Donald Trump is the President Mark IV (Read Mod Warning in OP)

Hande hoche!

Chris Coons is coming across well through the nomination process.

Headshot

Hande hoche! wrote: »

Chris Coons is coming across well through the nomination process.

Yap very classy

StringerBell

So, one week from today he will be getting confirmed and the Republicans have taken away a big talking point from the Democrats in the mid terms.

Not an overly bad day when they look back on it from McConnell and co I'd say.

Assuming it is limited to the current credible claims as we were told of course. Not sure how they will be able to get anything conclusive given the time passed etc.

Tactic should probably switch to , or at least heavily include looking for nailed on proof of lies from kavanaugh

TomOnBoard

Itssoeasy wrote: »

Well then Ms. Keyser is not being forth coming as judge Kavanagh was asked did he know ms keyser and he said not well but he knew her.

Not suggesting she was "economical with the truth" (just resurrecting that old battle-cry from Irish presidential elections past, in honour of the season we are in...) I sense that Ms Keyser may have deflected from herself by disavowing knowledge. She is currently dealing with illness, and it appears that the manner in which she had begun to be 'hounded' by reporters led to her terse communication via lawyers. Dr Ford did say yesterday that she had received a message that appeared to express sadness on the part of Ms Keyser that she could not be more supportive.

Assuming that the ground-rules are about to change with the intervention of Flake's FBI demand, personal reticence around becoming involved in the previous farcical 'investigation' may be tempered as more professional investigators deal with the matter.

UsedToWait

StringerBell wrote: »

So, one week from today he will be getting confirmed and the Republicans have taken away a big talking point from the Democrats in the mid terms.

Not an overly bad day when they look back on it from McConnell and co I'd say.

Assuming it is limited to the current credible claims as we were told of course. Not sure how they will be able to get anything conclusive given the time passed etc.

Tactic should probably switch to , or at least heavily include looking for nailed on proof of lies from kavanaugh

Would it be possible the FBI, in light of the abuse thrown at them by the Commander in Chief, might be exhaustive in their investigations?
I know Kavanaugh said they can only state the facts, but the facts, to me, seem damning.

A guy who has such a casual relationship with the truth, over trivial details, doesn't want the reality exposed, after his sworn testimony.

TomOnBoard

Duck Soup wrote: »

Good point made on MSNBC - Flake wouldn't have put himself out on a limb on this unless he was absolutely sure he had back-up from Collins and Murkawski.

Murkawski will back it up readily, I'd say but Collins seems under a lot of constituent pressure to 'conform'. On a personal level, she probably woul;d burn Kavanaugh but the base needs feeding so she's going to need lots of cover. I suspect that the way numbers appear to be stacking up, the arrangement will be agreed to in order to avoid un-necessarily marginalising folks now, which will be used to whip them into line unless the FBI makes any lights go to amber. If they find anything approaching red, Kav will be quietly advised "in the interests of the country" to withdraw, so as to avoid embarassment of the Senate Republicans and the White House..

Leroy42

Ludo wrote: »

As for Kavanaugh...I understand his anger yesterday and have no issue at all with that. If I was accused like that and innocent, I would probably react the same. On the other hand, he DID lie yesterday also repeatedly. Flatulence my arse!!! Drinking game? I don't think so.

So how do you explain the Fox news interview? Was he not angry by then? Did he only realise he was angry at the hearing? He said he didn't watch her testimony so what changed to make him so angry?

And why bring up a left wing conspiracy? With no evidence? People are claiming that it is his word against her (which it is) but that is simply his fantasy with no evidence at all? Can you imagine if she had tried something like that? Claiming the whole assault was a right wing conspiracy?

The man is seriously unhinged? I get he is angry, I understand how terrible this must be for him, but to lose his cool like that? This man is being proffered to make judgements about the very core of America. He will, quite likely, be asked to judge whether a woman has a right to decide on her own body. And yet he has shown incapable of controlling his own emotions.

I have friend that is a judge and I asked them a while back how they can be so sure that the person is guilty. They simply answered that is not their job. Their job is to decide if the evidence meets the legal requirement, if the process has been followed. I asked that they must have cases where they know the person did it but gets off. Again, they simply said that whilst they may well have done it, the law says that certain conditions must be met, and as such it is their job to make that decision.

Basically, totally and completely unemotional. Brett has shown incapable of being that. When the pressure was on he folded. Many people never get tested to the limits he has, so never know. But like top sportpeople (or nearly top) its that ability to stay cool and keep doing what is needed when the pressure is highest that marks the good from the great.

A SCOTUS judge should be the highest possible standard.

As for the screenshot. Look at the faces of the women in the picture. Everyone has a look of disgust. Because every woman knows exactly the type of man that Brett is, for they have all experienced his type before.

everlast75

The optimist in me thinks that to go to such great lengths to stop an FBI investigation means there is a there there.
If anything arises, Kavanaugh will withdraw rather than go to a vote on the floor.
If trump thinks that he will not get through, he will step away and disown him.

TomOnBoard

aloyisious wrote: »

Don at interview "Ford very compelling, very credible". I'm wondering if his missus or/and his daughter bent his ear.

Well said! I see Melania whipping him into line since early yesterday. At least she has some balls IMO. The other wan, I dunno! Melania would have been sincere, Ivanavanovitch would have been looking at how it affects her (failing) brand.

Leroy42

TomOnBoard wrote: »

Well said! I see Melania whipping him into line since early yesterday. At least she has some balls IMO. The other wan, I dunno! Melania would have been sincere, Ivanavanovitch would have been looking at how it affects her (failing) brand.

Good grief. On what possible grounds have you bestowed Melania such morals? What evidence are you basing it on? Is it her continued sticking with Trump despite his affairs? What about how he is treating the people of Puerto Rico? Or maybe it was when she said nothing when he called African countries Sh1tholes.

Or maybe it was when she called him out on calling Ted Cruz's wife ugly. Or saying that the allegations of sexual abuse against him were untrue because the women weren't good looking enough.

Or maybe it was.....actually no, there is an never has been a point that seems to be one beyond which she is not willing to go.

2 Scoops

Leroy42 wrote: »

So how do you explain the Fox news interview? Was he not angry by then? Did he only realise he was angry at the hearing? He said he didn't watch her testimony so what changed to make him so angry?

And why bring up a left wing conspiracy? With no evidence? People are claiming that it is his word against her (which it is) but that is simply his fantasy with no evidence at all? Can you imagine if she had tried something like that? Claiming the whole assault was a right wing conspiracy?

The man is seriously unhinged? I get he is angry, I understand how terrible this must be for him, but to lose his cool like that? This man is being

Talk about over react much, he had angry facial expressions at some of the lines of questioning which is totally understandable, he's being paraded as a serial rapist in much of the press. Anyone can pull similar gifs of Comey or Strzok or whoever else reacting in a similar manner to questioning. I watched the entire hearing, if people are clinging to this unhinged narrative he must have came out of the hearing better than I realized.

Duck Soup

Trump has ordered the FBI to re-open the background check.

aloyisious

StringerBell wrote: »

So, one week from today he will be getting confirmed and the Republicans have taken away a big talking point from the Democrats in the mid terms.

Not an overly bad day when they look back on it from McConnell and co I'd say.

Assuming it is limited to the current credible claims as we were told of course. Not sure how they will be able to get anything conclusive given the time passed etc.

Tactic should probably switch to , or at least heavily include looking for nailed on proof of lies from kavanaugh

Basically the GOP leadership has put the middle-digit up to US women voters. I see the number-crunchers in the GOP backrooms spending the weekend reckoning how many public female votes the party has just lost and try and persuade the leadership of that fact. The senate will be resounding to womens anger for some time now into the future.

It's twice in a week that public voter womens anger has been brought to bear directly on the Senate GOP members. It's more than probable that the GOP sitting members on the hill will be getting it in the neck at home from their women-folk and their constituents. Women will NOT like the idea that their daughters are being put at definite risk of sexual assault by the beliefs of elder male GOP members. it's "Carpe Diem" for the Dems on a plate.

Leroy42

Nice try, line of questioning! What particular question do you think the women are aghast at? Was it a DNC or GOP that was asking such a question that lead to all the women reacting like that.

You asked why, I gave an answer. That you don't want to accept that answer is not my problem.

I simply cannot understand how you can continue to think that this person is the correct person for SCOTUS. We hear the almost constant refrain about snowflakes, and yet here you are defending a guy that was crying because life is unfair.

HC never cried, and she had to sit through 11 hours of testimony. Dr Ford held it together. So you support a POTUS wcan spends his whole time complaining that everyone is out to get him and a SCOTUS nominee that things the somehow Bill and Hillary are out to get him.

Talk about snowflakes

Duck Soup

Leroy42 wrote: »

Nice try, line of questioning! What particular question do you think the women are aghast at? Was it a DNC or GOP that was asking such a question that lead to all the women reacting like that.

You asked why, I gave an answer. That you don't want to accept that answer is not my problem.

I simply cannot understand how you can continue to think that this person is the correct person for SCOTUS. We hear the almost constant refrain about snowflakes, and yet here you are defending a guy that was crying because life is unfair.

HC never cried, and she had to sit through 11 hours of testimony. Dr Ford held it together. So you support a POTUS wcan spends his whole time complaining that everyone is out to get him and a SCOTUS nominee that things the somehow Bill and Hillary are out to get him.

Talk about snowflakes

If I didn't know better, I would have said he was a bit pîssed.

mcmoustache

Leroy42 wrote: »

I simply cannot understand how you can continue to think that this person is the correct person for SCOTUS. We hear the almost constant refrain about snowflakes, and yet here you are defending a guy that was crying because life is unfair.

Because everything Trump does is the right thing. That's why.


When the ABA changes their mind about a candidate after the hearing, reality would suggest that he had a shít hearing. But if you support Trump, Kavanaugh totally pwned the libs there with his crying and his tantrums.

mcmoustache

In other news, a judge has stated that the Dems have standing a case against Trump for violating the emoluments clause. It's a bit boring though.

2 Scoops

Leroy42 wrote: »

HC never cried

So he can't display any emotion at all, is that what you want? Good for you.

On a totally honest note I did not find his opening antics and sobbing to be believable. It felt fake and contrived. I don't know if he's guilty of the accusation but I think there's a real possibility he was stooper drunk and grabbed the girl and pushed her down. If it was that and she pushed him off that's one thing, real scummy behaviour sure, but she's accused him of putting his hand over her mouth to stop her screaming and trying to pull off her clothes. Those are incredibly serious accusations.

For incredibly serious accusations the evidence or lack there of just isn't enough to destroy a family and career over. Like I've said many times now, her witnesses deny the event or even knowing Kavanaugh, she doesn't know the location, and she doesn't know who drove her there or drove her home, the last memory lapse especially I have an extremely hard time believing. Even if she didn't remember who drove her the people who did could have came forward.

I'm not against the FBI doing a 1 week investigation at all. I don't trust the Dem's, they're probably scheming as we speak of the next stall tactic in case the FBI report comes back clean. This is why I said it should have been brought to the proper peoples attention 2 months ago so everyone could be happy and provide ample time, I don't believe there was no political reasons as to why it was leaked to the media at the last second.

VonZan

Leroy42 wrote: »

So how do you explain the Fox news interview? Was he not angry by then? Did he only realise he was angry at the hearing? He said he didn't watch her testimony so what changed to make him so angry?

And why bring up a left wing conspiracy? With no evidence? People are claiming that it is his word against her (which it is) but that is simply his fantasy with no evidence at all? Can you imagine if she had tried something like that? Claiming the whole assault was a right wing conspiracy?

The man is seriously unhinged? I get he is angry, I understand how terrible this must be for him, but to lose his cool like that? This man is being proffered to make judgements about the very core of America. He will, quite likely, be asked to judge whether a woman has a right to decide on her own body. And yet he has shown incapable of controlling his own emotions.

I have friend that is a judge and I asked them a while back how they can be so sure that the person is guilty. They simply answered that is not their job. Their job is to decide if the evidence meets the legal requirement, if the process has been followed. I asked that they must have cases where they know the person did it but gets off. Again, they simply said that whilst they may well have done it, the law says that certain conditions must be met, and as such it is their job to make that decision.

Basically, totally and completely unemotional. Brett has shown incapable of being that. When the pressure was on he folded. Many people never get tested to the limits he has, so never know. But like top sportpeople (or nearly top) its that ability to stay cool and keep doing what is needed when the pressure is highest that marks the good from the great.

A SCOTUS judge should be the highest possible standard.

As for the screenshot. Look at the faces of the women in the picture. Everyone has a look of disgust. Because every woman knows exactly the type of man that Brett is, for they have all experienced his type before.

I think its dangerous to believe that he's unfit based on uncorroborated allegations, the look on people's face etc. Let the man have his due process. If their story can be corroborated then I'm sure we'll find out very quickly as I imagine the Democrats will want to bury this as quickly as possible after yesterday's showing and any new information will be leaked very quickly.

Two men have already come forward and claimed they were the people involved with Dr. Ford on the night in question. The best scenario for everyone is an independent investigation as a witch hunt without evidence won't do the Democrats any favours.

Leroy42

So he can't display any emotion at all, is that what you want? Good for you[/quote]

Again, try to at least be consistent. When libtards get emotional it all because they are snowflakes etc. Now suddenly you want us to treat people as humans with emotions.

So HC stood by Bill not because od any sense of emotion or belief in her husband, but because she wanted to facilitate him.

Are you going to try to suggest that had Dr Ford acted in the same way, angry, defiant, making conspiratorial accusations and crying you would have the same reaction? Please.

2 Scoops

Again, try to at least be consistent. When libtards get emotional it all because they are snowflakes etc. Now suddenly you want us to treat people as humans with emotions.

So HC stood by Bill not because od any sense of emotion or belief in her husband, but because she wanted to facilitate him.

Are you going to try to suggest that had Dr Ford acted in the same way, angry, defiant, making conspiratorial accusations and crying you would have the same reaction? Please.

I don't think I've ever called anyone in this thread a libtard, I've been called a nazi and alt right a bunch though. The onus is on the accuser to provide evidence, not the other way around. The way people behaved emotionally has nothing to do with it.

Igotadose

Rudepundit nails it about Kavanaughsdrunk defense,paraphrasing "If you re human trash, you're trash drunk or not." http://rudepundit.blogspot.com/2018/09/random-observations-on-raging.html?m=1

Leroy42

And she did provide it. 100% she said. There was one other person she claims was in the room. A friend of his, so a risky strategy if she is lying.Yet his friend refuses to back him up. She could have easily claimed it was just the two of them, what possible reason to bring a third party into it? Particularly a 3rd party close to the other side?Why has this friend not come forward to help Brett? That is the question you need to ask.

Thargor

2 Scoops wrote: »

On a totally honest note I did not find his opening antics and sobbing to be believable. It felt fake and contrived. I don't know if he's guilty of the accusation but I think there's a real possibility he was stooper drunk and grabbed the girl and pushed her down. If it was that and she pushed him off that's one thing, real scummy behaviour sure, but she's accused him of putting his hand over her mouth to stop her screaming and trying to pull off her clothes. Those are incredibly serious accusations.

So you've run your eye over the case and decided theres a possibility he grabbed her and pushed her down on the bed but less believable that he covered her mouth doing that? What mental gymnastics did you go through to arrive at that opinion?

Leroy42

2 Scoops wrote: »

I don't think I've ever called anyone in this thread a libtard, I've been called a nazi and alt right a bunch though. The onus is on the accuser to provide evidence, not the other way around. The way people behaved emotionally has nothing to do with it.

Apologies. My quick search couldn't show you used the word libtard. I'll just put this here to clear things up

[Loony left wing are normalizing this. Huffpo is probably the crème de la crème when you consider utter sludge like salon and polygon. Ideology takes a precedent over facts
21-Sep-2018 17:57 in After Hours by 2 Scoops]

mcmoustache

Whatever about the rape stuff, his performance yesterday wasn't great. I found him a bit shrill. He got very emotional during some answers and hysterical at points. Even crying in front of the world for some reason. It would make one wonder if he would be capable of doing the job without his emotions getting in the way. I'm all for equality but you can't be a judge if you're going to be flying off the handle and reaching for the tissues just because of a little pressure. And do we even know if he still gets weird once a month? That could be a disaster.

2 Scoops

mcmoustache wrote: »

just because of a little pressure.

Ah hear.. Imagine being in his position just for a second. I thought he was exaggerating too fwiw but it's a totally reasonable reaction to what has happened to him and his family.

aloyisious

VonZan wrote: »

I think its dangerous to believe that he's unfit based on uncorroborated allegations, the look on people's face etc. Let the man have his due process. If their story can be corroborated then I'm sure we'll find out very quickly as I imagine the Democrats will want to bury this as quickly as possible after yesterday's showing and any new information will be leaked very quickly.

Two men have already come forward and claimed they were the people involved with Dr. Ford on the night in question. The best scenario for everyone is an independent investigation as a witch hunt without evidence won't do the Democrats any favours.

That last in itself should be cause enough for the GOP to insist that the FBI get involved to locate the two men, verify their story and clear the judge for the USSC seat. If the FBI then find that the story is true, they have a duty to inform the person who authorised the investigation. The same applies if they find the two men's story is in any way incorrect. BTW, how long is it since the two men made their claim that they were the two boys at the parry with Prof Ford?

SimonTemplar

It is entirely probable that his experience with those two women caused Flake to change his mind about unconditionally voting in favour of Kavanagh, which has resulted in this new FBI investigation.

If things go south for Kavanagh during the next week, those two random members of the public after a chance encounter with a senator may end up playing a major role in who sits on the supreme court, which is pretty extraordinary.

2 Scoops

Leroy42 wrote: »

Apologies. My quick search couldn't show you used the word libtard. I'll just put this here to clear things up

[Loony left wing are normalizing this. Huffpo is probably the crème de la crème when you consider utter sludge like salon and polygon. Ideology takes a precedent over facts
21-Sep-2018 17:57 in After Hours by 2 Scoops]

In after hours, yes I called a left wing news site ( Huffpo ) that promoted being overweight as normal the loony faction of the left. Sue me.

Here's the article in question;

https://highline.huffingtonpost.com/articles/en/everything-you-know-about-obesity-is-wrong/

"For decades, the medical community has ignored mountains of evidence to wage a cruel and futile war on fat people, poisoning public perception and ruining millions of lives."