Judge Kavanaugh's confirmation Hearing Now with Poll

[The Black Forrest]

They have not shown any interest in caring. Party matters more than country to them and if Kavanaugh declared the President above the law what could be done?

Oh yeah, cause the Democrats are such patriots

And which hostile foreign power are the republicans defending these days?

[Tarsonis]

Oh yeah, cause the Democrats are such patriots

And which hostile foreign power are the republicans defending these days?

Beligium. They gave us French fries

[The Black Forrest]

And which hostile foreign power are the republicans defending these days?

Beligium. They gave us French fries

Damn it. I can't give those up.

[Telconi]

They have not shown any interest in caring. Party matters more than country to them and if Kavanaugh declared the President above the law what could be done?

Oh yeah, cause the Democrats are such patriots

But they don't put """party over country!"""

[San Lumen]

Oh yeah, cause the Democrats are such patriots

But they don't put """party over country!"""

No they do not.

[Telconi]

Beligium. They gave us French fries

Damn it. I can't give those up.

It's okay, they're good for you, and ketchup is a vegetable.

[Telconi]

But they don't put """party over country!"""

No they do not.

And I'm the queen of England.

[Petrasylvania]

Beligium. They gave us French fries

Damn it. I can't give those up.

Worth tolerating Belgian meddling in our elections.

Miserable Fat Belgian Bastards...

[Jerzylvania]

That cat doesn't seem interested at getting to the truth on this particular occasion.

Oh my sweet summer kettle...

He keeps pretending we're hiring an assistant manager at Arby's or maybe Walmart. In that case, sure, overlook it and nobody would argue because your pool of available excellent choice people may not be much.

But the bar for SCOTUS appointment is steeply higher and there are many highly qualified candidates that don't have the problems Kavanaugh has. Time for POTUS to save himself the trouble and move on from this flawed nominee.

Ahahaha, this has nothing to do with the level of appointment. You say I'm not interested in truth, but that's the funny thing, that's all that interests me. There's categorically no way of proving these allegations true. Perhaps she testifies, and perhaps she gives a very moving account of what happened to her, and yes perhaps Kavanaugh guilty. There's only one problem, there's no way to prove that.. There's no way to corroborate the accusations she's making. There's no witnesses by her own admission, there's not going to be any physical evidence 37 years after the fact, and again, by her own admission, theres nothing on record even relating to this incident prior to 2012.

These accusations cannot be corroborated, one way or the other. Which means the accused get's the benefit of the doubt. Welcome to American Legalism 101. In the case of the SCOTUS appointment, because they cannot be corroborated, they don't actually speak to the Character of Kavanaugh, not with any sort of merit. And here's the kicker, it's important that they don't affect the process. If they do affect the process, it sets precedent that so long as someone levels the most baseless accusations against someone, the minority can delay the appointment of any person to any position that they don't want. It lowers the level of process in our Republic the point where were destroying peoples careers, just to make sure our opposition can't fill the position they want to.



You keep saying I'm not interested in truth, but you're off the mark. The difference between you and me is you've already accepted the accusations as true, and I see no reason to take them seriously unless actual evidence can be presented. I'm also betting that you don't actually care to ponder if they're true accusations or not, but you latched on to them because of your anti-trumpian stance. You don't like Trump, thus you don't like Kavanaugh, thus you'll readily accept any accusation no matter how flimsy because it works toward your particular stance. You're not interested in truth, you're interested in your agenda. You act like the republicans are putting up a convicted rapist, because in your mind you've already convicted him, without any evidence, without any due process, without any justification, beyond the fact that you simply don't want him to be on the Court, and then you look down your nose at those of us who haven't followed along. Of course you say we're willingly turning a blind eye to a rapist, because he's already guilty in your eyes and you see all.



And just in case you doubt my intention, I actually . He never should have gotten the nom in the first place in my opinion. Amy Barret is who should have gotten it.

First PP above, you are totally wrong. Maybe you'll get it if put to you this way (yeah, right). My state wouldn't hire a candidate for State Police Officer position who had a credible accusation of this sort. Theyd move on to the next candidate.

Next PP. You are more worried about the political (blah blah blah minority blah blah) than the judicial. This is a Judicial appointment at the highest level FOR LIFE. Personally, I don't know Trump but my neighbor worked for him in the failed Atlantic City casino. She loved the guy, but not for president. Get that? I have the same feelings. He's not qualified ethically and otherwise, but might be fine to work for in a casino. Sorry, but it looks like I may have higher standards than you for high political and judicial jobs that affect millions. And no, your not qualified to be my professor in American Legalism 101 bc you make loud noises on the internet. So just get over it already

PP 3, most of which is incoherent ranting, but here's a couple things. First, I have never mentioned the word rape. I haven't accepted the accusations are true or false. As I have said, let's have the hearings and we'll see. You, OTOH have said yesterday the hearings aren't necessary. I totally disagree. But as far as similar high profile jobs such as these are concerned outside of the senate confirmation process, normally we'd move on to the next candidate at this point.

No matter what friend, at least Kavanaugh had a hearing and will be afforded another. That's more than Judge Garland received. His nomination was ignored. Do you want to tell me that's not true? Or something about what happened thirty years ago was the reason? Phhht.

Last sentence, about your intentions. For someone that "don't give a shit if Kavanaugh get's confirmed" you sure as Hell seem to give a shit.
Amy Barrett can get in line. Merrick Garland says he's still available and if Trump were to dump Kavanaugh for centerist Garland he'd find many people would decide to take a second look at Trump himself. Of course, that would take political courage on Trump's part. He'd have to defy his base which is full of cats like you. Do you think he's got it in him? It would be awesome to see that happen, though I feel the odds are against it.

[Ethel mermania]

Yeah, cause who needs or even wants actual evidence before passing judgement against someone, right?

*Nod Nod*

It's not "JUDGMENT" of the individual as much as it's better judgment of the field of candidates for the job.

BTW, maybe learn to spell the word.

Smelling doesn't count

[Jerzylvania]

It's not "JUDGMENT" of the individual as much as it's better judgment of the field of candidates for the job.

BTW, maybe learn to spell the word.

Smelling doesn't count

Only when it comes to smelling the roses.
Smell the roses!
Never mind that crap that's turned green in jars on the shelf. It's a diversion.

[Paddy O Fernature]

Yeah, cause who needs or even wants actual evidence before passing judgement against someone, right?

*Nod Nod*

It's not "JUDGMENT" of the individual as much as it's better judgment of the field of candidates for the job.

BTW, maybe learn to spell the word.

Perhaps you should maybe educate yourself, and know that both are acceptable spellings for the word in common usage, before trying to tell someone that they should learn how to spell a word already spelled correctly and looking like a fool that doesn't have an argument to stand on grasping at straws. However, just for you cupcake, if you want me to spell it the way you think I should I will from here on out just to make you feel better.

#KnowUNo

[The Black Forrest]

It's not "JUDGMENT" of the individual as much as it's better judgment of the field of candidates for the job.

BTW, maybe learn to spell the word.

Smelling doesn't count

Liar! Smelling is important to a cat!

[Paddy O Fernature]

Smelling doesn't count

Liar! Smelling is important to a cat!

This... this completes me and explains all of life's little mysteries!

[Petrasylvania]

Smelling doesn't count

Liar! Smelling is important to a cat!

There should be a smelling bee.

[Tobleste]

The entirety of interaction by the GOP with the Dems has been by smear tactics, mudslinging and various search and destroy missions of candidates for years. That's what reeks. Check your own garbage can.

That being said, I think Ms. Ford seems totally legit at this point. She's probably not on an unjustified revenge mission.

I meant McConnell was true to his form. Mitch is a long standing hypocrite. But more to the threads topic, there's plenty more to hear about Kavanaugh's past sexual exploits. Should be real conservative, right? Sex just to make babies and no other stuff.

Democrats do the same thing. Both sides should be held accountable, regardless of whether or not one does it more.

If one does it more, they should be punished more severely. That's pretty basic. Two thieves should be punished differently if one stole a pen and the other stole 100 million dollars.

[San Lumen]

Im starting to very much wonder if the Dr. Ford hearing will happen. At least have the courtesy to tell the Senate your attending. If she doesnt attend she will be branded a liar and opportunist.

[Petrasylvania]

Democrats do the same thing. Both sides should be held accountable, regardless of whether or not one does it more.

If one does it more, they should be punished more severely. That's pretty basic. Two thieves should be punished differently if one stole a pen and the other stole 100 million dollars.

Amputation and a golden parachute?

[Paddy O Fernature]

Im starting to very much wonder if the Dr. Ford hearing will happen. At least have the courtesy to tell the Senate your attending. If she doesnt attend she will be branded a liar and opportunist.

TBH, I'm pretty sure that boat has already sailed at this point for most.

[San Lumen]

Im starting to very much wonder if the Dr. Ford hearing will happen. At least have the courtesy to tell the Senate your attending. If she doesnt attend she will be branded a liar and opportunist.

TBH, I'm pretty sure that boat has already sailed at this point for most.

what do you mean? That she won't attend? Even I would question her claims at that point

[Tobleste]

If one does it more, they should be punished more severely. That's pretty basic. Two thieves should be punished differently if one stole a pen and the other stole 100 million dollars.

Amputation and a golden parachute?

True.

[Paddy O Fernature]

TBH, I'm pretty sure that boat has already sailed at this point for most.

what do you mean? That she won't attend? Even I would question her claims at that point

No, that people already consider her a liar and possibly an opportunist by this point in the game.

[San Lumen]

what do you mean? That she won't attend? Even I would question her claims at that point

No, that people already consider her a liar and possibly an opportunist by this point in the game.

I dont but the fact that she wont respond to the invitation to attend is puzzling.

[Petrasylvania]

what do you mean? That she won't attend? Even I would question her claims at that point

No, that people already consider her a liar and possibly an opportunist by this point in the game.

Didn't stop people from demanding Keith Ellison drop out. ;-]

[Paddy O Fernature]

No, that people already consider her a liar and possibly an opportunist by this point in the game.

I dont but the fact that she wont respond to the invitation to attend is puzzling.

Not really. If I'm understanding it correctly, she wanted to remain anon at the beginning and is only publicly known due to an "accidental" leak. If true, it would make sense that maybe she's had enough of the dog n pony bullshit show and is going to use this as an opportunity to get out while she still could.

No, that people already consider her a liar and possibly an opportunist by this point in the game.

Didn't stop people from demanding Keith Ellison drop out. ;-]