Brett Kavanaugh now under FBI investigation

[boutons_deux]

Trump suggests drunk women cannot be sexually assaulted

President Trump suggested during a press scrum that women who are drunk cannot be sexually assaulted.

Trump responded by dismissing Ramirez’s allegation,

in part because she admits she was drinking the night Kavanaugh allegedly assaulted her at a party while both of them were students at Yale.

“The second accuser has nothing.

The second accuser doesn’t ever know

—

she thinks maybe it would’ve been him, maybe not, she admits that she was drunk,”

Trump said.

“She admits time lapses —

there were time lapses.

This is a person,

and this is a series of statements that is gonna take one of the most talented, :lol

one of the greatest intellects from a judicial statements in our country — :lol

gonna keep him off the United States Supreme Court?”

https://thinkprogress.org/trump-drunk-women-assault-kavanaugh-3eee23b7a6a7/

[DMC]

Absolutely. Why not? If he can push for clinton to be forced to answer questions regarding the cigar being inserted in dark places - i guess it’s just his time in the barrel - amirite?

Ding!

I didn't say he shouldn't be called to testify. I said he shouldn't volunteer. You never volunteer to take the stand.

[DMC]

Oh here's a goody.

"she should be grateful it was just attempted rape, and not burning acid".

:cry Islam is peaceful
:cry Hichn pls

[RandomGuy]

Since when is "who has the most to gain by lying" been any type of metric? And who am I to judge motive?

As I've said before, the Left (present company possibly included I'm afraid) are hysterical about this nomination. "Coat Hanger Abortions" hang in the balance. The hyperbole has been extreme, and believed absolutely. I run in academic circles - they have swallowed the kool-aid. This woman (Ford) is now a hero to these people. What does she have to gain? I'm thinking a book, a speaking tour, and I'd be willing to bet a nice slot at the next presidential convention (bookmark this post). She is going to be an icon of the left for years. She lives in fucking San Francisco! What does she have to lose? Not a damn thing. Have some perspective. Regardless, even if she was going to wear the scarlet letter for the rest of her life, and this was going to ruin her, the fact that there is absolutely NO EVIDENCE AND NO CORROBORATION cannot be ignored! It isn't even a he said/she said. It is a he and he and she said,/she said (30 years later, then changed her story 6 years after that.) Please.

Provide any evidence of the woman's motive.

[DarrinS]

Hilarious if true

1044656501497901056

[DMC]

The justice system should put the clamps on people sitting on accusations for decades then using them as a weapon in opportune moments. In fact, someone who does what this woman is doing should be sued and they should lose. There has to be exceptions, of course, like if someone had no idea who did this to them but knew the face and realized "that's him", or in the case of a capital crime that doesn't have a statute of limitations like murder.

To sit on something that supposedly destroyed you until you can create a media firestorm with it, that doesn't really support your privacy or security fear angle. Had she even said anything at age 25 when she already had a PhD in psychology, that would have at least been consistent.

I don't know shit about this guy, don't give a fuck if I never hear his name again, but the conduit to fame through timing based calculated shit bombs needs to be addressed.

[johnsmith]

I’m not going to go back and read this entire thread, but I do want to point out that anything Boutons says regarding women needs to be taken with an even larger grain of salt then normal based solely on the way he’s described any woman that is not a liberal while posting on this site in the past.

I’m nearly positive he’s a very angry homosexual male that resents most women.

[Mikeanaro]

https://media1.tenor.com/images/2c02581480f829636bc96e2f2f9b5f0f/tenor.gif?itemid=9644886

[RandomGuy]

You might as well give up trying to reason with RG.

He is all in.

Because academic papers say 9 out of 10 accusations have seeds of truth she couldn't possibly be the 10/10.

This from some asshat whose sole metric on how credible the accuser is, is the party affiliation of the accused?

Really?

I generally believe the woman, because that is what the reasonable, evidence based, tentative conclusion should be, barring some other stronger evidence. Doesn't matter who the accused is.

That Kavanaugh was part of an entitled, spoiled "bro" culture at his university, with friends that actively bragged about doing the exact kinds of things he is accused of doing, does provide some context, in which to view the claims.

If you want to expect a 15 year old girl to come forward in that era, well that just seems too much "blame the victim-y" to me.

But, by all means, keep being a piece of shit. The young women and girls hear you loud and clear, and they get to vote their conscience. Keep not believing them and calling them liars.

[RandomGuy]

The justice system should put the clamps on people sitting on accusations for decades then using them as a weapon in opportune moments. In fact, someone who does what this woman is doing should be sued and they should lose. There has to be exceptions, of course, like if someone had no idea who did this to them but knew the face and realized "that's him", or in the case of a capital crime that doesn't have a statute of limitations like murder.

To sit on something that supposedly destroyed you until you can create a media firestorm with it, that doesn't really support your privacy or security fear angle. Had she even said anything at age 25 when she already had a PhD in psychology, that would have at least been consistent.

I don't know shit about this guy, don't give a fuck if I never hear his name again, but the conduit to fame through timing based calculated shit bombs needs to be addressed.

Most victims never come forward. Many wait decades.

Most don't because they think they won't be believed.

Provide any evidence that waiting for a long time means that the claim is less likely true.
.

[baseline bum]

As I've said before, the Left (present company possibly included I'm afraid) are hysterical about this nomination. "Coat Hanger Abortions" hang in the balance.

What a load of bullshit. You know full well cases like Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt will get their fourth and fifth anti-abortion votes from Gorsuch and Kavanaugh (vs nobody and Kennedy in 2016) and Roe Vs Wade will be subject to death by 1000 cuts in red states.

[RandomGuy]

:cry Islam is peaceful
:cry Hichn pls

:lol strawman

You just can't go more than a few posts without actively lying. It's as sad as it is predictable.

[johnsmith]

This from some asshat whose sole metric on how credible the accuser is, is the party affiliation of the accused?

Really?

I generally believe the woman, because that is what the reasonable, evidence based, tentative conclusion should be, barring some other stronger evidence. Doesn't matter who the accused is.

That Kavanaugh was part of an entitled, spoiled "bro" culture at his university, with friends that actively bragged about doing the exact kinds of things he is accused of doing, does provide some context, in which to view the claims.

If you want to expect a 15 year old girl to come forward in that era, well that just seems too much "blame the victim-y" to me.

But, by all means, keep being a piece of shit. The young women and girls hear you loud and clear, and they get to vote their conscience. Keep not believing them and calling them liars.

You just validated CC’s point.

[boutons_deux]

K should be impeached for numerous LIES he told Congress, even before the current shit show.

and therefore K must not be on SCOTUS

K is a Repug/oligarchy PIECE OF SHIT that degrades America, just like the kakistocrats throughout Trash's Exec branch.

[RandomGuy]

Leigh Corfman recently said that the Republican candidate for Senate in Alabama, Roy S. Moore, sexually assaulted her when she was 14, nearly four decades ago. She said she worried for years that going public would affect her children, and that her history of divorce and financial mistakes would undermine her account. After being approached by a Washington Post reporter, she agreed to tell her story, and later said, “If anything, this has cost me.”

But negative consequences are not the only thing to keep victims from coming forward. Experts point to a more fundamental issue: When the perpetrator is someone they trusted, it can take years for victims even to identify what happened to them as a violation.

Reah Bravo, one of several women who say that the broadcast journalist Charlie Rose made unwanted sexual advances while they were working for him, told The Washington Post, “It has taken 10 years and a fierce moment of cultural reckoning for me to understand these moments for what they were.”

Scott Berkowitz, the president of RAINN, the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network, said confusion and self-blame are common: “A lot of people who call the national hotline, one of the first questions they ask is, ‘Was I raped?’ ”

Offenders encourage confusion and shame and exploit people’s reluctance to identify themselves as victims. Ms. Valliere said the offenders she treats list two main tactics they use to obscure assaults: They camouflage the act as horseplay or humor, or they act as though nothing happened.

“If they do this enough, the victim can get really confused, like they’re really the bad one for thinking badly about the offender,” she said.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/30/us/sexual-harassment-weinstein-women.html

Psychologically, waiting to come forward is consistent with someone telling the truth, and not lying.

That is what we understand about how humans process such things.

[Pavlov]

:rollin "conduit to fame"

[101A]

yep, white male asshole criminalizing the white male's victim as masochisitic, self-hurting.

What a cliche. Don't you dare question the motives of the woman!!! She's a true believer liberal democrat. She is taking one for the cause. Then ends justify (sic) the means.

[101A]

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/30/us/sexual-harassment-weinstein-women.html

Psychologically, waiting to come forward is consistent with someone telling the truth, and not lying.

That is what we understand about how humans process such things.

Fine. Any evidence? Corroboration? Also, if we are going to start making decisions based on "consistencies" and"usually" and "probably", we should "probably" consider changing the constitution and eliminating individual rights all together (ironic since that is what you fear from Kavanaugh). Is it usual for the story to change in the ensuing 5 years after it was first told, and then, amazingly EXACTLY when the person you're accusing is up for the Supreme Court? Got any statistics? Have any cynicism at all?

[101A]

What a load of bullshit. You know full well cases like Whole Woman's Health v. Hellerstedt will get their fourth and fifth anti-abortion votes from Gorsuch and Kavanaugh (vs nobody and Kennedy in 2016) and Roe Vs Wade will be subject to death by 1000 cuts in red states.

Thanks for making my point.

[101A]

K must know be on SCOTUS

and he should be impeached for numerous he told Congress, even before the current shit show.

Ironically, if not for the "current shit show", we could actually be discussing what he said during his three days of testimony. THAT is actually relevant.

[RandomGuy]

You just validated CC’s point.

No.

His point was that I have excluded the possibility entirely. It is possible she is lying.

I just don't find his post hoc rationalizations to be very convincing of anything other than his ability to rationalize his seeming belief that Republicans never do these sorts of things and all Democrats and liberals are liars.

Could she be lying? Sure.

How probable is that? Seems to me that the odds are pretty slim to start with, and nothing I have seen really moves the needle on that. That invalidates his point. We disagree on the odds of that, and he wants to lie about what I believe.

[Pavlov]

Ironically, if not for the "current shit show", we could actually be discussing what he said during his three days of testimony. THAT is actually relevant.I don't think he said anything about how he got rid of his debts during that testimony.

[boutons_deux]

What a cliche. Don't you dare question the motives of the woman!!! She's a true believer liberal democrat. She is taking one for the cause. Then ends justify (sic) the means.

Her motive? closure? vengeance? both totally more legit than K will ever be.

And if she helps keep your lying piece of shit prick off SCOTUS, great side effect.

[RandomGuy]

Provide any evidence of the woman's motive.


Fine. Any evidence? Corroboration? Also, if we are going to start making decisions based on "consistencies" and"usually" and "probably", we should "probably" consider changing the constitution and eliminating individual rights all together (ironic since that is what you fear from Kavanaugh). Is it usual for the story to change in the ensuing 5 years after it was first told, and then, amazingly EXACTLY when the person you're accusing is up for the Supreme Court? Got any statistics? Have any cynicism at all?

So, you don't have any real evidence concerning her motive?

[Pavlov]

What a cliche. Don't you dare question the motives of the woman!!! She's a true believer liberal democrat. She is taking one for the cause. Then ends justify (sic) the means.SHE'S DEFINITELY IN IT FOR THE FAME CONDUIT

[101A]

:rollin "conduit to fame"

You don't think she'll have a couple of these? She's a professor, she knows how to publish. (and speak)

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71PhrfTStRL._AC_UL320_SR214,320_.jpg

https://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NTAwWDM0NA==/z/AmwAAOSwtIpZc4f8/$_35.JPG?set_id=89040003C1

[101A]

So, you don't have any real evidence concerning her motive?

There are generally no witnesses or evidence for a person's inner drive, unlike sexual assault at a party where multiple are attending. Besides burden's not on me - and shouldn't be on Kavanaugh. She deleted all of her social media before going on this quest - am I allowed to wonder "why"? I can only guess.

[Pavlov]

:rollin "conduit to fame"

You don't think she'll have a couple of these? She's a professor, she knows how to publish. (and speak)

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71PhrfTStRL._AC_UL320_SR214,320_.jpg

https://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NTAwWDM0NA==/z/AmwAAOSwtIpZc4f8/$_35.JPG?set_id=89040003C1You think Hill did it for det fame conduit too?

[RandomGuy]

Fine. Any evidence? Corroboration? Also, if we are going to start making decisions based on "consistencies" and"usually" and "probably", we should "probably" consider changing the constitution and eliminating individual rights all together (ironic since that is what you fear from Kavanaugh). Is it usual for the story to change in the ensuing 5 years after it was first told, and then, amazingly EXACTLY when the person you're accusing is up for the Supreme Court? Got any statistics? Have any cynicism at all?

Let me ask you this:

Assume you are a 15 year old girl who is assaulted. You are hurt and ashamed and you think no one will believe you or no one will care. You put up with the whispers and hope that eventually it goes away. the boy moves on, and you resign yourself to keeping it to yourself.

You see the boy grow into a man, with his own life, and does reasonably well in his life. You have, yourself moved on, and try to get over the trauma.

Now you see him nominated to the supreme court.

Your truth is now important.

Do you now come forward, or keep the fact that a sitting supreme court justice attempted to rape you when you were 15?

[101A]

SHE'S DEFINITELY IN IT FOR THE FAME CONDUIT

Also, Anita Hill has an agent and draws a significant speaking fee. I know lots of professors. None of them do. Yes. Blasse-Ford is forevermore a household name, and a famous person.

[Pavlov]

Also, Anita Hill has an agent and draws a significant speaking fee. I know lots of professors. None of them do. Yes. Blasse-Ford is forevermore a household name, and a famous person.So there is no way she could possibly be honest. She jes wanted det fame conduit and an agent.

You got it all figured out!

[101A]

Let me ask you this:

Assume you are a 15 year old girl who is assaulted. You are hurt and ashamed and you think no one will believe you or no one will care. You put up with the whispers and hope that eventually it goes away. the boy moves on, and you resign yourself to keeping it to yourself.

You see the boy grow into a man, with his own life, and does reasonably well in his life. You have, yourself moved on, and try to get over the trauma.

Now you see him nominated to the supreme court.

Your truth is now important.

Do you now come forward, or keep the fact that a sitting supreme court justice attempted to rape you when you were 15?

I might very well come forward. But if there is no-one to back up my claim, I understand that it probably won't go anywhere - I missed my chance, unfortunately.

[101A]

So there is no way she could possibly be honest. She jes wanted det fame conduit and an agent.

You got it all figured out!

No. She might be telling the truth. I was asked what her motive MIGHT be for coming forward. Doesn't matter. No evidence or corroboration.

[baseline bum]

Thanks for making my point.

Yeah why would anyone believe red states would try to effectively end abortion within their boundaries with ridiculous laws to deny access and close clinics when that has been their strategy in recent history? They're just going to stop now that they'd have two extremely sympathetic judges replacing Garland's rightful but empty spot and Kennedy's? Your point is ridiculous.

[Pavlov]

No. She might be telling the truth. I was asked what her motive MIGHT be for coming forward. Doesn't matter. No evidence or corroboration.Of course it doesn't matter to you because FAME CONDUIT AGENT FEES

[RandomGuy]

There are generally no witnesses or evidence for a person's inner drive, unlike sexual assault at a party where multiple are attending. Besides burden's not on me - and shouldn't be on Kavanaugh. She deleted all of her social media before going on this quest - am I allowed to wonder "why"? I can only guess.

So when you said:


I'm thinking a book, a speaking tour, and I'd be willing to bet a nice slot at the next presidential convention (bookmark this post). She is going to be an icon of the left for years. She lives in fucking San Francisco! What does she have to lose? Not a damn thing.

You didn't actually know, or read anything prior to this that leads you to believe this is the case. Other than the fact she is a "liberal" who lives in San Francisco.

Is that right?

[RandomGuy]

She deleted all of her social media before going on this quest - am I allowed to wonder "why"? I can only guess.

I am sure you can. She is a liberal after all, and therefore you think she is a liar it seems on that basis alone.

Would someone who was afraid of having anything said in her past used as a weapon against her, no matter how innocuous or unrelated, be motivate to delete social media posts?

(edit)

I would point out that accusers, no matter how truthful, are often raked over the coals. And in the current political environment, with trolls and all sorts of nutters out there, would a reasonable person expect all sorts of attacks based on anything they said in the past in an attempt to discredit them generally, no matter how unfair or untruthful the attack might be?

[101A]

Yeah why would anyone believe red states would try to effectively end abortion within their boundaries with ridiculous laws to deny access and close clinics when that has been their strategy in recent history? They're just going to stop now that they'd have two extremely sympathetic judges replacing Garland's rightful but empty spot and Kennedy's? Your point is ridiculous.

So you're saying that Kavanaugh becoming Justice would have extremely negative consequences for the rights of women?

Got it.

That's my point.

[101A]

Of course it doesn't matter to you because FAME CONDUIT AGENT FEES

No. What matters is there is no evidence to deny Brett Kavanaugh a supreme court seat based on what she is saying. My hypothesizing about motive is just that. I don't have any evidence of that, either. So don't try her for perjury (after she testifies).

[Pavlov]

No. What matters is there is no evidence to deny Brett Kavanaugh a supreme court seat based on what she is saying. My hypothesizing about motive is just that. I don't have any evidence of that, either. So don't try her for perjury (after she testifies).OK, what's the motive behind the virgin defense?

[baseline bum]

So you're saying that Kavanaugh becoming Justice would have extremely negative consequences for the rights of women?

Got it.

That's my point.

Your point sounded like a lot of complaining that the liberal professors you know are hysterical when fears about losing the right to abortion in red states is pretty logical.

[101A]

I am sure you can. She is a liberal after all, and therefore you think she is a liar it seems on that basis alone.

Would someone who was afraid of having anything said in her past used as a weapon against her, no matter how innocuous or unrelated, be motivate to delete social media posts?

I don't know if she's a liar, but the evidence (or lack of it) suggests that she might be. It certainly doesn't prove she's not. I'm not making any determinations on anything "alone".

[boutons_deux]

white male misogynist privilege in action

Amid Effort to Ram Kavanaugh Through Senate, House GOP Refusing to Reauthorize Violence Against Women Act

"Our efforts to combat violence against women should never waiver, should never be pushed to the margins, and should never be delayed or diminished by political gamesmanship or foot dragging."

none of the party's members have signed on to support a reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), which expires at the end of September.

House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) has not called for a vote on a full authorization of the the bill, despite calls to do so, including from 46 members (https://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/46-republicans-call-on-ryan-mccarthy-to-reauthorize-the-violence-against-women-act)of his own party, as well as Democratic leaders and more than 50 attorneys general (https://twitter.com/NCAGO/status/1041788772126531587).

VAWA has been reauthorized three times since the landmark legislation,

which was the first federal law to combat domestic violence and has provided grants for victims' services and prevention programs, was first passed in 1994—

always with bipartisan support.

As of Tuesday, 163 Democratic members of the House and

zero Republicans had signed on as co-sponsors of the bill.

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2018/09/25/amid-effort-ram-kavanaugh-through-senate-house-gop-refusing-reauthorize-violence?cd-origin=rss


Violence against women doesn't expire, why does this act keep expiring? White male privilege

[101A]

Your point sounded like a lot of complaining that the liberal professors you know are hysterical when fears about losing the right to abortion in red states is pretty logical.

My point was specifically that the left believes (quite possibly rightly), that Kavanaugh on the court means the end of Roe V. Wade. As a member of the left, we can assume Dr. Ford believes this. Therefore, when I was asked why someone would put herself through what she is putting herself through, I said, "to save Roe vs Wade" (not in so many words).

The liberal professors are my best friends, btw. I get drunk and debate people a LOT smarter than me all the time.

[Mikeanaro]

The must funny thing is nobody wants to make Kavanaugh pay for his supposed ¨abuse¨, being out of the supreme court is ¨enough¨.
Polishitical move? Noooooooooooooooo.

[baseline bum]

My point was specifically that the left believes (quite possibly rightly), that Kavanaugh on the court means the end of Roe V. Wade. As a member of the left, we can assume Dr. Ford believes this. Therefore, when I was asked why someone would put herself through what she is putting herself through, I said, "to save Roe vs Wade" (not in so many words).

The liberal professors are my best friends, btw. I get drunk and debate people a LOT smarter than me all the time.

Sorry I misinterpreted. The word hysteria seems to have connotations that a fear might be misplaced or nonsensical IMO. Maybe I'm wrong for thinking that word implies those things. Shouldn't have slept through my humanities classes tbh.

[DMC]

Most victims never come forward. Many wait decades.

Most don't because they think they won't be believed.

Provide any evidence that waiting for a long time means that the claim is less likely true.
.

So they won't be believed until the accused is up for the supreme court?

Your logic is astounding, fucktard.

[koriwhat]

He's more like koriwhat without the anger issues.

yall have no idea. i'm chill 99% of the time... yall just assume what yall want to believe is all.

[baseline bum]

yall have no idea. i'm chill 99% of the time... yall just assume what yall want to believe is all.

Sorry for the personal attack man. That was an asshole thing for me to say.

[Bill_Brasky]

The must funny thing is nobody wants to make Kavanaugh pay for his supposed ¨abuse¨, being out of the supreme court is ¨enough¨.
Polishitical move? Noooooooooooooooo.

The only polishitical move was stealing Obama's rightful supreme court nomination. Fuck you and fuck the party of Russia.

[DMC]

Let me ask you this:

Assume you are a 15 year old girl who is assaulted. You are hurt and ashamed and you think no one will believe you or no one will care. You put up with the whispers and hope that eventually it goes away. the boy moves on, and you resign yourself to keeping it to yourself.

You see the boy grow into a man, with his own life, and does reasonably well in his life. You have, yourself moved on, and try to get over the trauma.

Now you see him nominated to the supreme court.

Your truth is now important.

Do you now come forward, or keep the fact that a sitting supreme court justice attempted to rape you when you were 15?

So rape is only important to a woman when political gain is available? Got it.

[koriwhat]

these ladies are so full of shit. i thought ford was a liar from the get go but this ramirez lady takes the cake. all fucking losers just like the party they bow to.

[koriwhat]

The only polishitical move was stealing Obama's rightful supreme court nomination. Fuck you and fuck the party of Russia.

lmao fuck activist judges like all those obum put in place. can't wait for the DEM party to officially die already.

[ducks]

would they come forward if he was a liberal?
why did they not come forward when he was first appointed judge?
why did the fbi not find anything about this stuff thru 6 investigations(we know they hate the right not left)

[Pavlov]

lmao fuck activist judges like all those obum put in place. can't wait for the DEM party to officially die already.There is no way to look at Kavanaugh's abortion rulings and conclude he's anything but an activist.

[spurraider21]

lmao fuck activist judges like all those obum put in place. can't wait for the DEM party to officially die already.
:lmao yes only the liberal wing of SCOTUS is activist

[koriwhat]

There is no way to look at Kavanaugh's abortion rulings and conclude he's anything but an activist.

idgaf one way or another about abortion. kill your kid, don't kill your kid. whores will be whores!

[spurraider21]

:lmao when will conservatives stop falling for 4chan bullshit?
i remember TSA was convinced the entire dossier was a 4chan hoax too

[Pavlov]

idgaf one way or another about abortion. kill your kid, don't kill your kid. whores will be whores!You pretend to care about activist judges.

Kavanaugh is an activist judge.

[spurraider21]

There is no way to look at Kavanaugh's abortion rulings and conclude he's anything but an activist.
its gotten to the point where "activist" is just a euphemism for "appointed by democrat" with no other substantive meaning behind it

[koriwhat]

You pretend to care about activist judges.

Kavanaugh is an activist judge.

You pretend to be a man. and?

[Mikeanaro]

The only polishitical move was stealing Obama's rightful supreme court nomination. Fuck you and fuck the party of Russia.
The party of Russia? do you buy that crap? where is the evidence?
Fuck you entitled POS.

[Pavlov]

i remember TSA was convinced the entire dossier was a 4chan hoax tooI present to you the conspiracy theory of all conspiracy theories---Anon phase 3 (www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=264301)

[Pavlov]

and?Do you support the Kavanaugh nomination?

[spurraider21]

I present to you the conspiracy theory of all conspiracy theories---Anon phase 3 (http://www.spurstalk.com/forums/showthread.php?t=264301)
:lmao

[koriwhat]

Do you support the Kavanaugh nomination?

i support anything that makes feinstein finally turn into the little evil fucking troll that she is. fuck her, the dems, and you.

[Pavlov]

i support anything that makes feinstein finally turn into the little evil fucking troll that she is. fuck her, the dems, and you.So you openly support the appointment of activist judges.

Thank you for making yourself clear.

[koriwhat]

So you openly support the appointment of activist judges.

Thank you for making yourself clear.

i openly support anything that makes you pull out the last remaining hairs on that bald ass head of yours.

[clambake]

his roommate said he was a drunk, lol.

[koriwhat]

his roommate said he was a drunk, lol.

who cares? oh no he drank in college. who the fuck hasn't? drunk doesn't = rapist/groping/etc last time i checked.

[clambake]

who cares? oh no he drank in college. who the fuck hasn't? drunk doesn't = rapist/groping/etc last time i checked.

he said he didn't drink.

[koriwhat]

he said he didn't drink.

well, then we need an fbi investigation! lmao

[DarrinS]

:lmao when will conservatives stop falling for 4chan bullshit?

Lol, “falling for”. I said it would be hilarious IF it was true.

[koriwhat]

Lol, “falling for”. I said it would be hilarious IF it was true.

don't worry... mono falls for sugar 24/7 and soon enough will fall into his grave.

[Reck]

The vote is Friday morning. What a mockery.

Why even show up to testify when they're not even listening? What a joke. Team red!

[DarrinS]

So much for Ms Ramirez

1044680065869651968

[DarrinS]

The vote is Friday morning. What a mockery.

Why even show up to testify when they're not even listening? What a joke. Team red!


I don’t think she’ll show up

[RandomGuy]

No. What matters is there is no evidence to deny Brett Kavanaugh a supreme court seat based on what she is saying. My hypothesizing about motive is just that. I don't have any evidence of that, either. So don't try her for perjury (after she testifies).

Believe him he is a Republican, don't believe her. Don't have the FBI investigate, because she is a liberal, therefore lying, because she wants fame/money.

Got it.

[boutons_deux]

committee vote Friday

[Pavlov]

i openly support anything that makes you pull out the last remaining hairs on that bald ass head of yours.What you said about hating activist judges was complete bullshit. Thanks for confirming.

[DarrinS]

1044679422077554689

Still waiting on his mystery accuser.

[koriwhat]

What you said about hating activist judges was complete bullshit. Thanks for confirming.

you got me all wrong pav. i hate the judges you support! lmao! anything you support i will vehemently fucking hate! :tu

[Pavlov]

1044679422077554689

Still waiting on his mystery accuser.Until then you're taking mystery 4chan poster's word for it.

[DarrinS]

Until then you're taking mystery 4chan poster's word for it.

Never did. Misrepresenting other people, per par.

[Reck]

1044679422077554689

Still waiting on his mystery accuser.

He said in 48 hours. Can you count? It's barely been 24 hours since he set that 48 timetable.

Not that it matters anyways because the Republicans dont want to hear from the first woman, let along a third.

[Pavlov]

you got me all wrong pav. i hate the judges you support! lmao! anything you support i will vehemently fucking hate! :tu:lol obsessed with me. That's what you should base your political beliefs upon.:tu

[Pavlov]

Never did. Misrepresenting other people, per par.Do you believe mystery 4chan poster?

Yes or no.

[RandomGuy]

My point was specifically that the left believes (quite possibly rightly), that Kavanaugh on the court means the end of Roe V. Wade. As a member of the left, we can assume Dr. Ford believes this. Therefore, when I was asked why someone would put herself through what she is putting herself through, I said, "to save Roe vs Wade" (not in so many words).

The liberal professors are my best friends, btw. I get drunk and debate people a LOT smarter than me all the time.

Doesn't mean she is lying, does it?

She kept silent, because the consequences of her silence were little. He lives his life, and she doen'st have to pay the tremendous cost of losing her professional and personal life.

Now the stakes of keeping silent are vastly higher. Her personal calculus changed. The cost of keeping silent are vastly greater to her than the cost of speaking up.

The only difference is your starting assumption.

I assume women generally tell the truth.

You assume women generally lie, or at least this woman is lying, even though you have no evidence she is lying. That about sum it up?

smh

[RandomGuy]

Never did. Misrepresenting other people, per par.

It would be a lot easier to not do so, were you to make some clarification of what you actually think, other than doorbell ringing some "own the libs" bullshit, and running the fuck away like a bitch.

Given how often your shit gets destroyed, I can see why you choose the latter so often, tbh.

[pgardn]

you got me all wrong pav. i hate the judges you support! lmao! anything you support i will vehemently fucking hate! :tu

If he makes you that mad...
Thats a problem.
You base your political thoughts totally on someone else?

Pavs did not support the Iraq war so you did? I don’t think so. Not with the hindsight you both have. I’m talking little Bush and his disaster.

[boutons_deux]

Ari Melber Calls Out Male GOP Senate Judiciary Cowards For Dodging Questioning Christine Ford

Ari Melber explained how Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee look bad by hiring a female prosecutor to do their dirty work for them in questioning Christine Blasey Ford.

“This though obviously doesn’t look like that kind of case where someone with a long-term subject matter interest,

like the official counsel for the committee, is dealing with topics.

My job is to report to you the news, but when it looks bad,

I have to tell you that it looks bad.

This looks bad because it does look, unlike the Watergate precedent,

more like a method for the male senators

to avoid catching heat, political pressure, criticism

for the way that they might push the accuser,

an issue that of course came up in the 1991 hearings when Anita Hill testified.”

https://www.politicususa.com/2018/09/25/ari-melber-calls-out-male-gop-senate-judiciary-cowards-for-dodging-questioning-christine-ford.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+politicususa%2FfJAl+%28Politi cus+USA+%29

So the misogynist Repugs have hired female PROSECUTOR to prosecute Ford as defendant rather than as plaintiff,

because Repugs are so respectfully, reliably pro-women.

Will Repugs males speak at all?

[DarrinS]

Do you believe mystery 4chan poster?

Yes or no.


I’d love for that rumor to be true, but I highly doubt it.

[DarrinS]

It would be a lot easier to not do so, were you to make some clarification of what you actually think, other than doorbell ringing some "own the libs" bullshit, and running the fuck away like a bitch.

Given how often your shit gets destroyed, I can see why you choose the latter so often, tbh.


Alrighty then

[DarrinS]

So, in a criminal trial, you have evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

Civil trial, you have preponderance of evidence, a slightly lower standard.


So, what do we have in this case? And, I realize that this process is not a trial. Would like to know what spurraider thinks.

[Pavlov]

So, in a criminal trial, you have evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

Civil trial, you have preponderance of evidence, a slightly lower standard.


So, what do we have in this case? And, I realize that this process is not a trial. Would like to know what spurraider thinks.This is a job application. More precisely a job promotion process.

[Pavlov]

:lol Grown white men are going to be hiding behind the skirt of their "assistant" Thursday.

[DarrinS]

:lol Grown white men are going to be hiding behind the skirt of their "assistant" Thursday.

white men, the dregs of society

[Pavlov]

white men, the dregs of societyWhy are the Republican senators not questioning Ford themselves, Darrin?

Explain.

[DarrinS]

This is a job application. More precisely a job promotion process.

Well, since SCOTUS is the highest court, it would naturally be a promotion for any nominee.

If you’re going to present evidence that the nominee is unfit, what is the standard? What if someone claimed Kagan killed puppies when she was a HS student? But, the person couldn’t say when or where and had no corroborating witnesses?

[DarrinS]

Why are the Republican senators not questioning Ford themselves, Darrin?

Explain.

Optics

[Pavlov]

OpticsHiding under the skirt of their hired "assistant" is great optics. :lol

[Pavlov]

Well, since SCOTUS is the highest court, it would naturally be a promotion for any nominee.

If you’re going to present evidence that the nominee is unfit, what is the standard? What if someone claimed Kagan killed puppies when she was a HS student? But, the person couldn’t say when or where and had no corroborating witnesses?That's why I wanted the FBI to investigate tbh.

[TSA]

1044687624542261249

[DarrinS]

Hiding under the skirt of their hired "assistant" is great optics. :lol

The alternative is worse optics. Well, at least in 2018, because toxic masculinity, the patriarchy, etc. etc.

[Pavlov]

1044687624542261249Right, they don't.

And?

[Pavlov]

The alternative is worse optics. Well, at least in 2018, because toxic masculinity, the patriarchy, etc. etc.Yep, you're the real victim here, Darrin.

[TSA]

That's why I wanted the FBI to investigate tbh.


“The last thing I will point out, the next person who refers to an FBI report as being worth anything, obviously doesn’t understand anything. FBI explicitly does not, in this or any other case, reach a conclusion, period. Period,” Biden said. “The reason why we cannot rely on the FBI report [is] you would not like it if we did because it is inconclusive. They say, ‘He said, she said, and they said. Period.”

“So when people wave an FBI report before you, understand they do not, they do not reach conclusions,” Biden said.

:lol

[TSA]

Right, they don't.

And?

:cry but we NEED one :cry

[dabom]

Investigate does not mean conclude dumb fuck. :lmao

[DarrinS]

:lmao “if” is Conservatese for “i 100% believe this but want to deflect any ridicule I get for believing it”

Mmm, no

[pgardn]

So, in a criminal trial, you have evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

Civil trial, you have preponderance of evidence, a slightly lower standard.


So, what do we have in this case? And, I realize that this process is not a trial. Would like to know what spurraider thinks.

Its an appointment. So it’s a political excerise. A senator needs to make sure their base is satisfied with their vote. And that other people who can help them with their base. Now the base MAY shift their thoughts and start to head scratch if a SC nominee does not behave in a manner consistent with their morals. And what they expect of a law abiding, honest man, being a judge and all.

You had to know this. Feel free to add on.

[DarrinS]

Its an appointment. So it’s a political excerise. A senator needs to make sure their base is satisfied with their vote. And that other people who can help them with their base. Now the base MAY shift their thoughts and start to head scratch if a SC nominee does not behave in a manner consistent with their morals. And what they expect of a law abiding, honest man, being a judge and all.

You had to know this. Feel free to add on.


Is a “she said vs everyone else allegedly there saying ‘we don’t know wtf she’s talking about’” an adequate standard?

[pgardn]

The alternative is worse optics. Well, at least in 2018, because toxic masculinity, the patriarchy, etc. etc.

Slavery became toxic at one point in time and it kind of stuck... go figure.
Patriarchy and your definition of masculinity may change. If masculine means “I’ll make the moves and sexual advances, you just lay there. Pretend like it feels good as well.” Shit, it has changed already. Women even have a vote... wtf with these culture changes?

I guess we should just die now, this is sooo hard to handle.

[Reck]

So much for Ms Ramirez

1044680065869651968

You live for falling for fake shit, dont you?

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1044722056443629569

[Nathan89]

Aren't they bringing in a lawyer to question her? Someone trained in process seems like a good person to call in. She'll be able to get to the best information and then they can decide based on that.

[Reck]

Aren't they bringing in a lawyer to question her? Someone trained in process seems like a good person to call in. She'll be able to get to the best information and then they can decide based on that.

While they set up a vote on it the following morning? How much attention do you think they're paying to the hearing? :lol

[DarrinS]

Slavery...

Stopped reading after that. Sorry.

[pgardn]

Is a “she said vs everyone else allegedly there saying ‘we don’t know wtf she’s talking about’” an adequate standard?

Uhhh...

If you will recall, Republicans getting wind of her story thought it credible enough to have her heard. The president as well, but he does not count as he can change his mind in a millisecond.
Can you explain this? Her story must have had some sense of honesty to it most likely I would venture. Dontcha think? They made the choice to take this up BEFORE we were fully informed of any of this. It made the rounds.

[pgardn]

Stopped reading after that. Sorry.

Of course you did.
Conservatives are resistant to social change on the whole.
And I would agree that some of it is ridiculous. But some, in our time, seems perfectly reasonable, to me anyhow.

No need to apologize.
You don’t need confusion.
Black. White. Good.

[Nathan89]

Slavery became toxic at one point in time and it kind of stuck... go figure.
Patriarchy and your definition of masculinity may change. If masculine means “I’ll make the moves and sexual advances, you just lay there. Pretend like it feels good as well.” Shit, it has changed already. Women even have a vote... wtf with these culture changes?

I guess we should just die now, this is sooo hard to handle.

Someone "just laying there and pretending like it feels good" would be the result of "toxic femininity". Teach your daughters to not let their "toxic femininity" hold them back.

Both patriarchy and toxic masculinity are broad terms feminist use to demonize men. And they are ineffective beyond that. Those terms didn't lead to the female vote. Working to earn the female vote led to it. That's how things change.

[ducks]

Fox News reported that ranking Democrat Dianne Feinstein said that Ford may not testify after all. Fox also reported that Kavanaugh's second accuser, Deborah Ramirez, has said she will not testify.

[Nathan89]

While they set up a vote on it the following morning? How much attention do you think they're paying to the hearing? :lol

Well a lot information is already out.

[ducks]

They can hear it sleep on it and then vote
Do they need to sleep on it 5 days ?

[pgardn]

Aren't they bringing in a lawyer to question her? Someone trained in process seems like a good person to call in. She'll be able to get to the best information and then they can decide based on that.

Many of them are lawyers and go over this stuff with a very knowledgeable deep staff. They are quite good at questioning. Especially if it’s some evil CEO and they want constituents to see them bashing the evil.
But it does not look good having older white males doing the questioning in this case. It might appear they are not sympathetic.
Optics.
Its perfectly understandable.
To me.
Did I miss something?

[Pavlov]

:lolYes, they don't reach conclusions in those cases.

What is your problem with that, TSA?

Explain.

[Pavlov]

Someone "just laying there and pretending like it feels good" would be the result of "toxic femininity". Teach your daughters to not let their "toxic femininity" hold them back.

Both patriarchy and toxic masculinity are broad terms feminist use to demonize men. And they are ineffective beyond that. Those terms didn't lead to the female vote. Working to earn the female vote led to it. That's how things change.Yep, you're the real victim here, Nathan.

[DarrinS]

Fox News reported that ranking Democrat Dianne Feinstein said that Ford may not testify after all. Fox also reported that Kavanaugh's second accuser, Deborah Ramirez, has said she will not testify.

Reported by anyone else?

[Reck]

Well a lot information is already out.

right.. :lol

[Reck]

Reported by anyone else?

Tune into your favorite Network CNN. Ramirez's lawyer will be on there next.

If i was Ford, I wouldn't testify given that they have already decided not to listen to it.

[pgardn]

Someone "just laying there and pretending like it feels good" would be the result of "toxic femininity". Teach your daughters to not let their "toxic femininity" hold them back.

Both patriarchy and toxic masculinity are broad terms feminist use to demonize men. And they are ineffective beyond that. Those terms didn't lead to the female vote. Working to earn the female vote led to it. That's how things change.

I never said it did lead to the female vote.

Have you ever had sex?
Women can be quite amorous and absolutely want the act to occur. It’s a healthy zesty endeavor for both people, pure joy that can even lead to a wanted child known as “we are trying to have children” But THEY get penetrated. And on occasion, it really hurts I have been told. So stop, maybe remedy the situation with whatever and go at it again. If it’s still painful, why not stop. As a male, it’s a huge turnoff for me if your wife or whomever is not fully engaged. I want to be told what feels good.

Do you need more guidance? I will talk to your daughters if you would like. You can be there. I can go over my instructions ahead of time with you.

[DarrinS]

Tune into your favorite Network CNN. Ramirez's lawyer will be on there next.

If i was Ford, I wouldn't testify given that they have already decided not to listen to it.


Well, the public could listen. Oh well.

[DarrinS]

Did you share that link on Facebook too? Don’t lie.

Not on FB.

[djohn2oo8]

1044654309735043078

[Nathan89]

I never said it did lead to the female vote.

Have you ever had sex?
Women can be quite amorous and absolutely want the act to occur. It’s a healthy zesty endeavor for both people, pure joy that can even lead to a wanted child known as “we are trying to have children” But THEY get penetrated. And on occasion, it really hurts I have been told. So stop, maybe remedy the situation with whatever and go at it again. If it’s still painful, why not stop. As a male, it’s a huge turnoff for me if your wife or whomever is not fully engaged. I want to be told what feels good.

Do you need more guidance? I will talk to your daughters if you would like. You can be there. I can go over my instructions ahead of time with you.

Sounds like you need to tackle "toxic femininity". You can go one of the following approaches:

1. Needlessly talk about "toxic femininity" as if that does anything.

2. Actually tackle the problem by encouraging women to talk and instilling confidence within them.

Crazy thing is option 1 is not only ineffective but actually hinders the solution. Because telling someone they are toxic doesn't quite instill confidence. That's pretty much how that bullshit works in practice. So stop comparing it to the change of opinion on slavery. That's fucking moronic.

[Winehole23]

where's the middle ground these days? where did all the guys that "touched some boobies in high school and smoked some pot in college" go? It's either saint or the devil? really?bragged about boofing, FFFFFFouth of July and Renate Alumnius on his HS yearbook page, but didn't get any until he married at age 35.


I get that that's the right thing to say with your wife right
there...

[pgardn]

Sounds like you need to tackle "toxic femininity". You can go one of the following approaches:

1. Needlessly talk about "toxic femininity" as if that does anything.

2. Actually tackle the problem by encouraging women to talk and instilling confidence within them.

Crazy thing is option 1 is not only ineffective but actually hinders the solution. Because telling someone they are toxic doesn't quite instill confidence. That's pretty much how that bullshit works in practice. So stop comparing it to the change of opinion on slavery. That's fucking moronic.

So I need to tackle toxic femininity because I am cognizant of my partner’s pleasure. And if my partner is not having a pleasurable time like I am, and I get turned off, then I have become the victim of toxic femininity... Cool.

You have not have good sex. I feel sorry for you.

The slacery thing. If we had grown up as slave owners children during that time it would make perfect sense that we might see blacks as a commodity, property, our workers that we own and possibly trade. But, if we read the Bible, considered shaves people, we might actually question the whole thing. But maybe not.
But you find this totally divorced from any other social movement? You don’t think we could have been Nazis growing up in Nazi Germany? You don’t think we could have treated women as property with one purpose, to have children, if we grew up in a certain religious environment?

Well... I’m not that good. I’m shaped by a cultural environment around me. Some of it I find ridiculous, some of it I find reasonable and fitting my value system shaped by so many factors. But you... You are immune to this BS.

[Winehole23]

So, in a criminal trial, you have evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

Civil trial, you have preponderance of evidence, a slightly lower standard.


So, what do we have in this case? And, I realize that this process is not a trial. Would like to know what spurraider thinks.we have a political procedure devoid of due process and judicial standards of proof. That's as designed. There used to be normative deference to the executive and professional qualifications.. .once upon a time, about 25 years ago.

[Winehole23]

in b4 damn libs ruin everything

[Nathan89]

bragged about boofing, FFFFFFouth of July and Renate Alumnius on his HS yearbook page, but didn't get any until he married at age 35.


I get that that's the right thing to say with your wife right
there...

He didn't say he didn't have any till he was married.

[boutons_deux]

asshole K has probably never had a serious crisis as he glided through life a chosen, groomed one

White House Fears Kavanaugh Could Crack During Senate Testimony After He Looked 'Shaken' During Fox News Interview: (http://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/571435776/0/alternet)

even as Kavanaugh's defenders strike a confident pose, they are far from certain about his prospects at being approved by the Senate.

The report (https://apnews.com/0ac2fc744f40479f8140356948b22d61) notes that after a Fox News interview of Kavanaugh and his wife Ashley Estes Kavanaugh aired Monday night, there were mixed reactions in the White House:




After the interview aired, the sense in the West Wing was relief that Kavanaugh was able to present an image to counter the allegations.

Yet there remained concern among aides, and

Trump himself, as to how Kavanaugh, who appeared shaken at times during the interview,

would hold up facing far fiercer questioning from Senate Democrats on Thursday, according to a White House official



On CNN Tuesday night, New York Times reporter Maggie Haberman likewise reported that

Trump and others were not thrilled with Kavanaugh's performance in the interview.
During the interview,

Kavanaugh was repetitive and looked startled.

He repeatedly said he was looking for a "fair process" and

that he just wanted to be "heard,"

even though his Republican allies have had a stranglehold over the entire process and

no one has denied him the ability to respond to his accusers.

He denied the accusations against him in their entirety, but

he also made several dubious (https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/new-yorker-reporters-fact-check-brett-kavanaughs-desperate-fox-news-interview) claims (https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/brett-kavanaugh-classmates-virgin-lie) that threw more doubt on his credibility.

https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/white-house-fears-kavanaugh-could-crack-during-senate-testimony-after-he-looked

I wish Franken was on that committee. He had the most balls, tolerated no nonsense.

[Winehole23]

He didn't say he didn't have any till he was married.

that's what I just said

[Chris]

Look at this....blah blah blah...over yep ~~~nothing..

[ducks]

Hannity: 1991 Joe Biden Tape Destroys Dems' Calls for FBI Probe of Kavanaugh



http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/09/25/joe-biden-says-fbi-probes-arent-good-supreme-court-nominations-sean-hannity-says

Hannity: 1991 Joe Biden Tape Destroys Dems' Calls for FBI Probe of Kavanaugh
Fox News Insider
Sean Hannity said that many Democrats believe an FBI probe of Judge Brett Kavanaugh is the only way he can prove his innocence against claims of sexual harassment.

But, Hannity pointed out that one of the party elders made the exact opposite argument in a very forceful manner in 1991.

Then-Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Joe Biden (D-Del.), who was presiding over the Clarence Thomas hearings, called for everyone to stop invoking the FBI in that manner.

"The next person who refers to an FBI report as being worth anything, obviously doesn’t understand anything. FBI explicitly does not, in this or any other case, reach a conclusion, period. Period," Biden said.

My Democrat friends might want to consider this from then-Judiciary Committee Chairman JOE BIDEN (D-DE) In 1991: The ‘FBI Explicitly Does Not, In This Or Any Other Case Reach A Conclusion, Period’

— Leader McConnell (@SenateMajLdr) 4:49 PM - Sep 25, 2018
"[W]hen people wave an FBI report before you, understand they do not, they do not reach conclusions," he continued.

'He's a Buffoon': Tucker Reacts to Michael Avenatti Claiming New Kavanaugh Accuser

Hume on Female Interrogator: Dems 'Want to See a Bunch of Old White Guys' Questioning Kavanaugh Accuser

Read Full Article
Hannity said that in light of the unearthing of the Biden tape, it is clear that Democrats have rejected their own past reasoning in addition to the American standard of "due process [and] presumption of innocence."

A successor to Biden's seat, current Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) echoed the exact opposite of the demand for due process and presumption of innocence, Hannity said.

"[Kavanaugh] bears the burden of disproving these allegations," Coons said.

"Democrats want a cheap political victory," Hannity said. "Even if that means throwing 'inalienable rights' right out the window."

He reminded viewers of another Democrat on the committee, Hawaii Sen. Mazie Hirono, who demanded last week that men "shut up" when it comes to accusations against other men.

"[Female accusers] need to be believed," she said.

Democrats were against FBI reports before they were for them? @JoeBiden https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=vNK1dVIeYWo&app=desktop …

— Ed Henry (@edhenry) 3:09 PM - Sep 25, 2018
'Michael Is Now Making Disaster Movies': Gutfeld Riffs on Moore's Latest 'Flop'

The Five: The Left's Rejection of Due Process Means Everyone Must Buy 'Accusation Insurance'

[CitizenDwayne]

Hannity: 1991 Joe Biden Tape Destroys Dems' Calls for FBI Probe of Kavanaugh



http://insider.foxnews.com/2018/09/25/joe-biden-says-fbi-probes-arent-good-supreme-court-nominations-sean-hannity-says

Hannity: 1991 Joe Biden Tape Destroys Dems' Calls for FBI Probe of Kavanaugh
Fox News Insider
Sean Hannity said that many Democrats believe an FBI probe of Judge Brett Kavanaugh is the only way he can prove his innocence against claims of sexual harassment.

But, Hannity pointed out that one of the party elders made the exact opposite argument in a very forceful manner in 1991.

Then-Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Joe Biden (D-Del.), who was presiding over the Clarence Thomas hearings, called for everyone to stop invoking the FBI in that manner.

"The next person who refers to an FBI report as being worth anything, obviously doesn’t understand anything. FBI explicitly does not, in this or any other case, reach a conclusion, period. Period," Biden said.

My Democrat friends might want to consider this from then-Judiciary Committee Chairman JOE BIDEN (D-DE) In 1991: The ‘FBI Explicitly Does Not, In This Or Any Other Case Reach A Conclusion, Period’

— Leader McConnell (@SenateMajLdr) 4:49 PM - Sep 25, 2018
"[W]hen people wave an FBI report before you, understand they do not, they do not reach conclusions," he continued.

'He's a Buffoon': Tucker Reacts to Michael Avenatti Claiming New Kavanaugh Accuser

Hume on Female Interrogator: Dems 'Want to See a Bunch of Old White Guys' Questioning Kavanaugh Accuser

Read Full Article
Hannity said that in light of the unearthing of the Biden tape, it is clear that Democrats have rejected their own past reasoning in addition to the American standard of "due process [and] presumption of innocence."

A successor to Biden's seat, current Sen. Chris Coons (D-Del.) echoed the exact opposite of the demand for due process and presumption of innocence, Hannity said.

"[Kavanaugh] bears the burden of disproving these allegations," Coons said.

"Democrats want a cheap political victory," Hannity said. "Even if that means throwing 'inalienable rights' right out the window."

He reminded viewers of another Democrat on the committee, Hawaii Sen. Mazie Hirono, who demanded last week that men "shut up" when it comes to accusations against other men.

"[Female accusers] need to be believed," she said.

Democrats were against FBI (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=15186) reports before they were for them? @JoeBiden https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=vNK1dVIeYWo&app=desktop …

— Ed Henry (@edhenry) 3:09 PM - Sep 25, 2018
'Michael Is Now Making Disaster Movies': Gutfeld Riffs on Moore's Latest 'Flop'

The Five: The Left's Rejection of Due Process Means Everyone Must Buy 'Accusation Insurance'
From 1991. Things have changed. Biden himself would admit he was a POS in those days

[ducks]

From 1991. Things have changed. Biden himself would admit he was a POS in those days

If it was garland the left would not want a fbi investigation saying 6 was enough

[Mikeanaro]

https://scontent.faep9-2.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/42672659_1877924685661203_8805989850923663360_n.jp g?_nc_cat=101&oh=b91ca1734c02eda7ad3bd8f85d86db48&oe=5C2E742C

[CitizenDwayne]

If it was garland the left would not want a fbi investigation saying 6 was enough
Yes. And?

[Fabbs]

short haired older chick behind Shillary

who is it?

[boutons_deux]

From 1991. Things have changed. Biden himself would admit he was a POS in those days

yep, is huge stain on his career.

Biden reveals Anita Hill hearing regret

https://www.msn.com/en-us/video/lifestyle/biden-reveals-anita-hill-hearing-regret/vp-AAArVdz

[Mikeanaro]

who is it?
Debra Katz, Christine Ford´s attorney.

https://media.townhall.com/townhall/reu/ha/images/2018/260/d18bb271-b3f4-48c1-9e7e-3eab448d5ff0.png

[Spurs Homer]

Rapey Judge gonna share trade secrets with Clarence Thomas.

[101A]

Debra Katz, Christine Ford´s attorney.

https://media.townhall.com/townhall/reu/ha/images/2018/260/d18bb271-b3f4-48c1-9e7e-3eab448d5ff0.png

I'm shocked.

[pgardn]

So Hillary planted the Ford accusations?

What?

Connect it for the board please.

[Winehole23]

1044794730402459649

[Winehole23]

names of Trump judicial nominees confirmed within the last month:

Dooley, Horan, Summerhays, Albright, Williams, Tostrud, Lanza, Jung, Baker, Moorer, Goodwin, Brasel, Ashe

[ducks]

And

[Winehole23]

none of them were accused of rapey stuff by the liberal lie machine. was it taking a nap?

[ducks]

None of them had a letter mailed to a senator that they had held on for 2 months right before vote oh this.
The liberals think the Supreme Court judge is most important and they can not do two things at once

[Winehole23]

I wonder why none of them had a letter mailed to a Senator. Maybe it was because they didn't do anything wrong.

[Winehole23]

Senate Republicans don't trust themselves to treat Ford with dignity and respect, and they don't have a token woman on the committee, so they hired one to do their dirty work for them.

1044674389785169923

[Winehole23]

perfect smokey eye

1044559991842254848

[101A]

I wonder why none of them had a letter mailed to a Senator. Maybe it was because they didn't do anything wrong.

Before THIS nomination neither had Kavanaugh. He "sailed" through the same nominations those names you listed did. Why is that?

[101A]

The Calendar:

https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/347db7d11e909f136434be6b68b1fa8509f287d1/c=75-0-688-817/local/-/media/2018/09/26/USATODAY/USATODAY/636735223799455193-kav-cal-2.JPG?width=292&height=390&fit=crop
https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/f67d4947f62fb6a3e83214780822af9786c65bc0/c=64-0-678-819/local/-/media/2018/09/26/USATODAY/USATODAY/636735223799767201-kav-cal-3.JPG?width=292&height=390&fit=crop
https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/bed58ac75d3d1c8eefd9451eefcbfb768bfc5e5c/c=51-0-651-800/local/-/media/2018/09/26/USATODAY/USATODAY/636735223799143185-kav-cal-4.JPG?width=292&height=390&fit=crop
https://www.gannett-cdn.com/-mm-/8615e5bee6c15f7ef360d79bd7f8d4a0d29a17ce/c=54-0-650-795/local/-/media/2018/09/26/USATODAY/USATODAY/636735223799455193-kav-cal-5.JPG?width=292&height=390&fit=crop

"Interview Yale" "Interview Brown".

Fuck him. #Jealous

[hater]

1044794730402459649

:lmao

Da Rezizstanze :cry

[boutons_deux]

Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford offers Senate four people who corroborate her assault claims

The attorneys for Christine Blasey Ford (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/09/17/who-christine-blasey-ford-professor-accusing-brett-kavanaugh-assault/1339485002/) have sworn and

signed declarations from four people who corroborate her claims of sexual assault by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

In documents sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee

and obtained by USA TODAY, Ford’s attorneys present declarations from Ford’s husband, Russell, and

three friends who support the California college professor’s accusation that Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed, groped her and attempted to pull off her clothes while both were high school students in 1982.

The declarations will be used by Ford’s attorneys during a committee hearing on Thursday that could determine the fate of Kavanaugh’s embattled nomination (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/09/25/brett-kavanaugh-tensions-rise-senate-sexual-assault-hearing-nears/1420298002/).

He also faces a second accusation of sexual assault from Deborah Ramirez (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/09/25/brett-kavanaugh-deborah-ramirez-might-not-testify/1427657002/), who claims Kavanaugh exposed himself and pushed his genitals into her face at a drunken party during the 1983-84 academic year at Yale University.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/09/25/brett-kavanaugh-ford-has-4-people-corroborate-sexual-assault-claims/1429270002/?ncid=newsltushpmgnews__TheMorningEmail__092618

Repugs don't care, committee will vote Fri to approve him.

[101A]

https://nypost.com/2018/09/25/eight-big-problems-for-christine-blasey-fords-story/


In her original letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (https://nypost.com/2018/09/17/this-is-what-kavanaughs-accuser-wrote-in-her-letter/), Ford claimed that Kavanaugh talked to Keyser and Smyth right after he assaulted her. Yet neither shares her memory.


Her mother, father and two siblings are all conspicuously absent from a letter of support released by a dozen relatives, mostly on her husband’s side of the family.


Ford contends that notes her therapist took in 2012 corroborate her account. But they don’t mention Kavanaugh.
They also point up inconsistencies in her story. For instance, her shrink noted that Ford told her there were “four boys” in the bedroom, not two as she now says. The notes also indicate Ford said she was in her “late teens” when she was assaulted. But Ford now says she may have been only 15.




In another inconsistency, Ford told The Washington Post she was upset when Trump won in 2016, because Kavanaugh was mentioned as a Supreme Court pick. But Kavanaugh wasn’t added to Trump’s list of possibles until November 2017, a full year later.

We should be talking about Kavanaugh's testimony. I know people have problems with his own alleged inconsistencies (not related to these allegations). I think Democrats may have mis-played this. NOW moderate Republicans can get cover because of Ford's testimony, instead of having to defend Kavanaugh's 36 hours in front of the committee.

[101A]

Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford offers Senate four people who corroborate her assault claims

The attorneys for Christine Blasey Ford (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/09/17/who-christine-blasey-ford-professor-accusing-brett-kavanaugh-assault/1339485002/) have sworn and

signed declarations from four people who corroborate her claims of sexual assault by Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

In documents sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee

and obtained by USA TODAY, Ford’s attorneys present declarations from Ford’s husband, Russell, and

three friends who support the California college professor’s accusation that Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed, groped her and attempted to pull off her clothes while both were high school students in 1982.

The declarations will be used by Ford’s attorneys during a committee hearing on Thursday that could determine the fate of Kavanaugh’s embattled nomination (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/09/25/brett-kavanaugh-tensions-rise-senate-sexual-assault-hearing-nears/1420298002/).

He also faces a second accusation of sexual assault from Deborah Ramirez (https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2018/09/25/brett-kavanaugh-deborah-ramirez-might-not-testify/1427657002/), who claims Kavanaugh exposed himself and pushed his genitals into her face at a drunken party during the 1983-84 academic year at Yale University.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/09/25/brett-kavanaugh-ford-has-4-people-corroborate-sexual-assault-claims/1429270002/?ncid=newsltushpmgnews__TheMorningEmail__092618

Repugs don't care, committee will vote Fri to approve him.




Her husband cannot corroborate - he wasn't there. Were the other friends? Why don't you send a letter, B? You support her accusation as well.

[101A]

By the way, if one of these people is under oath and swears that they were at the party, and were aware at the time of what happened, it will be significant, and everything I have written about "no corroboration" becomes mute, obviously. "Some" corroboration is infinitely more persuasive than none.

[DMC]

By the way, if one of these people is under oath and swears that they were at the party, and were aware at the time of what happened, it will be significant, and everything I have written about "no corroboration" becomes mute, obviously. "Some" corroboration is infinitely more persuasive than none.

There's also the issue of whether the story is fabricated simply due to the nomination, which the 4 people can testify that they were aware of the allegations prior to the nomination. This at least removes some of the motive for lying, however the intent here likely isn't to prove anyone guilty of anything, but to cause enough chaos so that certain fence sitting GOPers decide they want to err on the side of caution. Make no mistake, the entire dog and pony show is intended solely to delay or void appointment, at least from the democrat side. The accuser could simply be stuck now after she tried to get some payback, and perhaps got caught up in the political machine.

[boutons_deux]

Her husband cannot corroborate - he wasn't there. Were the other friends? Why don't you send a letter, B? You support her accusation as well.

Why would she lie, years ago, to her husband (and therapist) that she was attacked (many women NEVER admit rape), and was attacked specifically by K?

I support investigating her accusation because almost no women make this shit up and hold it for decades, unlike you (white) male supremacists who claim men are innocent, entitled to attack women as inferior to men, as alway-on cum receptacles.

[ducks]

Why she would lie
To stop Brett becoming Supreme Court judge
New money in her account

[clambake]

Why she would lie
To stop Brett becoming Supreme Court judge
New money in her account

i noticed you haven't acted on the information you shared with the world, yet

[101A]

Why would she lie, years ago, to her husband (and therapist) that she was attacked (many women NEVER admit rape), and was attacked specifically by K?

I support investigating her accusation because almost no women make this shit up and hold it for decades, unlike you (white) male supremacists who claim men are innocent, entitled to attack women as inferior to men, as alway-on cum receptacles.

Years ago she didn't say she was assaulted by Kavanaugh. She said she was assaulted in her "late teens" with 4 guys in the room. My white male supremacist self is at home in a basement, having put my career 2nd to hers thirteen years ago (I'm doing fine, don't worry) by moving to Pa away from my business in SA (still there & mine at Callaghan and 410) so that DR. 101A could advance her career as a professor of Biochemistry. She is anything but inferior to me (and all my kids are smarter than me, as well)

[cd98]

Just checking in. I do think it will be an interesting hearing. Ford has holes in her story, to be sure. But that doesn't mean there isn't some credibility. I do agree that having told people about it (and obtaining their affidavits) before Kavanaugh was nominated is some evidence that the story is true. Sure, it is possible that the affiants are not telling the truth or that Ford mentioned she was attacked, but didn't name Kavanaugh. The one I'd probably give least weight to would be the husband because they're married, he's got to stick with her story.

Since we haven't heard Ford testify, we don't have much to lean on for her credibility, but the facts do tend to make me think it's possible that she was attacked by someone. That's why Kavanaugh has focused on that it wasn't him while not denying that she might have been attacked. Unfortunately, at the end of the day, unless Ford can provide more verifiable facts, it's just a he said/she said with all people listed as potential witnesses denying it happened or claiming they can't remember it ever happening. In the court of law, especially after 30+ years, that would sink this before it even got to a grand jury (sorry to all you that are hoping a Supreme Court nominee goes on trial for attempted rape). Does that prevent him from serving as a Supreme Court justice? I guess we'll see how the vote comes out.

[Reck]

https://twitter.com/MichaelAvenatti/status/1044960428730843136

Happy now, DarrinS?

[djohn2oo8]

https://twitter.com/MichaelAvenatti/status/1044960428730843136

Happy now, DarrinS (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=2042)?
Dayumm

[boutons_deux]

As with everything Repug (fraudulent), Repugs' attack bitch will softball K and hardball Ford.

Will be as "fair and balanced" and BigCorp arbitration for employees.

And the Repugs, in their hermetic bubble, really think they will get away with it, because they can.

A huge majority of Americans don't know, and care less, most don't vote, so their self-absorbed disengagement allows politicians, BigCorp, oligarchy to do all kinds of dangerous, degrading, retrograde shit, with no accountability.

I pretty sure the Repugs will seat this oligarchical piece of shit on the SCOTUS bench, alongside their other 4 political hacks in robes.

Oligarchy 5 - non-oligarchy 4, for DECADES.

But most "law" is made at Federal district and appeals level, which is why Bitch McC is railroading through other right wing ideological political hacks in bunches.

[djohn2oo8]

1044963552451334145

so Darrin doesn’t overlook it

[boutons_deux]

Seth Meyers puts comedy aside to completely destroy Brett Kavanaugh after Fox News interview


https://www.rawstory.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/My-Post-15-800x430.jpg

Meyers riped Kavanaugh’s interview piece by piece.

“If you’re trying to distance yourself from sexual assault,

maybe Fox News is not the place to hang out.

Usually, when they interview someone for sexual assault it’s for a job —

shoutout to Bill O’Reilly,” he joked.

Watch the video below.

https://www.rawstory.com/2018/09/seth-meyers-puts-comedy-aside-to-completely-destroy-brett-kavanaugh-after-fox-news-interview/

[djohn2oo8]

1044967989731381248

[djohn2oo8]

1044965500114153472

[Winehole23]

Before THIS nomination neither had Kavanaugh. He "sailed" through the same nominations those names you listed did. Why is that?perhaps his victims did not know he was up for a federal judgeship.

[101A]

perhaps his victims did not know he was up for a federal judgeship.

Nor those on your list.

[Winehole23]

Gorsuch went to the same prep school at the same time. Nobody accused him of being a rapist. A few Dems even voted for him.

What do you suppose accounts for the difference in treatment?

[boutons_deux]

Classmates Who Endorsed Brett Kavanaugh Now Say Claims Warrant Investigation

Three men who knew the judge at Yale say the allegations should be probed in a “fair and credible” way.

Several former classmates of Judge Brett Kavanaugh (https://www.huffingtonpost.com/topic/brett-kavanaugh) who just last month endorsed his nomination to the Supreme Court (https://www.huffingtonpost.com/topic/supreme-court)

have now called for the Yale alumnus to be investigated over allegations of sexual misconduct.

Three of Kavanaugh’s former classmates at Yale Law School told The Washington Post this week (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/three-yale-law-school-classmates-who-endorsed-kavanaugh-call-for-investigation-into-sexual-misconduct-claims/2018/09/25/fabfc002-c10e-11e8-9005-5104e9616c21_story.html?utm_term=.fe3fe31c4b68) that the recent allegations by Christine Blasey Ford and Deborah Ramirez

warrant a “fair and credible investigation.”

“The confirmation process should be conducted in a way that fosters trust in the process and the Supreme Court, :lol

and that seriously considers allegations of sexual violence,”

Kent Sinclair and Douglas Rutzen said in a statement to the Post on Tuesday. A third member of Yale Law School’s class of 1990, Mark Osler, told the Post that the circumstances around the allegations “need to be probed.”

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/kavanaugh-classmates-sexual-misconduct-allegations_us_5baafd1fe4b0f143d10e6501?utm_medium =email&utm_campaign=__TheMorningEmail__092618&utm_content=__TheMorningEmail__092618+CID_1cfabe3f 46b42209fbefdb1d43058b55&utm_source=Email%20marketing%20software&utm_term=HuffPost&ncid=newsltushpmgnews__TheMorningEmail__092618

trust (oligarchy's politicized) SCOTUS? :lol

[djohn2oo8]

1044974215630344192

lol Grassley. Good luck slandering a govt official

[Pavlov]

1044974215630344192

lol Grassley. Good luck slandering a govt officialDEEP STATE

[dabom]

1044974215630344192

lol Grassley. Good luck slandering a govt official

That guy straight strocking it on the Re-Tards. :lmao

[Cry Havoc]

1044965500114153472

lmfao

Kavanaugh puts himself at the scene of the crime.

Sorry, just to not trigger any conservatives here, "scene of the alleged incident". :lol

Oof. Not looking so good for him.

[djohn2oo8]

Darrin I see ya lurkin there bwoi!

[Cry Havoc]

Also, to anyone who thought 4chan was going to be their beacon of truth.... :lmao

[djohn2oo8]

1044975425146023936



​these niggas out here making Kobe envious

[dabom]

1044975425146023936



​these niggas out here making Kobe envious

That's a wrap. Put it in the bag. :lmao

[djohn2oo8]

1044979184957775877

[dabom]

Well today was a good morning. :lmao

[dabom]

We need to subpoena that fuck judge. :lmao

[Cry Havoc]

That's a wrap. Put it in the bag. :lmao

Republicans have to seriously consider now that putting Kavanaugh in office might affect every possible candidate for the next 10-15 years. Not going to look good with the coming generations of voters if they confirm him and then more evidence comes out.

[Winehole23]

That's a wrap. Put it in the bag. :lmao If Mitch McConnell has to reschedule the vote we'll know Kavanaugh is in trouble.

Otherwise, expect Brett Kavanaugh to be confirmed Friday.

[boutons_deux]

Arizona prosecutor Rachel Mitchell is GOP choice to question Kavanaugh and accuser at hearing

Mitchell is the chief of the special victims division of the Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, which deals with sexual assault cases, among others.

A registered Republican, Mitchell has worked for in the county attorney’s office for 26 years.

Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (R-Iowa) said in a statement.

“The goal is to de-politicize the process :lol

and get to the truth, :lol

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said earlier Tuesday that Republican lawmakers

hired “a female assistant” :lol Girl Friday / GoFer

to “ask these questions in a respectful and professional way. :lol

We want this hearing to be handled very professionally, not a political sideshow.” :lol

https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/arizona-prosecutor-rachel-mitchell-emerges-as-gop-choice-to-question-kavanaugh-and-accuser-at-hearing/2018/09/25/47964afa-c0ff-11e8-9005-5104e9616c21_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e5177f87779a#nws=mcnewsletter (https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/arizona-prosecutor-rachel-mitchell-emerges-as-gop-choice-to-question-kavanaugh-and-accuser-at-hearing/2018/09/25/47964afa-c0ff-11e8-9005-5104e9616c21_story.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.e5177f87779a#nws=mcnewsletter)

I doubt she'll do it, but I'd love Ford to go full Maxine-Waters on the Repugs and her "assistant" (does she get them coffee?)

[Cry Havoc]

If Mitch McConnell has to reschedule the vote we'll know Kavanaugh is in trouble.

Otherwise, expect Brett Kavanaugh to be confirmed Friday.

Given the new round of accusations, it would be a huge risk to have the vote tomorrow. If even 2 senators decide they might be in trouble for saying yes, his ship is sunk. And we already know that a couple of them were wavering prior to this.

How many meetings do you think they're having now trying to convince everyone to stay on board?

[baseline bum]

If Mitch McConnell has to reschedule the vote we'll know Kavanaugh is in trouble.

Otherwise, expect Brett Kavanaugh to be confirmed Friday.

Nate Silver was speculating McConnell might want the vote ASAP to kill the nomination so they have time to rush the next candidate in.

https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-gops-least-worst-option-is-if-kavanaugh-withdraws-and-soon/

[baseline bum]

Given the new round of accusations, it would be a huge risk to have the vote tomorrow. If even 2 senators decide they might be in trouble for saying yes, his ship is sunk. And we already know that a couple of them were wavering prior to this.

How many meetings do you think they're having now trying to convince everyone to stay on board?

I kind of think the opposite myself. If Kavanaugh won't withdraw they can quickly vote him down and wash their hands of him. We know the court is going to be 5-4 Republican no matter what. Surely they can find another conservative judge like Gorsuch who is a decent person and would glide through confirmation the way he did.

[Winehole23]

I think they know what's expected of them. Senate Republicans know what to do.

Today's accuser will get frozen out like Angela Wright did, Catherine Blasey Ford will get the bum's rush tomorrow and the vote will happen as scheduled the day after that..

Then 22% of the Supreme Court will be credibly accused sexual predators.

[dabom]

Republicans have to seriously consider now that putting Kavanaugh in office might affect every possible candidate for the next 10-15 years. Not going to look good with the coming generations of voters if they confirm him and then more evidence comes out.

Who ever vetted the guy. :lol

[boutons_deux]

Kavanaugh’s ‘choir boy’ image on Fox interview rankles former Yale classmates

in his younger years, he was focused on sports, academics and “service projects.” :lol

But it was

his comments about drinking that rankled some Yale University classmates,

prompting them to speak out for the first time.

Liz Swisher, ...

“Brett was a sloppy drunk, and I know because I drank with him.

I watched him drink more than a lot of people.

He’d end up slurring his words, stumbling,”

“There’s no medical way I can say that he was blacked out. . . .

But it’s not credible for him to say that he has had no memory lapses in the nights that he drank to excess.”

Lynne Brookes, ...

“He’s trying to paint himself as some kind of choir boy,”

said Brookes, a Republican and former pharmaceutical executive who recalled an encounter with a drunken Kavanaugh at a fraternity event.

“You can’t lie your way onto the Supreme Court, :lol YES, YOU CAN! Roberts, Gorsuch! :lol

and with that statement out, he’s gone too far.

It’s about the integrity of that institution.” :lol

“I’ve always treated women with dignity and respect,” he told Fox. :lol

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2018/09/25/ea5e50d4-c0eb-11e8-9005-5104e9616c21_story.html?utm_term=.8e1499dbb164&wpisrc=nl_most&wpmm=1

[Pavlov]

Who ever vetted the guy. :lolAnd how did he move up over everyone who was on Trump's list before him? Was it really just his trying to pwn the pregnant refugee?

[Cry Havoc]

And how did he move up over everyone who was on Trump's list before him? Was it really just his trying to pwn the pregnant refugee?

No. It's because Kavanaugh will excuse Trump for his crimes. That's why they're fighting so hard to keep him. They know if they nominate another justice, it will probably still be a conservative court, but the next justice might not protect Trump if Mueller's investigation goes directly after Trump.

[boutons_deux]

On FBI investigation, Murkowski folds (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/9/25/1798684/-Murkowski-folds)

https://images.dailykos.com/images/429278/story_image/GettyImages-699773890.jpg?1501173788

Liz Ruskin@lruskin (https://twitter.com/lruskin)

Murkowski told me her response to CNN was "perhaps somewhat flip" and

she's not calling for the FBI to investigate.

She says the committee is investigating :lol

and she wishes Sen. Grassley released more info about that.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2018/9/25/1798684/-Murkowski-folds?detail=emaildkre

[Winehole23]

I kind of think the opposite myself. If Kavanaugh won't withdraw they can quickly vote him down and wash their hands of him. We know the court is going to be 5-4 Republican no matter what. Surely they can find another conservative judge like Gorsuch who is a decent person and would glide through confirmation the way he did.the disadvantage is that GOP voters expect nothing short of total victory plus ruthless liberal humiliation.


it's not enough to win, whiny feminists, liberals and other bien pensant do-gooders must be crushed. that's why Republican Senators are sticking with Kavanaugh. backing away would be seen as a loss.

[Cry Havoc]

the disadvantage is that GOP voters expect nothing short of total victory plus ruthless liberal humiliation.


it's not enough to win, whiny feminists, liberals and other bien pensant do-gooders must be crushed. that's why Republican Senators are sticking with Kavanaugh. backing away would be seen as a loss.

And because Kavanaugh will protect Trump. IMO that's way more important here than anything else to the GOP.

[Winehole23]

in a way, the accusations of assault and gang rape act as a sweetener: all the more crushing will be the result for the libs.

[baseline bum]

the disadvantage is that GOP voters expect nothing short of total victory plus ruthless liberal humiliation.


it's not enough to win, whiny feminists, liberals and other bien pensant do-gooders must be crushed. that's why Republican Senators are sticking with Kavanaugh. backing away would be seen as a loss.

Yeah could be. But damn that seems a great way to fire up an already pissed left and get them to the voting booth in even greater numbers. It's really dangerous IMO. They lost a senate seat in Alabama of all places with this pwn the libs strategy.

[Reck]

Given the new round of accusations, it would be a huge risk to have the vote tomorrow. If even 2 senators decide they might be in trouble for saying yes, his ship is sunk. And we already know that a couple of them were wavering prior to this.

How many meetings do you think they're having now trying to convince everyone to stay on board?

Grassley just said he's not delaying the hearing or vote. Sink or swim mode.

[Spurminator]

This shit is just ugly as hell and we're going to have to figure out a way to prevent this kind of divisive partisan shit-slinging in future nominations for the health of the country. I don't see how we go back from this with the current system.

First step is to remove the President's arbitrary authority to nominate SC judges. I'd rather see a bipartisan panel nominate a group of potential judges and vet through all of them for the best and most agreeable candidate across party lines.

[baseline bum]

Kavanaugh is either going to get confirmed with 51 votes or rejected with <= 40 votes IMO.

[dabom]

This shit is just ugly as hell and we're going to have to figure out a way to prevent this kind of divisive partisan shit-slinging in future nominations for the health of the country. I don't see how we go back from this with the current system.

First step is to remove the President's arbitrary authority to nominate SC judges. I'd rather see a bipartisan panel nominate a group of potential judges and vet through all of them for the best and most agreeable candidate across party lines.

Not hard to find someone who isn't a drunk that participates in gang raping. :lol

[boutons_deux]

https://media.newyorker.com/cartoons/5bab9bedf229dd2d8d57ac81/master/w_1298,c_limit/DC092618.jpg

[Cry Havoc]

Yeah could be. But damn that seems a great way to fire up an already pissed left and get them to the voting booth in even greater numbers. It's really dangerous IMO. They lost a senate seat in Alabama of all places with this pwn the libs strategy.

With how much the Democrats struggle to get their house in order, the only reason the Republicans don't have a supermajority in both houses is their own vindictiveness and complete incompetence.

[Cry Havoc]

This shit is just ugly as hell and we're going to have to figure out a way to prevent this kind of divisive partisan shit-slinging in future nominations for the health of the country. I don't see how we go back from this with the current system.

GOP waved bye-bye to that long ago when they turned most of their voters into single-issue simpletons. Not only do they not want to compromise, they can't now, because boomers have been put through the xenophobic hate-mill for so long that they're all playing a huge game of gatekeeping.

ABORTION BAD. GUN RIGHTS GOOD. <<< all you need to get 40% of the vote in America today, no matter how racist, rapist, or criminal you are.

[baseline bum]

GOP waved bye-bye to that long ago when they turned most of their voters into single-issue simpletons. Not only do they not want to compromise, they can't now, because boomers have been put through the xenophobic hate-mill for so long that they're all playing a huge game of gatekeeping.

ABORTION BAD. GUN RIGHTS GOOD. <<< all you need to get 40% of the vote in America today, no matter how racist, rapist, or criminal you are.

You forgot MEXICANS BAD.

[Spurminator]

GOP waved bye-bye to that long ago when they turned most of their voters into single-issue simpletons. Not only do they not want to compromise, they can't now, because boomers have been put through the xenophobic hate-mill for so long that they're all playing a huge game of gatekeeping.

ABORTION BAD. GUN RIGHTS GOOD. <<< all you need to get 40% of the vote in America today, no matter how racist, rapist, or criminal you are.

Also "We'll lower your taxes" because that's what brings the sweet PAC money in.

[Brazil]

Donald: Brett, I have a job for you.. supreme court
Brett: well, I'd love to but my past is not that shinny, u know... drinking... women
Donald: Don't worry I've done much worst and I've been elected.. I get your back bro, gonna be a piece of cake
Brett: ok Donald if you say so

[djohn2oo8]

:lmao Trump is shook

[Reck]

Wasn't a condition set by kennedy that they nominate Kavanaugh for his seat and Trump agreed?

I'm sure I read that somewhere.

[Pavlov]

Since the white men are afraid to question Ford, can a sex crimes prosecutor question Kavanaugh too?

[djohn2oo8]

Damn. Y’all Niggas seen hater?

[boutons_deux]

With how much the Democrats struggle to get their house in order, the only reason the Republicans don't have a supermajority in both houses is their own vindictiveness and complete incompetence.

Consider that with rquired gerrymandering, voter suppression, counting fraud, and low population, rural red states reliably contributing 2 Repug Senators, Repugs prove that they are the minority party.

[djohn2oo8]

1044991766309621760

:lmao took the bait

[djohn2oo8]

1044995696645025792
lol

[Cry Havoc]

1044995696645025792
lol

10-7 Avenatti.

Like him or hate him you have to admit that Trump's trash talking game is fucking abysmal.

[hater]

Avenatti/Oprah 2020 :lmao

[djohn2oo8]

1044998360309084160

[Winehole23]

1044994404631506945

[boutons_deux]

The Long Decline of DKE, Brett Kavanaugh’s Fraternity at Yale

the Yale Daily News published an old photograph (https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2018/09/20/a-flag-of-underwear-photo-from-kavanaughs-time-shows-dke-hijinks/) that directed scrutiny to the Supreme Court nominee’s college years.

In the black-and-white image, two brothers of the Delta Kappa Epsilon fraternity march across Yale’s campus in an initiation rite,

one of them carrying a flag fashioned from women’s lingerie.

At the time of the shot, Kavanaugh, who does not appear in the image, was a sophomore in the fraternity.

Another man who was a member of dke at the time told the student paper, on Wednesday, that

his brothers had obtained the underwear “consensually.” :lol

But several female classmates suggested otherwise, saying that

members of dke often attempted to ransack their rooms during class time.

“They were loud, entitled, pushy, and creepy,” one alumna tweeted.

“They didn’t care what we thought.”

Kavanaugh’s time at Yale (where he also belonged to an

all-male secret society, Truth and Courage, which was popularly known as Tit and Clit),

Greek life on the campus has declined, but dke, sometimes described as the “white football frat,” has maintained a reputation for aggressively loutish antics.

“When we had a mixer with them, they didn’t even want to talk to us,” a classmate who is in a sorority told me recently.

“They just wanted to pour beers on each other’s heads.”

a pack of pledges thronged the freshman residential quadrangle to shout an

initiation chant:

“No means yes, yes means anal.”

(Also: “Fucking sluts!” and

“I fuck dead women and fill them with my semen.”)

In January, Business Insider published detailed accounts (https://www.businessinsider.com/yale-sexual-misconduct-story-2018-1) from two female undergraduates who alleged that they had been assaulted by dke brothers.

One of the accused was a former president of the fraternity, who, in 2016, told the student paper that dke members of his generation had “played an important part in the cultural shift” that had occurred since the 2010 incident.

(He was eventually expelled from the fraternity and suspended from Yale, for “penetration without consent”; :lol

Further investigation by the Daily News uncovered

eight more women who alleged sexual misconduct by dke brothers between 2014 and 2017.

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/the-long-decline-of-dke-brett-kavanaughs-fraternity-at-yale?mbid=nl_Daily%20092618&CNDID=43758549&utm_source=Silverpop&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Daily%20092618&utm_content=&spMailingID=14320711&spUserID=MTQzNTk4NzA3ODYzS0&spJobID=1482126801&spReportId=MTQ4MjEyNjgwMQS2

So Catholic Jesuit Choir Boy K belonged to Yale's Animal House frat DKE :lol

The Defending Guardian Angel for the DKEs, and all college rapists, of America is Ditzy Devos.

[dabom]

1044995696645025792
lol

I have been entertained today. Non stop laughter during lunch. :lol

[Cry Havoc]

1044994404631506945

Is that THE Shapiro? The conservative?

[Reck]

Jeff Flake sure sounds like he'll vote no. :lol

[Reck]

Avenatti/Oprah 2020 :lmao

Avenatti/Stormy

Everyone gets to fuck a pornstar of their choosing. I'd vote for that.

[boutons_deux]

Is that THE Shapiro? The conservative?

yep, check his "you may also like" twitter references

[SnakeBoy]

I think they know what's expected of them. Senate Republicans know what to do.

Today's accuser will get frozen out like Angela Wright did, Catherine Blasey Ford will get the bum's rush tomorrow and the vote will happen as scheduled the day after that..

Then 22% of the Supreme Court will be credibly accused sexual predators.

lol today's civil libertarians

[Winehole23]

Is that THE Shapiro? The conservative?yep

[Cry Havoc]

yep, check his "you may also like" twitter references

Did he forget which twitter account he's on? What's he doing going after Trump on a day like today?

[Winehole23]

lol today's civil libertarianshow have Kavanaugh's civil liberties been impaired?

[Cry Havoc]

yep

btw your avatar is broken for me

[ducks]

lol she says she went to 10 parties why keep going if this is happening
she is full of shit

[boutons_deux]

Trash overrode Repugs' preferences to force the very unpopular (Bork level) K as his nominee.

:lol

[Cry Havoc]

lol she says she went to 10 parties why keep going if this is happening
she is full of shit

Maybe.... just maybe... that's why she stopped going?

[Reck]

https://twitter.com/MichaelAvenatti/status/1044985963200614400

Avenatti big dicking DarrinS TSA and Chris like it's Christmas time. :lmao

[101A]

Did he forget which twitter account he's on? What's he doing going after Trump on a day like today?

Having the balls to post what the rest of us conservatives were thinking. I've been playing ball for the past couple hours

[Cry Havoc]

Having the balls to post what the rest of us conservatives were thinking. I've been playing ball for the past couple hours

Good on you for that. :tu