Politics Kavanaugh Confirmation Hearing, now with New allegations!

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Will Kavanaugh be confirmed?

  • Yes

  • No

  • Burn it all down

Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Hoopguru said:
Im sure the authorities will be all over an investigation if she has any thing?
I still think she was the one drunk and pushing herself on the guys?
I remember chicks like that, when hey got a few drinks down them they got all loud, sloppy and aggressive.
Click to expand...

It actually pains me to read things like this. This is why women don't come forward. Nearly all of the women in my life have at some point been assaulted and revealed it years and years after the fact. It is almost incomprehensible but it is true. And not one of them was drunk and pushing herself or whatever the fuck. I don't like that language. And I'm sure that form of forward drunkenness happen; hell, I've seen people act that way, but never have they come forward and pretended that it was something that it wasn't.

And also, and very importantly, having sex with or trying to have sex with or whatever with an intoxicated woman is also not okay, regardless of what she is saying; and this is not just me saying this but the authorities. The flipside would be excusing drunk men for their drunken behavior (ahem). It's bullshit.
 
Hoopguru said:
Im sure the authorities will be all over an investigation if she has any thing?
I still think she was the one drunk and pushing herself on the guys?
I remember chicks like that, when hey got a few drinks down them they got all loud, sloppy and aggressive.
Click to expand...

You make a big assumption here. You would like to believe she was drunk and pushing herself on him. Even if it were the case, and they got in that room, and she suddenly changed her mind, and he tried to make her follow through because he was thinking with his other head, he was in the wrong. No means no.

You don't want to believe its Kavanaugh. Maybe because you want to see him confirmed. Maybe its the current climate in which women are speaking up and going after men for the sins they commited years ago. That they thought were long buried. I don't know, I am not going to assume. Just pointing out possibilities.

The things that stand out to me.

- Another dude was in the room to guard the door.

- Despite death threats, and danger to herself and her family, she is not backing down. Pretty brave in my book.

I don't see her coming out of the woodwork, to make a false claim, causing such a stress on herself and family and all to smear a dude who is innocent. I just don't see it. Is it possible, sure. I just don't see it.
 
Last edited:
Chris Craig said:
You make a big assumption here. You would like to believe she was drunk and pushing herself on him. Even if it were the case, and they got in that room, and she suddenly changed her mind, and he tried to make her follow through because he was thinking with his other head, he was in the wrong. No means no.

You don't want to believe its Kavanaugh. Maybe because you want to see him confirmed. Maybe its the current climate in which women are speaking up and going after men for the sins they commited years ago. That they thought were long buried. I don't know, I am not going to assume. Just pointing out possibilities.

The things that stand out to me.

- Another dude was in the room to guard the door.

- Despite death threats, and danger to herself and her family, she is not backing down. Pretty brave in my book.

I don't see her coming out of the woodwork, to make a false claim, causing such a stress on herself and family and all to smear a dude who is innocent. I just don't see it. Is it possible, sure. I just don't see it.
Click to expand...
CC, I don't know what the truth is at his point and neither does anyone else. And to be honest I don't have a thing for Kav at all, if he guilty he should be gone.
How much evidence is needed to go after someone with serious accusations? If its just one person's word over another's thats crazy.
Should there need to be some evidence/witness before someone is deemed guilty?
 
Hoopguru said:
CC, I don't know what the truth is at his point and neither does anyone else. And to be honest I don't have a thing for Kav at all, if he guilty he should be gone.
How much evidence is needed to go after someone with serious accusations? If its just one person's word over another's thats crazy.
Should there need to be some evidence/witness before someone is deemed guilty?
Click to expand...

That would be why you'd have an FBI investigation and why you'd have testimony from people other than Ford and Kav.

So you got to ask yourself: why are the Republicans refusing to do that?

barfo
 
barfo said:
That would be why you'd have an FBI investigation and why you'd have testimony from people other than Ford and Kav.

So you got to ask yourself: why are the Republicans refusing to do that?

barfo
Click to expand...
I personally have no problem with an investigation, I'm actually for it. Let the chips fall where they do.
On the other hand I think its really slippery for Finstein to not bring it up after having the report for two months. Seems if she was so interested and in an investigation for the accuser she would have brought it up then, rather than wait for the hearings to be over? That does appears to be a stall tactic to me.
 
barfo said:
That would be why you'd have an FBI investigation and why you'd have testimony from people other than Ford and Kav.

So you got to ask yourself: why are the Republicans refusing to do that?

barfo
Click to expand...

They already have testimony from all parties except the accuser, who has repeatedly backed out of agreements to testify.

All 4 people she claims were there have provided statements under oath that they have no idea what she's talking about.

Only the accuser has refused to do anything.

Like make an accusation of a crime to the FBI or any other law enforcement agency anywhere at any time.

Like testify under oath what she claims and provide something/anything to support her claim.
 
Hoopguru said:
I personally have no problem with an investigation, I'm actually for it. Let the chips fall where they do.
Click to expand...

But the question is, why are the Republicans against it?

barfo
 
MARIS61 said:
They already have testimony from all parties except the accuser, who has repeatedly backed out of agreements to testify.

All 4 people she claims were there have provided statements under oath that they have no idea what she's talking about.

Only the accuser has refused to do anything.

Like make an accusation of a crime to the FBI or any other law enforcement agency anywhere at any time.

Like testify under oath what she claims and provide something/anything to support her claim.
Click to expand...

Maybe check the news? She's scheduled to testify at 10am ET Thursday.

barfo
 
MARIS61 said:
They already have testimony from all parties except the accuser, who has repeatedly backed out of agreements to testify.

All 4 people she claims were there have provided statements under oath that they have no idea what she's talking about.

Only the accuser has refused to do anything.

Like make an accusation of a crime to the FBI or any other law enforcement agency anywhere at any time.

Like testify under oath what she claims and provide something/anything to support her claim.
Click to expand...

actually they have NO testimony under oath. What one might say in an interview can be completely different than what someone says under oath. The first has no repercussions but if you lie under oath it's called perjury. Do some homework.
 
barfo said:
That would be why you'd have an FBI investigation and why you'd have testimony from people other than Ford and Kav.

So you got to ask yourself: why are the Republicans refusing to do that?

barfo
Click to expand...

The Republicans had planned to have Kavanaugh confirmed in time for the start of the new Supreme Court term on October 1st. Feinstein and Company could have brought the allegations forward for investigation at the end of July when she was first informed of Ford’s claims. Instead, she sat on it until the point it would do the maximum to disrupt that schedule and make it so that, if Kavanaugh has to be replaced with a new nominee, it will drag out past the midterm elections. So, you know, it’s just swamp rats of both political persuasions doing their thing and putting party over any real interests in truth.
 
e_blazer said:
The Republicans had planned to have Kavanaugh confirmed in time for the start of the new Supreme Court term on October 1st. Feinstein and Company could have brought the allegations forward for investigation at the end of July when she was first informed of Ford’s claims. Instead, she sat on it until the point it would do the maximum to disrupt that schedule and make it so that, if Kavanaugh has to be replaced with a new nominee, it will drag out past the midterm elections. So, you know, it’s just swamp rats of both political persuasions doing their thing and putting party over any real interests in truth.
Click to expand...
well said!
 
e_blazer said:
The Republicans had planned to have Kavanaugh confirmed in time for the start of the new Supreme Court term on October 1st. Feinstein and Company could have brought the allegations forward for investigation at the end of July when she was first informed of Ford’s claims. Instead, she sat on it until the point it would do the maximum to disrupt that schedule and make it so that, if Kavanaugh has to be replaced with a new nominee, it will drag out past the midterm elections. So, you know, it’s just swamp rats of both political persuasions doing their thing and putting party over any real interests in truth.
Click to expand...

But republicans said a Supreme Court Justice can't be confirmed within 8 months of an election. Those were their rules. Just ask McConnell as he established the rule. Why do they want to change that now? A little taste of their own medicine. :biglaugh::biglaugh:
 
e_blazer said:
The Republicans had planned to have Kavanaugh confirmed in time for the start of the new Supreme Court term on October 1st. Feinstein and Company could have brought the allegations forward for investigation at the end of July when she was first informed of Ford’s claims. Instead, she sat on it until the point it would do the maximum to disrupt that schedule and make it so that, if Kavanaugh has to be replaced with a new nominee, it will drag out past the midterm elections. So, you know, it’s just swamp rats of both political persuasions doing their thing and putting party over any real interests in truth.
Click to expand...

I can't quite believe that Republicans care about leaving the court with a vacancy, since they left it open for a year rather than considering Garland. So that dog won't hunt.

barfo
 
barfo said:
I can't quite believe that Republicans care about leaving the court with a vacancy, since they left it open for a year rather than considering Garland. So that dog won't hunt.

barfo
Click to expand...

Did I say that Republican rats were any more honorable than Democrat rats?
 
e_blazer said:
Did I say that Republican rats were any more honorable than Democrat rats?
Click to expand...

No, you did not. But this isn't a case of 'both sides do it'. Refusing to consider a nominee at all is of a different order of magnitude than delaying a nominee's confirmation by a couple of weeks so that a sexual abuse allegation can be heard.

barfo
 
barfo said:
No, you did not. But this isn't a case of 'both sides do it'. Refusing to consider a nominee at all is of a different order of magnitude than delaying a nominee's confirmation by a couple of weeks so that a sexual abuse allegation can be heard.

barfo
Click to expand...

I think the GOP’s actions relative to Garland were reprehensible. I think the Dems using Kavanaugh as a means to rally the base for the midterms is also morally bankrupt. I think that’s what this is largely about at this point.
 
e_blazer said:
I think the GOP’s actions relative to Garland were reprehensible. I think the Dems using Kavanaugh as a means to rally the base for the midterms is also morally bankrupt. I think that’s what this is largely about at this point.
Click to expand...

If Ford turns out to be a fake or a plant, sure. That would be dirty politics.

If she's a woman who was assaulted by Kavanaugh, I'm not so sure one should dismiss it as politics.

McConnell warned Trump not to nominate him, that he'd have trouble getting confirmed.

Rumor has it there is about to be a second woman...

barfo
 
barfo said:
If Ford turns out to be a fake or a plant, sure. That would be dirty politics.

If she's a woman who was assaulted by Kavanaugh, I'm not so sure one should dismiss it as politics.

McConnell warned Trump not to nominate him, that he'd have trouble getting confirmed.

Rumor has it there is about to be a second woman...

barfo
Click to expand...

I’d agree with your first two paragraphs. Don’t know about the third. Don’t give a crap about rumors unless they are Blazers-related. I also think that ifFeinstein’s concern was finding out the truth she would have brought this forward in July. Pure politics.
 
Kavanaugh should be hiring a Defamation lawyer. Let Ford know she is going to be sued.
This gang of political hacks using her now are not about to help her when she gets sued.
 
And Avanatti says he has a third woman as a client.

barfo
 
MarAzul said:
Kavanaugh should be hiring a Defamation lawyer. Let Ford know she is going to be sued.
This gang of political hacks using her now are not about to help her when she gets sued.
Click to expand...

...c'mon man...I'm sure that has been taken into consideration and has been addressed.
 
MarAzul said:
Kavanaugh should be hiring a Defamation lawyer. Let Ford know she is going to be sued.
This gang of political hacks using her now are not about to help her when she gets sued.
Click to expand...

I don't agree with her being used as a political pawn. I don't like that the dems waited till the last moment to reveal this. That said, I am not going to discount her either. You think she should be bullied into submission. That is terrible Marz. At this point suing her will not stop her from revealing her truth.
 
You know the repblicans could have turned over those papers by now. There has been plenty of time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top