wouldn't submit). Republicans continued/escalated the fight with Merrick Garland. Democrats are very obviously counter punching with the same tactic. The left gets lefter and the right gets righter. Its an ugly cycle. Not really sure of a way out. Garland was a good pick and the Republicans acted awfully. Kavanaugh is a good pick, and the Democrats are acting awfully. (I don't believe for a second that any of these accusations are based on credible evidence. Something most likely happened, but she has no way of determining that it was Kavanaugh, and his life speaks to his character, particularly with women. This isn't a Donald Trump or Bill Clinton kind of pattern). This is a delay tactic and nothing more to try and get this thing to the mid-terms.
Kavanaugh will be confirmed IMO, but the larger issue still exists. The good of the country is not a primary objective of either party. Power is the only currency. Not sure how you get past that in the current rule setup / political climate.
Some mighty fine false equivalancy wrangor.
Unless she’s some sociopath who has been hatching this scheme for years in the off chance Kavanaugh one day got nominated to the Supreme Court.
They can’t ever admit fault. Same reason you have the rubes’ undying loyalty of Trump. It’s all about owning the libs. Nothing else matters.
Aren't they required to go through hearings? Accomplish due diligence? Allow majority and minority senators to ask questions to the candidate? I am not a McConnell guy, but I don't think you can just straight vote in a Supreme Court Justice without going through the proper procedure. Perhaps you can, and this is all just for public perception...I could be wrong on that.
Democrats started this chain of events by reducing the filibuster rule to simple majority in 2013 (You can blame it on Republicans for being hardheaded during that time, but there have been plenty of times in our country's history where a minority party wouldn't submit). Republicans continued/escalated the fight with Merrick Garland. Democrats are very obviously counter punching with the same tactic. The left gets lefter and the right gets righter. Its an ugly cycle. Not really sure of a way out. Garland was a good pick and the Republicans acted awfully. Kavanaugh is a good pick, and the Democrats are acting awfully. (I don't believe for a second that any of these accusations are based on credible evidence. Something most likely happened, but she has no way of determining that it was Kavanaugh, and his life speaks to his character, particularly with women. This isn't a Donald Trump or Bill Clinton kind of pattern). This is a delay tactic and nothing more to try and get this thing to the mid-terms.
Kavanaugh will be confirmed IMO, but the larger issue still exists. The good of the country is not a primary objective of either party. Power is the only currency. Not sure how you get past that in the current rule setup / political climate.
...What is the delay for Christine Ford?
Law Enforcement has now told her and her attorney and the MEDIA Twice that they have no play here. It is a political matter to be exact.
—— as a media watcher,which organizations are covering the response from the FBI?
— Does Christine need more time to get her 36 year story straight?
—— —————————————————————————
Dearest Christine,
It appears that Judge Kavanaugh is ready to testify and boy he sure seems confident. Doesn’t that just piss you off,Christine? I mean,after all the suffering and decades of trauma? And don’t forget,Christine..Kavanaugh may have “inadvertently” killed you that night..do you really want to be responsible if all of your 320 million fellow citizens have to live with a lifetime appointment of a potential murderer to our highest court?
** for fans of the ‘art of the smear’..ponder the use of “inadvertently” in the letter..nice bit of agit-prop**
Anyway,come on Christine.You owe it to yourself and your country.
So let’s have your attorney suspend the game playing..nobody asked you to sit at the same table as your accuser at the same time as you cunningly tried to imply...you wily attorneys,you.
You will testify from the same table as Brett but not at the same time..a bit awkward for everyone in the room wouldn’t you agree?
And Christine,as you and your attorney already know (does the Press?),you still have the option to appear publicly or privately. It is your choice. The committee has deferred to you,above any desire Mr Kavanaugh or other interests may have.
— So please Christine, please consider that the claims you are making have come at the end of what has been a bitter and partisan fight with many questions and accusations faced by Mr Kavanaugh in his confirmation hearing. We would all appreciate it if you would come in and publicly or privately testify in front of this committee in 6 days time.
— Regards,
Your Fellow Americans.
I don’t quite understand the “I don’t believe for a second that any of these accusations are based on credible evidence” comment. It’s not like the person coming forward wasn’t there when it happened. So, for the accuser, the accusation is based upon the most credible evidence one can have - her experience.
Now, I think what you meant to say is that you don’t find these accusations credible because you believe the accuser is lying. Your only reasoning for this conclusion seems to be “Kavanaugh’s life...particularly with women.” This seems odd to me since I doubt you know him personally or any of the women that do.
Also, even if Kavanaugh has treated every woman he’s ever encountered since that night with the utmost respect, that doesn’t make the accusation false.
So, the question is do you believe the accuser. In terms of actual evidence relevant to the issue at hand she has provided two ways to substantiate her claims: 1) She brought this episode up years ago with no motive of any kind with a therapist. So, it seems odd she would lie about it then. 2) She passed a lie detector test.
That is actual evidence that tends to lend credibility to her accusations. Unless she’s some sociopath who has been hatching this scheme for years in the off chance Kavanaugh one day got nominated to the Supreme Court.