Kavanaugh Hearings

[RUPERTKBD]

23 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

I was thinking more of:

 

Jeff Sessions?

[HerrDrFunk]

9 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:

Jeff Sessions?

*Jeff Sessions pokes his head out of his tree-bakery to object to that comparison*

[-DLC-]

 

On 9/28/2018 at 10:35 AM, Rim Jobson said:

It would seem there's quite a few feminists posting in this thread, and that's ok. What's not ok in my opinion is that for the most part you all seem to believe this woman's allegation without any evidence to back it up. What I've seen here in this thread so far is something to the effect of - 'a woman accused a man of a sexual assault! She must be telling the entire truth without fabrication and therefore he must be guilty!' - oh, and if you happen to disagree, well then I hope you dont have a daughter. Ridiculous.

 

You folks here realize that there was no rape, right? The accuser admitted this much herself. She named witnesses who could not corroborate her story, and one that had never even heard of Brett Kavanaugh. Although maybe they were all just a bit forgetful considering it's now 36 years after the "fact". The accuser certainly forgot a few things along the way.

I dont condone rape or any sexual assault by any means, but I'm not willing to accept every woman's accusation at her word as gospel. In this era of #MeToo where a woman can define an assault just about any way she likes and as far back in the past as she wants - effectively destroying her target's name, family, livelihood - WITHOUT CONSEQUENCE if she's not telling the entire truth or even outright lying to suit her own agenda - that I personally will not support either. Just wait until one of you virtuous knights in shining armor who believes every word every woman says, crosses the wrong woman, and she accuses you of a similar travesty. You WILL change your tune. I for one need cold hard evidence of a crime to believe it. Unfortunately that's hard to come by when a crime is not reported for decades.

Assault is defined....not by women, by law.

 

And times are a'changing.  There was once a time where, in order to get ahead, some had to comply.   Were pressed by execs who used their positions for personal gain.

Women were looked at in a dark light when they came forward.  What were they wearing?  What did THEY do to encourage it?  Etc.  Seems that's still prevalent today. Witchhunts and demonization.

 

This isn't about the act of rape...it's about the lack of respect for another human being.  It's about demoralizing behavior and mob mentality.  And crossing lines of personal space and violating someone's body against their will.  I'd say covering a mouth lends way to that?

 

Now sure, when we're young a lot of us misbehave and "fun" sometimes crosses lines.  But never should it violate another human being.

 

We're not talking about criminal prosecution here...but, rather, whether or not this is the ideal candidate for the job.  And my guess is no.  Innocent until proven guilty, sure.  But that applies to the female, too.

 

By the way, she was in therapy for this earlier on. That would support her "story". 

 

Often women are confused.  Ashamed.  Feel bullied and isolated.

 

It's time that changes......

 

But the first step in that is understanding there may not be eye witness testimony.  If I kick you in the groin, doesn't mean it didn't happen if no one saw it. That's the thing...it all is weighed out.  Not discarded because.  That's what needed to happen here, in a proper procedure.  Not something rushed to push this guy through.

 

I am very aware of the fact that  the door is open for exploitation and that false stories to fit agendas will be part of it.  But not many women I know would subject themselves to this kind of scrutiny, that will follow them for life, if it isn't true.  Innocent until PROVEN guilty means there's a process by which to determine that.  I don't feel this process was properly or thoroughly conducted.  It was a fast food drive through deal.

 

 

Your post sounds rather angry , defiant and defensive and has stereotyped with an us against them (feminists) deal.  I'm not a feminist and it isn't cut and dry.  You don't believe her but you do him.  Based on ? 

[Rob_Zepp]

3 hours ago, Warhippy said:

Or are you completely ignoring that he PERHURED himself in front of a senate committee?

 

Did you drink beer?  No.  Oh excwept all those times I drank beer

 

Did you ever black out?  No...except for those times I don't remember

 

Did you ever physically acost anyone?  No.  Except for that time with that bar fight and all those people that are saying otherwise.

 

I mean, is it just being pissy that someone "won something" or is it just a complete and utter end to the patience for people like yourself that like to spin the facts because you really cannot argue otherwise and refuse to accept that you might be wrong?

 

As for not being able to remember a time where this level of whining was this close to this scale.

 

need I remind you of the time the GOP held a sit in to ensure Obama couldn't pass the ACA by shutting down the government while reading green eggs and ham at nearly midnight to their kids?  Oh how about the buying starbucks to pour it out?  Wait no buying Nikes to burn them?  Ohhhh buying taylor swift merch today and burning it?  Or even better my personal fave, being mad at a dude in tites refusing to stand for a song

 

I mean I don't want to say your memory is selectively short but hey...we don't need merrick garland in the room continually bringing up her emails do we

I didn't listen to all the proceedings and will take your word for it.  I think he was attacked at very core level and if he was lying about raping someone he should not be a SCJ but if he wasn't, it was a brutal attempt to destroy a man's life.   

 

Taylor Swift?   You drinking?   What on earth does that bimbo have to do with any of this?

[Rob_Zepp]

3 hours ago, Warhippy said:

I agree.  Appointing people with no accountability simply to score political points and stack the deck is wrong

 

 

 

 

 

But the Canadian Supreme Court doesn't have the hyper political issues that the US does thankfully.

Those people are judges?!?!

[Rob_Zepp]

3 hours ago, RUPERTKBD said:

Jeff Sessions?

Is he a Jedi?

[smithers joe]

if they say she is lying, she deserves a day in court with all the issues being investigated. trump thinks he is being clever, but i believe it will come back to bite him and his government in the butt. to them, it is a closed case. i don't think so. 

[RUPERTKBD]

11 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Is he a Jedi?

He must be....only a Jedi mind trick could have convinced the Dotard that he'd make a good AG...

 

....of course those only work on weak minds....

[Rob_Zepp]

5 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:

He must be....only a Jedi mind trick could have convinced the Dotard that he'd make a good AG...

 

....of course those only work on weak minds....

Weak minds, small hands and the colour of an Archie comic hero.   Recipe for fake news if I ever heard it.    

[RUPERTKBD]

Just now, Rob_Zepp said:

Weak minds, small hands and the colour of an Archie comic hero.   Recipe for fake news if I ever heard it.    

Speaking of "fake news", I just listened to Trump make the claim that Kavanagh was "proven innocent"...

[Rob_Zepp]

6 minutes ago, RUPERTKBD said:

Speaking of "fake news", I just listened to Trump make the claim that Kavanagh was "proven innocent"...

Wow.   Do you think anyone will REALLY know though?   One thing for sure, long after Trump is gone as President the US will have influence from his presidency through the court.   Interesting times.

[-DLC-]

The Trump legacy .. what will it be?

 

A sorority of fat, geriatric frat boys who stick together in a lie and deny pinkie swear deal.  We've reached the bottom, people.  These are the guys people hated in high school, but they were too stupid to notice.

[King Heffy]

1 hour ago, Rob_Zepp said:

Wow.   Do you think anyone will REALLY know though?   One thing for sure, long after Trump is gone as President the US will have influence from his presidency through the court.   Interesting times.

The one bright spot in all of this is that "lifetime" can be a very short amount of time. 

[-DLC-]

https://middleamericandemocrat.com/2018/09/23/russian-donations-to-gop-senators-could-explain-their-rush-to-confirm-kavanaugh/

 

Quote

GOP Senators like Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham are dead set on confirming Brett Kavanaugh, in the face of unprecedented public opposition and despite the fact they have a list of several other possible nominees who would satisfy conservatives, and who could likely be confirmed with much less difficulty. GOP Senators could force Trump to nominate someone else very easily. All they would have to do is tell Trump they don’t have the votes. They also have time. Even if Democrats win control of the Senate in November, that wouldn’t take effect until January of next year, and if the GOP is willing to force a confirmation through a month before a midterm election, they would certainly be willing to force a confirmation through right after a midterm election. Mitch McConnell hasn’t exactly shown himself to be beholden to convention when it comes to Supreme Court Justice nominations (see: Merrick Garland). But, they aren’t forcing Trump to select a better nominee. They are instead trying to rush through confirmation of this obviously flawed nominee. Why? Midterm elections are just around the corner. Jamming through the confirmation of a historically unpopular Supreme Court Justice, who also stands accused of attempted rape, is not a good way to win a midterm election. So, why don’t they just force Trump to nominate somebody else? What makes Brett Kavanaugh so special that he is worth all this trouble?

The explanation could possibly be found by going back to August 2017 when it was revealed that GOP Senators received millions of dollars in funding from a Russian-linked oligarch:

Dallas News: GOP campaigns took $7.35 million from oligarch linked to Russia

Donald Trump and the political action committees for Mitch McConnell, Marco Rubio, Scott Walker, Lindsey Graham, John Kasich and John McCain accepted $7.35 million in contributions from a Ukrainian-born oligarch who is the business partner of two of Russian president Vladimir Putin’s favorite oligarchs and a Russian government bank.

During the 2015-2016 election season, Ukrainian-born billionaire Leonard “Len” Blavatnik contributed $6.35 million to leading Republican candidates and incumbent senators. Mitch McConnell was the top recipient of Blavatnik’s donations, collecting $2.5 million for his GOP Senate Leadership Fund under the names of two of Blavatnik’s holding companies, Access Industries and AI Altep Holdings, according to Federal Election Commission documents and OpenSecrets.org.

So, there is already proof out there that Russian-linked money (Blavatnik was born in the Soviet Ukraine and is a shareholder of a Russian aluminum company) made its way into the campaign funds of prominent GOP Senators like Mitch McConnell and Lindsey Graham. And this is just what we know right now.

There is also the matter of what Paul Manafort knows and what Paul Manafort could be telling Robert Mueller:

Trump’s campaign manager pleads guilty to conspiracy against the United States, will cooperate with special counsel – could implicate numerous people in crimes

In addition, the Republican National Committee could be implicated, as per Manafort’s notes from the meeting:

Manafort’s notes from the Trump Tower Russia meeting reportedly mention political contributions and the RNC

Congressional investigators examining Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election are now focusing on whether the Trump campaign or the Republican National Committee received donations from Russian sources after a meeting involving two Russian lobbyists in Trump Tower last year, according to a Thursday NBC report.

President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and his campaign chairman, Paul Manafort, attended the meeting, on June 9, 2016, with two Russian lobbyists: Natalia Veselnitskaya and Rinat Akhmetshin. Donald Trump Jr., the president’s eldest son, organized the meeting.

Manafort took notes during the meeting on his iPhone and submitted them to the Senate Intelligence Committee late last month. References to political donations and the RNC in the notes have “elevated the significance” of the meeting for congressional investigators, according to NBC.

The Manafort note is fairly cryptic, but it suggest the possibility that the Republican National Committee may have also taken money from Russia.

Then there’s the fact that the Russians also hacked some GOP e-mail accounts, but no hacked materials from the GOP have ever been released to the public:

NBC News: Russia Hack of U.S. Politics Bigger Than Disclosed, Includes GOP

But the hackers –- some of whom are believed to be Russian government employees working regular hours just like other bureaucrats –- have also quietly targeted a broad array of Republicans too as part of the same cyberespionage campaign, say sources.

If sensitive or potentially embarrassing information about GOP politicians or officials was hacked, but never released, there remains open the possibility that the Russians have been holding the information to be used for “kompromat”, essentially a form of blackmail.

Perhaps not coincidentally, several GOP Senators decided to spend the 4th of July in Moscow this year, something that surely was not a great choice as far as political optics goes, which raises the question of just why they want at all:

Daily Beast: GOP Senators Tell Contradictory Stories About Moscow Trip

A top Republican senator shocked his colleagues when he suggested, after returning from a trip to Moscow with fellow GOP lawmakers, that U.S. sanctions targeting Russia were not working and the Kremlin’s election interference was really no big deal.

Now, the senators who joined him for the series of meetings with senior Russian officials are sharply disputing not only Sen. Ron Johnson’s (R-WI) conclusions—but also his account of what went on behind closed doors in Moscow.

 

“I think the sanctions are hurting them badly both in terms of their pocketbooks and in terms of their status in the world,” Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA), who joined the congressional delegation last week, said in an interview. “I don’t want to over-state this, but these were very tense meetings.”

Lastly, in 2016, while Mitch McConnell was receiving millions from a Russian oligarch, and was made aware of the fact that Russians had also hacked the GOP, Mitch McConnell was also refusing to go along with President Barack Obama’s wishes to issue a bipartisan statement about the Russian election interference:

MSNBC: McConnell’s response to Russian attack is back in the spotlight

In early September, Johnson, Comey, and Monaco arrived on Capitol Hill in a caravan of black SUVs for a meeting with 12 key members of Congress, including the leadership of both parties. The meeting devolved into a partisan squabble.

“The Dems were, ‘Hey, we have to tell the public,’ ” recalled one participant. But Republicans resisted, arguing that to warn the public that the election was under attack would further Russia’s aim of sapping confidence in the system.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) went further, officials said, voicing skepticism that the underlying intelligence truly supported the White House’s claims.

So, what does all of this have to do with Brett Kavanaugh? Well, there is a circumstantial chance that it isn’t just Donald Trump and the Trump campaign that could be implicated in crimes by the Mueller investigation, but also members of the Republican National Committee, campaign officials for GOP Senators and members of Congress, or even GOP Senators and members of Congress themselves (cough, Devin Nunes, cough). If they know there is a possibility they or others could be implicated in the Mueller investigation, they would also have good reason to try to ensure that the information from the Mueller investigation never sees the light of day, and this is where there is potential for the Supreme Court to get involved.

The first option for covering up the Mueller investigation’s findings would be to fire Robert Mueller. How do you fire Robert Mueller? Well, first you fire Rod Rosenstein, which could be why the recent story about Rosenstein just came out: as a pretext for him to be fired. Then, after firing Rosenstein, Trump could argue that he has the right to fire Mueller.

 

If Trump goes down this path, it could end up going to the Supreme Court, because legal justification for Trump to follow this course of action lacks precedent. If it goes to the Supreme Court, Brett Kavanaugh could end up being the deciding vote. Guess what Brett Kavanaugh previously stated about his opinion of a President firing a special counsel:

 

This argument of Brett Kavanaugh’s has been written about many times with regards to how it could mean he would protect Trump from the Mueller investigation. But, it could be more than just Trump who Kavanaugh could end up protecting. It could be Mitch McConnell, Lindsey Graham, or other GOP Senators, staff, or operatives who Kavanaugh could end up protecting if he ended up being the deciding vote that upheld Trump’s right to fire the special counsel.

It’s of course impossible to know with any certainty all that is motivating GOP Senators like Lindsey Graham and Mitch McConnell, but these men are very experienced political operators, and their actions and words regarding the nomination and possible confirmation of Brett Kavanaugh are making less and less sense from a political standpoint with each passing day. If Rod Rosenstein is indeed fired by Donald Trump, which looks to be a possibility right now, the reactions of these GOP Senators should be watched very closely, whether Brett Kavanaugh ends up being confirmed or not.

 

 

[Rob_Zepp]

28 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

The one bright spot in all of this is that "lifetime" can be a very short amount of time. 

I don't wish short life on anyone.   Enemies included.

[King Heffy]

7 minutes ago, Rob_Zepp said:

I don't wish short life on anyone.   Enemies included.

If he actually is guilty, death is too good for him.  Keeping Kavanaugh alive could also lead to the suicide of a victim due to the ignorant and bigoted laws he will help to ensure pass.  Unfortunately, the only means to ensure justice is served is for Kavanaugh to die reasonably quickly.

[Rob_Zepp]

10 minutes ago, King Heffy said:

If he actually is guilty, death is too good for him.  Keeping Kavanaugh alive could also lead to the suicide of a victim due to the ignorant and bigoted laws he will help to ensure pass.  Unfortunately, the only means to ensure justice is served is for Kavanaugh to die reasonably quickly.

If he is actually guilty, karma will take care of him (karma is a big dude with massive hands who he shares a locker with at the club - he has always found Kavanagh "cute").

 

I don't pretend to have the wisdom to say who should live or die and I certainly don't when I don't know all the facts.   One thing the past few years should teach EVERYONE, is facts are what the media either want them to be or what they don't.   It is one of the reasons "leaders" like Trump are so dangerous IMHO.

[xereau]

Kavanaugh was one of the chief architects of The Patriot Act.

Notice how this wasn't even brought up once in the hearings or in the MSM?

Does all of this circus side show nonsense make sense now?

A bipartisan smokescreen to hide the fact that one of the most unconstitutional wannabe tyrants in the court system just got onto the Supreme Court of the United States.

 

Disgusting.

[CBH1926]

24 minutes ago, xereau said:

Kavanaugh was one of the chief architects of The Patriot Act.

Notice how this wasn't even brought up once in the hearings or in the MSM?

Does all of this circus side show nonsense make sense now?

A bipartisan smokescreen to hide the fact that one of the most unconstitutional wannabe tyrants in the court system just got onto the Supreme Court of the United States.

 

Disgusting.

Source?

[xereau]

28 minutes ago, CBH1926 said:

Source?

Not sure why I have to google for you...

 

https://epic.org/2018/08/kavanaugh-white-house-counsel-.html

https://mises.org/power-market/judge-napolitano-kavanaugh-enemy-4th-amendment

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/courts/privacy-group-seeks-last-minute-brett-kavanaugh-delay-citing-extraordinary-new-disclosure

 

He was right in the thick of it.  And defended it.  And defends it.  And likes torture too.  The dude is a dbag and the people fell for the ruse hook line and sinker.  A real neoconjob has taken place here.

 

About 4 days ago, Trump was asked in a press conference about Kavanaugh, and I quote, "I hadn't even heard of the guy until a few months ago." LOL

 

Its disgusting how far removed from politics and the amount of Liberty the people have given away for nothing.

Edited October 9, 2018 by xereau