• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Report: Kavanaugh won’t commit to recusal from Trump/Mueller related matters

Junebug said:
This is open and shut to me. Ford’s allegations, although vague, sound potentially credible (polygraph, raised with her doctor years ago). For that reason, and despite Feinstein’s bad-faith handling of the situation, the committee has correctly delayed its vote to give Ford a chance to tell her story under oath. In a turn of fate that both undermines Ford’s credibility and highlights the donkeys’ true motivations, she is refusing to do so. She has every right to do that, but, at the end of the day, the believability of her story was always going to come down to her testimony. Although this isn’t a criminal trial, there are reasons we have statutes of limitations in law, and, given Ford’s own inability to recall even the most basic details of the event, the odds of an investigation turning up additional credible facts are vanishingly small. Given her refusal to provide the only evidence upon which her claim could reasonably be evaluated, the committee should hear from Kavanaugh, and, if his testimony is credible, he should be voted out of committe.

The ploy for an FBI investigation is just that—a ploy, whose ultimate, and obvious, purpose is simply further delay on the hope that the midterms shift the balance of power. The pubs are acting in good faith, and they—rightly—aren’t blinking in this 11th hour game of chicken. All this does is give red-state donkeys cover for turning their thumbs down. For that, donkeys should thank Feinstein’s masterful political maneuvering, but there really isn’t any high ground here.
Click to expand...

90
 
Junebug and Wrangor seem to stuck on this idea that Democrats are trying to stall the nomination.

Is the truth that the Republicans are rushing the process?
 
RJKarl said:
This guy lied under oath about participating in the torture memos. That should have killed his nomination.

He lied about not seeing stolen Dem memos. That should have killed his nomination.

He told Senators on both sides that he believes Roe is settled law. However, his writings say he believes otherwise.

Some say there 3-5 other lies he told to committee.

Now add the allegations from Dr. Ford. Basically every other nominee in history would have been taken down by now or done the honorable thing and step down.
Click to expand...

Shooshmoo said:
Kavanaugh also thinks Presidents should be immune from criminal investigations -- wonder why Trump wanted him? But it's only Dems playing politics by [clutches pearls] wanting to spend some time investigating a credible sex assault allegation. Despite his constant need to claim he is above the fray and the suckers who buy it, Wrangor is just as bad, or worse, than the rest of them.
Click to expand...

The multiple lies under oath should disqualify him regardless of the sexual assault allegations. Pubs are defending him for his outstanding character over the past decades, yet here he has lied under oath multiple times. Good job guys. The GOP attracts the best people.

He wasn't on any short list for SCOTUS until Mueller starts his investigation. What a coincidence.
 
RJKarl said:
This guy lied under oath about participating in the torture memos. That should have killed his nomination.

He lied about not seeing stolen Dem memos. That should have killed his nomination.

He told Senators on both sides that he believes Roe is settled law. However, his writings say he believes otherwise.

Some say there 3-5 other lies he told to committee.

Now add the allegations from Dr. Ford. Basically every other nominee in history would have been taken down by now or done the honorable thing and step down.
Click to expand...

PhDeac said:
Junebug and Wrangor seem to stuck on this idea that Democrats are trying to stall the nomination.

Is the truth that the Republicans are rushing the process?
Click to expand...

They have to get him on the bench before the new term starts in a 2 weeks. Can't have that 4-4 deadlock.
 
Junebug said:
This is open and shut to me. Ford’s allegations, although vague, sound potentially credible (polygraph, raised with her doctor years ago). For that reason, and despite Feinstein’s bad-faith handling of the situation, the committee has correctly delayed its vote to give Ford a chance to tell her story under oath. In a turn of fate that both undermines Ford’s credibility and highlights the donkeys’ true motivations, she is refusing to do so. She has every right to do that, but, at the end of the day, the believability of her story was always going to come down to her testimony. Although this isn’t a criminal trial, there are reasons we have statutes of limitations in law, and, given Ford’s own inability to recall even the most basic details of the event, the odds of an investigation turning up additional credible facts are vanishingly small. Given her refusal to provide the only evidence upon which her claim could reasonably be evaluated, the committee should hear from Kavanaugh, and, if his testimony is credible, he should be voted out of committe.

The ploy for an FBI investigation is just that—a ploy, whose ultimate, and obvious, purpose is simply further delay on the hope that the midterms shift the balance of power. The pubs are acting in good faith, and they—rightly—aren’t blinking in this 11th hour game of chicken. All this does is give red-state donkeys cover for turning their thumbs down. For that, donkeys should thank Feinstein’s masterful political maneuvering, but there really isn’t any high ground here.
Click to expand...

Why shouldn't the Committee hear from the 3 other people, other than Ford and Kavanaugh who, were present that night, including one who may have been in the room?
 
PhDeac said:
Junebug and Wrangor seem to stuck on this idea that Democrats are trying to stall the nomination.

Is the truth that the Republicans are rushing the process?
Click to expand...

I think it's a little of both. Blue state Dems are being pushed by constituents to prevent or delay the process, but at the end of the day, there's not much they can do as long as Pubs fall in line. And conversely, Pubs are ramming this through. It's politics, but made worse because of a salacious revelation from 35 years ago and because Dems are still bitter and angry (rightfully so) over the Garland nomination. Kavanaugh will be a SC justice unless his name is withdrawn, which it doesn't look like it will be, or unless the Dems stay together and you get 2-3 Pub defections, which is unlikely at this point. McCaskill has said she's a no vote, but I'd be surprised to see Donnelly or Heitkamp vote no because that would hurt their reelection chances in ruby red states. Those 2 probably don't want Pub defections so they don't have to be the critical votes.

Edited to add that Kavanaugh will make it will appease the base (I love how evangelicals are pushing it), but overall, I don't see this nomination helping the administration or Pub efforts this Fall. It's an unnecessary bloody nose.
 
Last edited:
DistrictDeacon said:
Why shouldn't the Committee hear from the 3 other people, other than Ford and Kavanaugh who, were present that night, including one who may have been in the room?
Click to expand...


And why not hear from her therapist? To corroborate when she started talking about this, etc.? Or the person who administered the lie detector test?
 
ConnorEl said:
And why not hear from her therapist? To corroborate when she started talking about this, etc.? Or the person who administered the lie detector test?
Click to expand...

So treat this as an incident that could be investigated instead of just some he said/she said stuff.
 
Junebug said:
The donkeys don’t want a 3-day investigation. That does them no good. And the pubs are smart not to give it to them, because they would just turn around and call a 3-day investigation a sham.
Click to expand...

Are you related to lectro?
 
PhDeac said:
So treat this as an incident that could be investigated instead of just some he said/she said stuff.
Click to expand...

Yep.


Pubs seem to have already decided that’s all this is, or all they want it to be. And that she is probably just confused or “mixed up” at best.
 
Junebug said:
The donkeys don’t want a 3-day investigation. That does them no good. And the pubs are smart not to give it to them, because they would just turn around and call a 3-day investigation a sham.
Click to expand...

Seems to me they just need her statement and the other guy's statement, and a Kavanaugh statement. :noidea:
 
Interesting also that a few articles have claimed that Ford provided the therapist's reports to the WaPo when she reported the story and that the therapist's report stated there were 4 guys, but she now says only 2??? Allegedly Ford claimed therapist was mistaken, but isn't that yet another huge red flag coupled with no other facts she can provide??? Does a therapist who takes note for a living really confuse 2 with 4??? The one thing she claims as fact is disputed by her own therapist notes???
 
How many donkey votes are needed to move forward with his confirmation?
 
Well, let’s investigate!



I haven’t seen the therapist notes. 4 guys at the gathering, two in the room?

I don’t know.


But I do know who is asking for an FBI investigation and who is not.
 
Junebug said:
Who needs the FBI when you have Spartacus in your corner? If anyone can determine the line between stealing second and groping, it’s him.
Click to expand...

Huh?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top