Kavanaugh's SC Confirmation Hearings
- Thread starter Clean
- Start date
Wow, sort of like the George Constanta rule, “is it wrong?”.
Those incidents we are hearing about are not 'boys will be boys' or incidents from high school. They are cases where the conduct was clearly associated with impropriety by a male that had the power to tank someone's career, or at least seriously damage it.
There was no such dynamic here. She isn't an attorney over whom Kavanaugh could have denied partnership to nor was he someone in the position to damage her ability to get into graduate school. They were two classmates. If there was ANYTHING beyond political animus to be had here, she would have spoken up when he was nominated for the lower courts. But not a peep came then. Instead, we get a very politically motivated bombshell that surfaces ONLY after the confirmation seemed to be a done deal.
Contrary to what the left would have people believe, there have indeed been females speaking about abuse for years. The current floodgate is no doubt motivated by reasons that are less than pure in their basis...
I don't believe he was an offender even in this one allegation. Simply put, the facts, as they have appeared thus far, amount to a showing that it has been invented for political gain. I would hold the same opinion even if I were inclined to vote for more people with a D beside their name instead of an R. And I hold this opinion as a female who HAS been the victim of assault by someone who had a semblance of power...if you know who won one of the early WSOP events, then you will know who it was. They have since passed away. While the property where the conduct occurred did little about it, it was at least placed on record and not held back for multiple years...
No, it would be a she said vs he said + another he said bullsh..!
I am surprised Dems have not found a female witness who suddenly remembers she was there and saw it all.
The one they did try flubbed it by saying it was the talk of the school when it was supposed to be summer And the accuser said she never told anyone.
I do not think the Dems are through with slinging poop.
The one they did try flubbed it by saying it was the talk of the school when it was supposed to be summer And the accuser said she never told anyone.
I do not think the Dems are through with slinging poop.
Clean
5,000+ Posts
yes, do tell. That case has all kinds of physical evidence, unlike this one.
Because Ellison is a Dem
No..... That can't possibly be right.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
I take issue with the inference that Left = Democrats. One is a political partner the other is a reference to an ideology. I could care less about Ellison but would point to others where the left has forced out politicians and business leaders. Al Franken would be one good example of many. Would you be so polite to show me where the right has believed the woman (women in Moore's and Trump's case) and pushed the Conservative leader aside?
ProdigalHorn
10,000+ Posts
"Al Franken would be one good example of many."
That's just ridiculous. They were lock-step in line in favor of Franken until almost exactly on the same day, people started stepping up saying he should resign. It was a complete about-face, and clearly the marching orders went out that if they give up Franken, they can try to leverage it against Trump - which is exactly what they tried to do.
To your other question, the GOP gave up a layup senate seat in Alabama based on #MeToo charges. If you're going to argue that it wasn't unanimous across the party (including Trump) then you'll have to apply that standard both ways. But ultimately GOP voters rejected him.
The GOP basically cut Ted Stevens loose (not for harassment) when he was indicted (and as it turned out, he was cleared.) I frankly can't think of a GOP congressman who has stayed in office despite actual, serious, credible charges.
The Dems have a laundry list of "deplorables" who have stayed in power and flourished, or left on their own terms - i.e. Maxine Waters, John Conyers, Barney Frank, Bob Menendez, Ted Kennedy, and more. Anthony Weiner literally had an episode of Parks and Rec written based on his case, where they came out and explained why he was being railroaded and it was no big deal.
And of course you could "care less" about Ellison. He's an inconvenience and destroys your narrative.
That's just ridiculous. They were lock-step in line in favor of Franken until almost exactly on the same day, people started stepping up saying he should resign. It was a complete about-face, and clearly the marching orders went out that if they give up Franken, they can try to leverage it against Trump - which is exactly what they tried to do.
To your other question, the GOP gave up a layup senate seat in Alabama based on #MeToo charges. If you're going to argue that it wasn't unanimous across the party (including Trump) then you'll have to apply that standard both ways. But ultimately GOP voters rejected him.
The GOP basically cut Ted Stevens loose (not for harassment) when he was indicted (and as it turned out, he was cleared.) I frankly can't think of a GOP congressman who has stayed in office despite actual, serious, credible charges.
The Dems have a laundry list of "deplorables" who have stayed in power and flourished, or left on their own terms - i.e. Maxine Waters, John Conyers, Barney Frank, Bob Menendez, Ted Kennedy, and more. Anthony Weiner literally had an episode of Parks and Rec written based on his case, where they came out and explained why he was being railroaded and it was no big deal.
And of course you could "care less" about Ellison. He's an inconvenience and destroys your narrative.
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Did you just infer sexual assault by 17yr old boys is acceptable or excusable? Lifetime appt. to the Supreme Court...the highest in the land. Expecting nominees to be "clean" over a lifetime is simply too much these days. Sad.
That wasn't sexual assault. At worst, going along with the highly dubious assumption that this woman is being truthful, this was a teenage makeout session that went past the girls comfort zone.
When you distort the definition of sexual assault to include 35 year old make out sessions, the term sexual assault loses practically all meaning. So because the term has no meaning, I absolutely will say sexual assault by 17 year old boys is acceptable.
When you define the term properly, then sure, we can revisit whether or not I would support such actions.
When you define the term properly, then sure, we can revisit whether or not I would support such actions.
I made no such inference. But I can see where someone incapable of looking at a situation from a rational viewpoint would take the statement out of context.
I DON'T expect a nominee to have been squeaky clean. He is basically my age and I know what my junior high and high school years were like. I DO expect them to be free from criminal allegations that can actually be proven to have occurred and that actually speak to propensity to engage in felonious conduct, just as I expect members of Congress to be free from such allegations. If he drank or perhaps inhaled back then is something I really don't care about. What we lack in this scenario is ANY manner of actual proof that he engaged in the conduct alleged by the DiFi crowd...I've got ZERO problems with his confirmation.
Which, by the way, brings us back to Ellison...when are you beginning your push for his investigation and resignation? Or does his conduct not matter since he is a Democrat?
Just curious, but did you think that Clinton should have been removed from office?
Did you just infer that a blatant lie, refuted by two of the alleged party attendees named by the accuser as witnesses, and supported by zero evidence offered by the accuser who also refuses to testify, should be given credibility?
Seattle Husker
10,000+ Posts
Left = Democrat...again? I'll quote myself.
Some of y'all are so steeped in your party lines. To answer the question...yes, the left did push Al Franken out regardless of initial support by his Senate peers.
My reference was to the #MeToo movement and sexual assault alegations. Not sure what any of those other malfeasance examples have to do with my reference. I'm going to assume you simply jumped into "defend my tribe" mode for the moment.
I'll give you credit that a small subset of conservative Alabama voters did vote against Roy Moore. Kudos to those individuals for giving credit to his accusers and answering with their vote. Their vote ultimately spoke louder than the members of this board and local Alabamans that defended Moore vociferously. In the end, he still got nearly 50% of the vote.
I thought Moore was accused of icky behavior, not assault.
OK, a few thoughts on the above discussion. First, the comparison between Ellison and Kavanaugh is laughably weak for the simple reason that the allegation against Ellison has dramatically more credibility. The Ellison allegations are much more recent. When Kavanaugh supposedly attacked this woman, Lawerence Welk still had a TV show. Why does that matter? Because memories get less reliable and evidence diminishes over time, and we can see that in how hazy her story is. It's why we have statutes of limitations.
In addition, there's actual evidence of a relationship between Ellison and his accuser. There's no evidence that Kavanaugh even knew this woman. I could just as easily claim that Kavanaugh grabbed my nuts and have just as much credibility as this woman.
Furthermore, Ellison's accuser isn't a political adversary of his. Kavanaugh's accuser is a political adversary, and she has behaved as such. Did she go to people who could actually press charges against Kavanaugh? No. She went to Democratic members of Congress so they could exploit it.
Finally, Ellison has been accused by multiple women which is far more consistent with abuse. Kavanaugh supposedly attacked this woman in high school and ended the pattern with that one incident. How many guys get slobbering drunk and jump one chick in high school and then go through college and law school (where he has dramatically more opportunity to get drunk and jump chicks) and never do it again? Not many. In my 27 years of following politics, I've never seen an allegation that was so flimsy but taken so seriously. If you dismissed Paula Jones and Juanita Broderick but take this seriously, you've got serious consistency problems.
Second, I'll say it again. Democrats do not have more moral authority on this issue than Republicans do. Yes, they've shitanned some of their own, but they haven't done it when they actually had something to lose. And when the issue came up when they did have something to lose (Bill Clinton), they rallied around him and crapped on his accusers and still crap on them to this day. If Joe Donnelly was accused of sexual harassment, does anyone really think the Democratic Party would throw him under the bus and forfeit his Senate seat to a Republican? Hell friggin' no.
Third, making a sexual assault allegation does not give you any special right to be believed or respected. Why not? Because people lie. Your allegation should be treated like any other criminal allegation and should be subjected to the same degree of scrutiny. And if you're story is false, you're not entitled to anybody's respect or sympathy. You're not a victim. You're a fraud.. In fact, you deserve condemnation and judgment. It would be as if I I put a wheelchair in my trunk and roll around parking lots in it so I could hustle good parking spaces, got caught by the police, and then tried to shame him for being mean to handicapped people. It's moronic on its face.
Finally, not believing a particular accuser doesn't mean you are less sympathetic to sexual assault victims in general, and kneejerk choosing to believe all accusers doesn't make you more sympathetic either and doesn't make you virtuous. It just makes you stupid (and nobody actually does that anyway). Let somebody accuse Stephen Breyer of sexual assault while Trump is in the White House, and let's see how quick Democrats are to believe her.
The reality is that not only can you pick and choose based on evidence and credibility, if you truly care about doing justice, you have to pick and choose. Were the Roy Moore allegations true? I think they were, even if I didn't like throwing away a Senate seat. But they added up and were supported by patterns and evidence. Unless some enormous piece of evidence turns up, the allegations against Kavanaugh are unsubstantiated nonsense, laughably flimsy, and the cheapest political stunt I think I've ever seen. (Actually, the way they were handled by Feinstein, they were a pretty cheap political stunt even if they're true.)
In addition, there's actual evidence of a relationship between Ellison and his accuser. There's no evidence that Kavanaugh even knew this woman. I could just as easily claim that Kavanaugh grabbed my nuts and have just as much credibility as this woman.
Furthermore, Ellison's accuser isn't a political adversary of his. Kavanaugh's accuser is a political adversary, and she has behaved as such. Did she go to people who could actually press charges against Kavanaugh? No. She went to Democratic members of Congress so they could exploit it.
Finally, Ellison has been accused by multiple women which is far more consistent with abuse. Kavanaugh supposedly attacked this woman in high school and ended the pattern with that one incident. How many guys get slobbering drunk and jump one chick in high school and then go through college and law school (where he has dramatically more opportunity to get drunk and jump chicks) and never do it again? Not many. In my 27 years of following politics, I've never seen an allegation that was so flimsy but taken so seriously. If you dismissed Paula Jones and Juanita Broderick but take this seriously, you've got serious consistency problems.
Second, I'll say it again. Democrats do not have more moral authority on this issue than Republicans do. Yes, they've shitanned some of their own, but they haven't done it when they actually had something to lose. And when the issue came up when they did have something to lose (Bill Clinton), they rallied around him and crapped on his accusers and still crap on them to this day. If Joe Donnelly was accused of sexual harassment, does anyone really think the Democratic Party would throw him under the bus and forfeit his Senate seat to a Republican? Hell friggin' no.
Third, making a sexual assault allegation does not give you any special right to be believed or respected. Why not? Because people lie. Your allegation should be treated like any other criminal allegation and should be subjected to the same degree of scrutiny. And if you're story is false, you're not entitled to anybody's respect or sympathy. You're not a victim. You're a fraud.. In fact, you deserve condemnation and judgment. It would be as if I I put a wheelchair in my trunk and roll around parking lots in it so I could hustle good parking spaces, got caught by the police, and then tried to shame him for being mean to handicapped people. It's moronic on its face.
Finally, not believing a particular accuser doesn't mean you are less sympathetic to sexual assault victims in general, and kneejerk choosing to believe all accusers doesn't make you more sympathetic either and doesn't make you virtuous. It just makes you stupid (and nobody actually does that anyway). Let somebody accuse Stephen Breyer of sexual assault while Trump is in the White House, and let's see how quick Democrats are to believe her.
The reality is that not only can you pick and choose based on evidence and credibility, if you truly care about doing justice, you have to pick and choose. Were the Roy Moore allegations true? I think they were, even if I didn't like throwing away a Senate seat. But they added up and were supported by patterns and evidence. Unless some enormous piece of evidence turns up, the allegations against Kavanaugh are unsubstantiated nonsense, laughably flimsy, and the cheapest political stunt I think I've ever seen. (Actually, the way they were handled by Feinstein, they were a pretty cheap political stunt even if they're true.)
That's gold, Jerry! Gold!
Mr D
My concern is Dems/leftists will find other people to suddenly remember incidents.
Yes they would eventually be discredited but how long before this good man decides he does not need the continual crap being spewed by Dems/leftists?
In the meantime
Seattle Husker
I am still waiting for the left to treat Ellison the same way they are treating Kavanaugh IF as you said the left believes any woman's claim?
Isn't Karen Monohan a woman? Why do you think he is getting a pass?
My concern is Dems/leftists will find other people to suddenly remember incidents.
Yes they would eventually be discredited but how long before this good man decides he does not need the continual crap being spewed by Dems/leftists?
In the meantime
Seattle Husker
I am still waiting for the left to treat Ellison the same way they are treating Kavanaugh IF as you said the left believes any woman's claim?
Isn't Karen Monohan a woman? Why do you think he is getting a pass?
Wait...Kavanaugh grabbed some of DeezNuts?
Hey, SOME manner of levity was needed here...
You'll forgive me but some of us have better sense than to buy into 40 year old allegations that come out of nowhere.
Last edited:
The democrats are fighting this using all means necessary because the leftist progressives are taking over the party. They simply want to delay this to hopefully get past the midterms and possibly gain control. It's politics. It's disgusting. It's the fall of our republic.
I35
5,000+ Posts
You got to be kidding me? Sexual assault?
Unbelievable that everyone here can see what a joke this is and the guy that has the party as the joke and is defending them no matter what, is accusing others on this board of being steep in their party line. I only see one person being strep in his party line.
On a side note it’s actually hilarious for the Dems to be asking what’s the hurry to have Ms Ford testify? Well she’s had over 35 years to testify, it might as well finally get it done on Monday. Of course we know she won’t testify no matter to how many demands she’s making are met.
Weekly Prediction Contest
* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC
Recent Threads
-
Black Lives Matter; The Cerebral Warlords of Our Time
- Started by iatrogenic
- Replies: 1K
- West Mall
-
The Media Industry
- Started by texas_ex2000
- Replies: 8K
- West Mall
-
President Biden Accountability Thread
- Started by 2003TexasGrad
- Replies: 4K
- West Mall
Prediction Results Threads
