Archive 2017-2019 Political Thread

[gangstonc]

I believe something happened to Ford. Looking at Kavanaugh's Calendar, I do not believe he was involved.

I ask what proof you have of Kavanaugh and his lying about his partying ways?
How did he perjure himself in the first hearing?

It makes zero sense to you because you do not want Kavanaugh appointed.

They didn't meet with Ramirez because her story is completely unbelievable.

There are pictures of him partying. Also there is no way his Renate take is true.

I’ve covered that in earlier posts.

I wouldn’t have s problem with Kavanaugh if he wasn’t a liar and the fbi exonerated him.

We also know Mark Judge is a liar. Everybody in this thing is lying.
What’s the problem with ramirez’s Story?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/

 

[Matt]

There will be a new accuser before the day is done. Anyone want to bet ?

 

[Arcadia]

There are pictures of him partying. Also there is no way his Renate take is true.

I’ve covered that in earlier posts.

I wouldn’t have s problem with Kavanaugh if he wasn’t a liar and the fbi exonerated him.

We also know Mark Judge is a liar. Everybody in this thing is lying.
What’s the problem with ramirez’s Story?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/

I've covered some of the problems with Ramirez's story already. Are you even trying to be objective? Because they are pretty freaking obvious.

 

[gangstonc]

I've covered some of the problems with Ramirez's story already. Are you even trying to be objective? Because they are pretty freaking obvious.

I know it took her six days to remember and she was drunk, but I don't know of any others. I really don't feel qualified to guess on the accuracy of Ford's, Ramirez's, or Swetnick's stories. I want the FBI to investigate and I will trust them.

 

[ghost]

I only got to see about 30 min of Ford's testimony and about 30 min of Kavanaugh's. I've read a little bit of the transcripts and seen selected clips of each on Fox and MSNBC which I'm sure painted the candidates in the light the networks wanted them to be painted in. I know many of you have seen more and are more well versed in what was said. I have a couple of questions...
Did Kavanaugh ever express regret or remorse over all the excessive drinking he did back then? He seemed to be ok with that type of behavior but he may have said something different and I wasn't aware. Also did any of the Dems ask him if he would be ok and approve of his daughters attending one of his and Mark Judge's parties?

 

[Matt]

I also predict the new accuser ( or one of the next two or three) will be a friend of Ford’s that will remember the date and place of the party. It will be one of the few weekends where Kavanaugh’s calendar said he was not out of town. Bets anyone?

 

[ghost]

I also predict the new accuser ( or one of the next two or three) will be a friend of Ford’s that will remember the date and place of the party. It will be one of the few weekends where Kavanaugh’s calendar said he was not out of town. Bets anyone?

In this vindictive circus world of politics we live in, nothing would surprise me anymore.

 

[KoD]

Before I express my opinion I want readers to know that I didn't see much of the Ford testimony, and I saw a couple hours of the Kavanaugh testimony. Therefore my view point isn't entirely fair.
From the Kavanaugh hearing, it seemed to me that he gave direct, confident and short answers when responding to questions that related to gross sexual behavior or rape. When asked about alcohol, intoxication and "black outs" he responded much more vaguely with elaborated explanation/answers.

My read (opinion) on the situation is this:
Kavanaugh did get heavily intoxicated at times, and he is lying about it by saying it never happened.
Kavanaugh on several occasions got too drunk, and has poor recollection of some events that occurred at parties.
Kavanaugh may have acted inappropriately at these parties and may have been sexually aggressive
There's no hard evidence to prove Kavanaugh raped anyone.. nor will there ever be any.

I doubt that an FBI investigation will find anything that would convince a Judiciary body that there's undeniable proof that Kavanaugh is guilty or innocent, so I don't understand why anyone even wants to waste tax dollars on an FBI investigation. I'm even more puzzled as to why Democrats want one, while most Republicans don't. If I was a Republican, I would support the FBI investigation because there's no chance they would conclude with reasonable certainty that Kavanaugh is a rapist. They could put it behind them, say the FBI investigated, and push through the nominee with less irritation.
Although, if I were a Republican representative then it would look bad to call for an investigation. It would look better to let the democrats have their wish and simultaneously appear to be more bipartisan and cautious.

Politics aside, Kavanaugh doesn't represent my interests. I don't support him and I definitely don't like that Garland was denied a spot on the Supreme Court. I don't want Kavanaugh to be a justice because of his beliefs and his character. I feel like that's a fair and honest thought and as an American I'm free to have it and express it. I also don't believe that Kavanaugh raped that woman. I think he's lying, but not a rapist. Even though lying is better than raping, it's not enough to be Supreme Court material to me. I hope I would feel the same if the shoes were on the other feet. This position is incredibly important and only the best, brightest and bipartisan should be there.

 

[Evan]

Listen, if Feinstein cared about Ford she wouldn't have held the information for 6-8 weeks. She would have turned it over to be investigated. She. Did. Not. She waited until the eleventh hour and USED it as a POLITICAL WEAPON to stop the vote. That's what happened. That is the ugly truth. If you're upset that an investigation is not underway blame Feinstein.

As for Kavanaugh being a "proven liar" ... that's a bit of a stretch. Do you know for certain he lied about his yearbook? I don't. Evan is assuming he is lying about it - and maybe he is.... but it's not proven. Do you know what is proven? That Ford lied about her fear of flying. She also proved that she is terrible with remembering dates and times, even recent ones. She also doesn't know who paid for her polygraph, which I find odd. She can't remember if she took it the day of her grandmother's funeral or the day after. She's proven that her memory is not reliable. People thought she was credible. I didn't. Yesterday was not a court of law. That's a good thing for her, because her testimony would be dismantled rather easily. And in truth, the only reason anyone is listening to her now and taking her seriously at all is because of the political setting and what it could possibly mean. Because she has no evidence. It's political.

And this isn't directed at you gangstonc, but I wanted to say something about what people are saying about his anger and his tears yesterday. Because God forbid the man show he is a human being. The media, most of them, are despicable. I've listened to some say he threw a temper tantrum. I've listened to them say that "If a woman were to show that much emotion she would be accused of not being fit to be in a leadership role" and on and on and on. And it's all just crap. Yesterday, the media decided that whatever Kavanaugh did would be wrong. He was never in a position to win. Not enough emotion they would say he was detached and remote. Too much and he's too emotional for leadership. For ten days his character has been murdered with their help and for them to say...how dare he get angry! I suppose the only person allowed to show emotion is the woman. Well, if any of you are ever visciously attacked - called a rapist - accused of sexual assault - may I suggest that you keep your response measured. Don't show too much emotion. I mean, we're only talking about your life. No need to get carried away.

Yes, he is being considered for one of the highest positions in the land and should always behave in a professional manner. But he wasn't being vetted yestereday for his job skills. He was being accused of sexual assault. He's been accused of gang raping women. It was altogether personal. I think he's kept a cool head until now. What we saw yesterday was a human being behaving like a human being defending himself after days of character assassination. This attitude that he shouldn't have reacted this way is completely unfair. He had every reason to react this way. And unless you find yourself sitting in the same seat as he is, no one has the right to say how he should react.

It is proven that he's lying about the Renate stuff. Because there are other yearbook quotes by other males/Kavanaugh buddies that make much more explicit comments about Renate.

The New York Time's article quotes several classmates that say verbal comments were made about Renate. They also quote a couple of the Yearbook quotes. Renate, herself, is upset about the quotes. One of her friends, who also signed the letter supporting Kavanaugh, and still supports him, was "sickened" by the Renate references. I wasn't born yesterday. It was obvious they were saying she was a cheap date. One of them even SAYS so in Yearbook quote by saying: "“You need a date / and it’s getting late / so don’t hesitate / to call Renate.”

Obviously Renate who signed the letter of support, and her friend who also signed the letter, have zero reason to lie about what the comments meant -- even if you discount the 3-4 other people confirming that the comments were in line with unfair sexual implications about Renate, why would Renate and her friend confirm it? Again, I understand WHY he lied -- but I absolutely think it is proven.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/24/business/brett-kavanaugh-yearbook-renate.html

As far as the "blackout" from drinking stuff is concerned, I think there is a tiny bit of room for reasonable doubt about that but not much. Self-report studies show that at LEAST 50% of college students in a survey/study reported blacking out from drinking at some point in their life. 40% had blacked out in the past year -- that's out of 74.2% of students overall that had reported drinking in the past two weeks. We don't know if these were en-bloc blackouts (where basically nothing is recalled) or a fragmentary blackout where only part of memories are lost. Self-report surveys about negative drinking behavior are notorious for underreporting even when anonymous.

The most common and important factors for blacking out are binge drinking, adolescence (say early 20s and younger), drinking on an empty stomach, how quickly someone drinks, total amount of alcohol consumed, and the social pressure around you (if others are drinking excessive amounts of alcohol). Obviously Kavanaugh was young. Obviously at least one close friend (Mark Judge) was a heavy drinker, and from testimony and other accounts (such as Judge's book or Kavanaugh being part of the Ralph Club), we know Kavanaugh consumed large amounts of alcohol and at least on one occasion threw up because of it. That implies a fairly quick consumption of alcohol and almost assuredly a high BAC.

Take it all together, and I feel very confident in saying the chance Kavanaugh had at least one blackout in his life was easily 85%+. Look, I've been a male HS student that went to parties and drank. And I also drank in college. I also have plenty of friends that did the same. I don't know of a single one of us that hasn't ever at least partially blacked out. Perhaps Kavanaugh felt he was being truthful because he only had a fragmentary blackout as he possibly could've remembered at least SOME of the prior evening. I can perhaps give him the benefit of the doubt on that. It was obvious that the Dems were asking him that question to suggest that maybe he was blacked out and didn't remember sexually assaulting Ford. He's a very intelligent man -- he knew what they were trying to do. He's probably also aware that "blackout" doesn't mean a total memory loss. At best, I think his response was misleading. It wasn't completely truthful. Again, I wasn't born yesterday.

https://www.verywellmind.com/social-drinkers-can-blackout-too-62810
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20180613-why-do-only-some-people-get-blackout-drunk
https://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/arh27-2/186-196.htm
https://www.alcohol.org/effects/dangers-of-blackouts/
https://scholars.duke.edu/display/pub801394
https://www.centeronaddiction.org/the-buzz-blog/science-behind-blacking-out

As far as the Devil's Triangle thing. I noticed later on that other people had the same idea as I did. I scoured Google using the date setting and couldn't find a single mention of Devil's Triangle as a drinking game vs. common usage of other terms to describe the drinking game that Kavanaugh claimed he was referring to. Again, it is possible it was some esoteric inside joke. I won't discount that. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on that one even though I believe there are at least two examples of him lying or being untruthful on topics that relate to the same kind of question.

Again, I understand why Kavanaugh thought he had to be misleading because he was facing total character assassination. I also understand why the GOP kept resisting an FBI investigation even though it might've been a smarter choice for them. I'm about to post something about that.

 

[Evan]

I haven't had a chance to read anything today about the response to Flake's decision to support Kavanaugh with the caveat of a FBI investigation as I've been away from the internet all day, but I think this might be one of the most incredible political moves since Trump tore through the GOP to win the Presidency. Kavanaugh's legitimacy was going to suffer if he was confirmed. There's just no two ways about it. The Republicans also were likely to face some serious issues with Independents and GOP moderates/females if Kavanaugh was pushed through with unresolved questions and without meeting even one of the demands by the Democrats. Fair or unfair, it would've played out that way.

The GOP was pretty boxed in by how every thing happened at the last minute. If they gave in to a FBI investigation it is likely the base would revolt and potentially punish incumbents. Additionally, Trump may lose his mind and go off on the Senate leaders. Flake is about to retire. He's despised by most Trump supporters and even big portions of the GOP base. The fact the he is calling for the investigation with the caveat that he'll confirm if nothing turns up (and it is time limited to one week to prevent the Democrats from stringing it out) directs any fire from the base towards him.

But, here's the most important thing. The Democrats SOLD OUT yesterday on one major request. They wanted the FBI to investigate. They said repeatedly that is the only way that the accusers will have been fairly heard. That is the only way that the process is fair. They also had a lesser demand that Mark Judge be subpoenaed because they wanted him under oath. They were going to batter the GOP with that during the midterms and batter Kavanaugh with that for his entire time on SCOTUS. Additionally, it is possible that Collins, Murkowski, etc might end up caving causing the nomination to collapse. Flake took the Democrat's only AND best weapon away from them. Their demands are being met. The FBI is going to investigate. Mark Judge has promised to cooperate with them and be interviewed. Everything they asked for is now being met. Their ability to cry that Kavanaugh is illegitimate or was rushed through has been politically neutered. Also important, it was a GOP committee member that made this request -- again that further neuters the Democrats ability to cry foul or continue to stall. Finally, one of the worst potential scenarios was for the GOP to push through this nomination and then something truly damning to turn up that could NOT be explained away. The GOP alone would be on the hook in that case. Now, they can turn around and say: "Hey, even the FBI couldn't find it. We held a hearing for the accuser, we asked the FBI to investigate Kavanaugh again, talk to Mark Judge, and interview all three accusers. They couldn't substantiate anything. We followed the process and all the demands of the Democrats."

Obviously, one other scenario remains. Let's say the FBI does find something. Well, again, the GOP won't take the hit they might have taken. If the FBI can uncover it in a week, it was likely to come out anyway. Best that a GOP committeeman be the one who called for the investigation and that the GOP paused the nomination process. We did what we were supposed to do. Better it come out in the next week or so than right before the midterms or six months into his term when a case of huge consequence is being decided.

I don't know that Flake had all this in mind when he decided to caveat his support, but I don't think this was Flake's decision alone. The other GOP Senators and the committee could've told him to go pound sand. Either support the nominee or live with having not confirmed a consequential Conservative justice. I think the GOP realized that the Democrats had stupidly sold out on an FBI investigation and left their flank unguarded. Flake was the perfect messenger because he's retiring and he's on the judiciary committee. Bottom line: the Democrats played themselves. Unless something absolutely damning is found about Kavanaugh, they've shot all the ammunition that they have. Even if something is found, the GOP is exponentially more protected from backlash and consequences than they were 12 hours before he announced his caveat. Again, I think it is an absolutely brilliant political move, and anyone that wants to see a Conservative justice on SCOTUS (especially Kavanaugh) should be praising Jeff Flake like crazy right now. He stopped the GOP from potentially screwing up the most consequential judicial nomination of the past 50 years.

 

[Evan]

Wow, so I've caught up a little bit now. Republicans are actually mad at Flake? I think people are too angry or too emotional to think coherently right now. From what I've read Flake didn't do this for strategic purposes. So, clearly, the strategic advantages his FBI caveat gives weren't intentional. That's actually pretty funny. Those protesters, one who was much more upset because baby-killing might be limited in future SCOTUS rulings than anything else, might have single-handedly saved Kavanaugh AND the GOP. Unintended consequences can be so incredibly ironic and cruel.

I can't believe people are upset with Flake and don't see how his move is actually a brilliant coup even if completely unintentional. I just saw a couple of polls that provide support for why Flake's move may be the salvation the GOP desperately needed.

https://mavenroundtable.io/theintel...ns-over-the-last-week-ng7X30bggkS7RRD47qVL2Q/

Huge drop in support of Kavanaugh by GOP women. Almost 20%. Trump also experienced a major drop in support by GOP women. A FBI investigation, especially since that was the one major ask of the Democrats, should definitely assuage most of those GOP female voters. Of additional importance, Kavanaugh was underwater with Independents. A clear and updated FBI background investigation should flip that around quite nicely.

I noticed that the Democrats went from crowing that Flake was agreeing with them to suddenly backing away once they realized Flake's plan would be a deathknell for their plans to obstruct and delay so that they can keep the seat open. OOPS. Too bad, they spoke out clearly yesterday that this is what they wanted. They also were happy with the plan and Coons agreed to it earlier today. Now they are saying a week might not be long enough. I think the FBI will feel the pressure and get it done. Long term... the one concern for me about this plan is that may cause more politicization of the FBI.

 

[KoD]

I couldn't agree more Evan. I never understood why there would be calls for an FBI investigation by Kavanaugh opposition. What's the end game? There's no compelling evidence, only conflicting testimonials. This seems like a big opportunity for Republicans and Kavanaugh supporters to get the ball in their court and make a slam dunk. Do the Dems have a plan?

 

[Mike S]

The problem with this investigation is the folks on the left aren't going to accept any findings unless Kavanaugh is implicated. The following tweet is just one of many that mention the investigation and voting no, as if the outcome is predetermined. The FBI can find nothing and the vote will still be 51-49 and those on the left will still not be happy.

 

[Evan]

I couldn't agree more Evan. I never understood why there would be calls for an FBI investigation by Kavanaugh opposition. What's the end game? There's no compelling evidence, only conflicting testimonials. This seems like a big opportunity for Republicans and Kavanaugh supporters to get the ball in their court and make a slam dunk. Do the Dems have a plan?

I think their plan was to use each allegation as an excuse to delay and hope that more impossible to prove/disprove allegations pop-up so that the totality of it gives them ammo to say "This man has too many characters issues/question marks. He can't be approved."

We already saw what appears to be GOP partisans or trolls attempting to take the blame for attempted sexual assault on Ford. Those were the ones Graham mentioned as being not credible.

Dem partisans, nutjobs, and attention seekers won't be above lodging new allegations to try to derail this thing. Avenatti's client is clearly such a fabricator. I don't think even the Dems believe a word she claimed.

There are people that are so hyped and worried about Roe that they will say and do anything to derail Kavanaugh. I'm surprised it took as long as it did.

I respect your position here. You disagree on policy, but see that there's no credible evidence to prove these claims, and know that we cannot have a standard of forcing people to prove their innocence when that clearly can't be done - especially with old and foggy accusations like the ones that have been made.

A very good friend of mine is a liberal Progressive and absolutely cannot stand the GOP. He's pro-abortion. He believes these accusations and forcing Kavanaugh to prove his innocence is insane. I had not talked with him about this subject at all. He called me yesterday and told me this on his own without me saying anything.

I believe people can call for more investigation in good faith, and a week long investigation by the FBI is a good demarcation point for those who are being honest that they just want to see a little more soil turned over. Those that continue to want investigations and demand more - if the FBI returns with largely what already known, are not acting in good faith.

We cannot set a standard that any political office, justice nomination, or high profile job can be derailed by any old acquaintance, or someone who was a friend of a friend, who makes an accusation without evidence and signicant corroboration.

 

[Evan]

The problem with this investigation is the folks on the left aren't going to accept any findings unless Kavanaugh is implicated. The following tweet is just one of many that mention the investigation and voting no, as if the outcome is predetermined. The FBI can find nothing and the vote will still be 51-49 and those on the left will still not be happy.

That's totally fine. They'll never be convinced. Polls showed something like 27% believe Kavanaugh, 31% believe Ford, and 42% don't know what to think. You can easily chip 1-2% away from those that believe Ford with a FBI investigation, but the real fertile land is that of the 42%. A FBI investigation can probably whittle down undecideds to 20% or less. Then you have a majority, and that's huge for both the midterms and Kavanaugh's legacy.

 

[Kory]

This is the same FBI that threw their hands up in confusion after investigating the Las Vegas massacre and eventually couldn't come to a conclusion outside of "no motive and random act of violence." Yeah, gives me confidence they can reasonably come to a conclusion in a week about an allegation with very fuzzy details from 1982.

 

[ARCC]

That's totally fine. They'll never be convinced. Polls showed something like 27% believe Kavanaugh, 31% believe Ford, and 42% don't know what to think. You can easily chip 1-2% away from those that believe Ford with a FBI investigation, but the real fertile land is that of the 42%. A FBI investigation can probably whittle down undecideds to 20% or less. Then you have a majority, and that's huge for both the midterms and Kavanaugh's legacy.

The polls may be right, but I think that 42% number is baloney. It's hard for me to believe that many people is undecided. Now if that number consists also of people who don't care at all and those who are afraid to give their opinion, it may be right. I am in the camp that that all the investigation will do is waste time and not change any opinion unless something drastic is found. Maybe you are right, but the only way I see this helping mid terms is if the nomination drags out until the elections.

 

[Evan]

This is the same FBI that threw their hands up in confusion after investigating the Las Vegas massacre and eventually couldn't come to a conclusion outside of "no motive and random act of violence." Yeah, gives me confidence they can reasonably come to a conclusion in a week about an allegation with very fuzzy details from 1982.

This is not entirely true. They had the BAU do a psychological profile. They know POSSIBLE motives, as does Las Vegas Sheriff's department who has mentioned some, but say they cannot definitively narrow it down. No one has been able to come to a concrete conclusion. I don't believe the BAU has released the psychological profile yet, but they are slated to do so before EOY.

https://www.ktnv.com/news/las-vegas-sheriff-to-discuss-final-report-for-1-october-mass-shooting

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.re...egas-shooting-unable-to-determine-motive/amp/

A lot of people have said this investigation is "different" with the claim "we always find out motive" but that just isn't accurate. There are lots of cases of spree killers, mass murderers, or crimes of signicant notoriety in which a definitive motive is never uncovered. It isn't that uncommon when the perpetrator is dead and doesn't leave a manifesto or some other type of communication.

 

[ghost]

As far as the Devil's Triangle thing. I noticed later on that other people had the same idea as I did. I scoured Google using the date setting and couldn't find a single mention of Devil's Triangle as a drinking game vs. common usage of other terms to describe the drinking game that Kavanaugh claimed he was referring to..

If you search Devil's Triangle using the Urban Dictionary it refers to sexual encounters... different types of sexual encounters but sexual activities none the less. Refer to the definitions posted years ago (2008 and 2011). Discount the ones posted this week since they are obviously politically motivated.

 

[Evan]

If Ford was really assaulted by Kavanaugh, then it’s not a tactic. We will never know because a proper investigation won’t be done.

Kavanaugh has proven he’s a liar. Let Trump nominate somebody else. The Dems let gorsuch through.

I would contend this is just as much a republican tactic to protect trump as anything else. Was he on any short lists before Mueller started turning up the heat? What’s the difference between Kavanaugh and other conservative judges? What role does his view on presidential power have?

I missed part of what you said earlier. The Democrats did NOT let Gorsuch through. They filibustered him for zero reason. He was imminently well-qualified. There were zero questions about his judicial temperament, no accusations against him, and no accusation of partisan bias.

So, no, the Dems didn't let Gorsuch through. They made it clear that they would oppose any nominee to the court, and they've continued that with Kavanaugh. But, they knew, along with liberal activists and liberal partisans in the legal community, that they'd be powerless to stop the next nominee because McConnell nuked the filibuster. They would need SOMETHING else to stop Kavanaugh.

That's why the Democrat's motives here are so questionable, and in my view, are totally transparent. They want to stop Kavanaugh at any cost.