I'm confused
 

Is Kavanaugh a metaphor for what we go back to if Kavanaugh is confirmed?

Oh thanks, now I'm confused too.:o

if Kav is confirmed everything stays the same
 

Mebbe the commies don't take over so quickly, but, other than that, nuthin' changes.

Right, if Kavanaugh is confirmed everything stays fucked up.

better the status quo than the absolute hell of commies in control
 

:neutral:

Better tell that to the Repug Congress and their fearful leader. :eyebrow:

Kavanaugh

The most controversial sound I ever heard:
Kavanaugh, Kavanaugh, Kavanaugh, Kavanaugh
All the controversial sounds of the words
In a single word:
Kavanaugh, Kavanaugh, Kavanaugh, Kavanaugh

Kavanaugh!
I've just remembered a boy named Kavanaugh,
And suddenly that name
Will never be the same
To the committee.

Kavanaugh!
I've just smeared a man named Kavanaugh,
And suddenly I've found
How malicious a sound
Can be!

Kavanaugh!
Say it loud and the world's smallest violin is playing,
Say it soft and it's almost like defaming.

Kavanaugh,
I'll never stop accusing Kavanaugh!
The most controversial sound I ever heard.

Kavanaugh.

Or he's a frat boy who has been shielded from consequences his entire life. Maybe there should be a serious investigation before he gets a life-time appointment to the highest court in the land.

Chris Wallace on Fox News recently noted that, because of family conversations that this hearing has sparked, two of his daughters told him stories he'd never heard before about incidents that personally happened to them in high school.

He now thinks we should take Christine Blasey Ford's allegations seriously.

The bitter side of this is that old men have no empathy unless it's brought home to them in a personal, concrete way. The hopeful side is that it can be brought home, if the women in their lives are willing to speak the truth to them.

I definitely have ambivalent feelings when someone makes an announcement like that. It's great that that person gained some empathy, but why was that required? Can he apply that newfound empathy to other subjects that don't personally affect him? Is there any way for his newfound empathy to be spread to others with a similar mindset, or does every one of them need to be personally affected themselves?


But that's only hopeful because of the tragic fact that it's depressingly likely that women in their lives have some truth of this sort to tell.

All I wanna know is...
 

...where's the beef?

If there ain't no beef to show then all the claims of beef don't mean jackshit.

Ain't no sensible person buyin' beef sight unseen.

-----

*Confirm, don't confirm: **meh

Buy into this crapsack of a woman? No fuckin' way.









*to be clear: I don't give a flip about Kav so dumbshits (hi, tw!) need to shut the fuck up in advance...call me misogynist or misanthrope, I don't care; throw up that tired 'extremist' bullshit and I'll find you and shoot you in the ass, two barrels of rock salt...seriously, you fuckin' retard: don't do it

**if what's 'round the corner is really 'round the corner then all this means less than nuthin'

hq

Your declared level of care and the vigor and volume of your declaration are way out of proportion.

Sometimes, it's not what you say but how you say it that communicates more truthfully.

Supreme Court justices can be impeached.

"Your declared level of care and the vigor and volume of your declaration are way out of proportion."

As a warning to tw (or any other nimrod) everything of mine syncs up perfectly.

#

"Sometimes, it's not what you say but how you say it that communicates more truthfully."

Yeah? Then -- by way of 'how' I say what I say -- it should be apparent I can't stand tw.

Anything else you wanna read into it is your problem, bub.

Much easier not to put them there, I'd assume. Trump has ah... binders of judges. I'm sure he has someone more judicious than the guy we heard from today.

Dr. Ford sounded legit. Whether Pelosi sat on her information is another question. I'd need to see the time-line. Proportional response to the Garland move? It is a hardball play but proportional as long as Dr. Ford is for real.

"Dr. Ford sounded legit"

they both did ~ but that shouldn't be enough evidence for anyone, right?

Definitely not. But if one side took a lie detector test and actively wants the FBI to investigate, while the other side is refusing to do either... I'm on the side that is in favor of more evidence-gathering.

It's not my opinion that both sounded legit. Kavanagh sounded evasive and butthurt.

Also.... If Ford is lying why doesn't Kavanaugh sue her for defamation?

Feinstein, not Pelosi.

But yes, even if the Democrats did try to pull a mini-Garland and delay the vote a week, that has no bearing on the veracity of Ford.


Ford answered every question directly and as the questioner intended the question to be interpreted, and is requesting further investigation, to gather more evidence. The opposite is true for Kavanaugh.



And the football team calling themselves the "alumni" of a girl means they were her pals? No. Just no. They were claiming they had sex with her. I expect they were lying then, but he was definitely lying in the hearing.

Lying?

Hahahaha.

Google Devil's Triangle and tell me how far down the search results you have to go to get to the "drinking game".

Whoopsie!

Turns out, there have been recent edits to The Internet to match Kavanagh's description.

Talk about fitting the data to the conclusion....

~ but that shouldn't be enough evidence for anyone, right?

I mean I can't see high school broheim lingo is proof of anything worthwhile, other than you figure he might have gotten his buddies to beat us up in high school.

Personally I'm over that wretched time period, but are you guys ok?

Appreciate what is happening here. First, other Republicans were screaming that they would be punished in November if the hearings were not conducted with Senatorial courtesy.

Second, no committee Senator will be swayed. This entire presentation only targets some moderate Republican Senators.

Third, question is quite simple. Does behavior in high school and college have any relevance to qualification of a judge? This behavior was acceptable even some years ago. Harvey Weinstein changed that. So, is behavior that is unacceptable for adults today relevant to what someone did in high school and college? Does that behavior define core values of the man?

A few moderate Republican Senators will be the only ones answering that question. Only one is on the committee.

Definitely not enough for a legal proceeding. However, there is enough there for a more serious look if you're getting a lifetime appointment.

Temperament is an issue. Can this guy deal fairly with the political cases that come before the court? Throwing the Clinton red meat out there looks to me either politically calculated or paranoid. I want someone coolly looking at the law. Can this guy do that?

For the record I'm over high school but is the nominee?



https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/...f-the-clintons

I would guess this makes him very attractive to the base, pretty repulsive to mainline Democrats, and a real problem for Joe Manchin.

SC justices can be impeached.

We could judge him on his body of work, on the 12 years on the second-highest court but... ah that is pretty irrelevant I guess. There's apparently nothing to see there (or we would have already gotten an earful about it)

Lying under oath multiple times yesterday, plus multiple times earlier in the process (see links in first paragraph). His body of work was discussed in that earlier process, during which he lied. This was a hearing specifically about the sexual assault, which is why it wasn't discussed there.

He sounded, appeared, tentative and timid. He had no fire in his belly.

She sounded, appeared, wounded and fragile. She had no fire in her belly.

Neither was credible, neither convincing.

As performance art: the whole event gets a half a star out of a possible ten stars.

As a means of sussin' out the truth: zero out of a possible ten.

We know not one goddamned thing more today than we did at the beginning of yesterday.

Led by the nose we are, not by beef but only by the promise of beef, to one of two troughs where we're expected to drink deep and shut the fuck up.

No, nope, forget that noise.

I say Trump should dump Kav and find a woman of comparabe experience...vet the hell out of her...have the vetting be public.

Then bring her before the committee and dare the bastids to wreck her...make them vote on 'her' and not on an accusation about her.

I'll buy the earlier in the process issues -- and it would be nice if the committee actually cared. But lying about high school yearbook terminology? Bill Clinton should *definitely* have been impeached, if that is the standard. I don't think he should have been impeached, do you?

The high school yearbook lies were just a few of the most obvious ones. He also repeatedly claimed that he was of a legal drinking age, even though he missed the cutoff when they raised it in Maryland.



And we seem to have slid from "Ford and Kavanaugh were both legit" to "Kavanaugh's most obvious lies were about trivial things".

Clinton *was definitely* impeached, you could look it up.

Trump *could be* impeached, how's that workin out?

Kavanaugh's behavior as a young person is germane, for a couple reasons. One, what he did and how he's addressing it *now* is the main reason. He's lying and I don't want someone who's a liar on the Court. Two, it shows his hypocrisy and I don't want that on the Court either. The actions of other teenagers matter, but don't look at his. That's not fair.

I think I know why he won't call for an FBI investigation, why he won't call for Mark Judge to be subpoenaed--because he believes these actions will not help his case.

Maybe you think both were credible in telling their truth. But who do you think has more to gain from lying? Ford? To put herself and her family in the national spotlight and become the target of death threats when merely staying silent could avoid that? Or Kavanaugh? To avoid losing his shot at the Court *and* still be subject to criminal prosecution? It seems clear to me that he has more to gain from lying. He is lying. He is a liar.

Multiple Republican Senators on that committee were quoted outside the conference room saying she sounded very credible.

SOUNDED legit was "our" starting point and I suppose "we" have?

Do you figure he should have been removed from office?

The Republicans insisted on this being a he-said-she-said, refusing any investigation and refusing to call additional witnesses, so credibility is paramount. In that context, the importance of lies is vastly magnified.


Is it credible that a teenage boy is asking whether one of his friends has farted yet? When the common meaning for the term in question is something that teenage boys may dare each other to do?


He could have said that all the booze and sex references in his yearbook were teenage bluster. It would have meshed with his "I was outwardly embarrassed about being a virgin but inwardly proud" line.


About impeachment; it should have a much higher bar than a confirmation hearing. In Clinton's case, it didn't, and Brett Kavanaugh had a hand in that so he can hardly complain. If some of the other women's accusations against Clinton had borne out (and maybe some should have. Ken Starr certainly tried and failed, and I have a somewhat higher trust for negative results from hostile prosecutors than other combinations, but that's tempered by a general difficulty for accusations of this sort to get traction), then those would have justified it. As it is, he was impeached but not convicted, which was embarrassing for him, but mattered not a whit to his presidential power.


So I find it a bit disingenuous to respond to "lifetime appointment" with "he can be impeached". What does it matter if he's impeached? Do you think they'll come up with 67 Senators to convict him?

What does sounded legit mean if obvious lies don't count? Tone of voice?

Do you think they wouldn't if they had proof?

Proof? Fake news.


[eta] not snark. That's exactly what I would expect.

"He is a liar."
 

Aren't they all?

Pretty sure if the level of scrutiny applied to Kav were applied to everyone in Washington, that place would be empty across all three branches.

Would any of us, here, in this forum, survive that kinda of nose-pokery?

I doubt it.

No, there was only one standard that mattered and that standard was poorly defended by the committee right and utterly pissed on by the committee left.

"Multiple Republican Senators...were quoted...saying she sounded very credible."
 

So what?

Or that. "Fake news" or "everybody does it". Or both at the same time.

Flake is trying to find a center. I hope it works because this is getting very ugly.

The Judge and the women who came to support him...

Wow.

I know a photo is just an instant in time captured forever, but look at the repulsion on their faces.

Yup Dr. Ford is a credible witness. I think I will contribute to one of her 5 go fund me accounts which are at a total of $900,000 right now. Maybe she can buy some new eyeglasses.

When this is over, can you imagine the make-up sex Ford and Kavanaugh are going to have!


Too soon?

Damn good (not the sex).

make of this what you will...
 

Analysis of Kavenaugh's testimony.

The Coen Brothers lay it out in Beach Week.

When the Republicans are bitterly partisan and combative, it shows conviction, and it fires up their base of freedom-loving constitutionalists, and they sweep national and state level elections. When the spineless Democrats push back with an ounce of enthusiasm, OH NO we mustn't be too ill-mannered, we gotta maintain decorum with those cool-headed patriots across the aisle. It's got to be a ƒuckin' joke at this point. One big wind-up.

I don’t think that’s true. There are more Democrats than Republicans so as long as Dems stay fired up and a similar percentage show up they win. Being comfortable is death for the Dems.

Nate Silver sees fit to look into it: Is Kavanaugh Helping Republicans' Midterm Chances?

Answer: A little, especially in the Senate, but it may be fleeting and the situation is dynamic anyway.

Kavanaugh's unfit. He's a liar, a perjurer. And let's look at how he *does* answer when he's not lying.

Attachment 65162

"Kavanaugh's unfit. He's a liar, a perjurer.'
 

And he's about to be confirmed.

Too bad, so sad.

Too bad for who??

"Too bad for who??"
 

Women, blacks, kids, the poor, gays, transgenders, etc.

You know, the usual go-to groups.

But, really, it's only 'too bad' for the commies.

I'm not impressed with Kav, but at least he's not a commie.

Ruthie is next.

Trump should replace RBG with a woman, a non-commie woman, a hot, piece-of-ass woman. If she were Mexican, that'd be kick ass. A non-commie, Mexican hottie who immigrated legally.

What a 'fuck you' that would be.

No difference between a commie or a nazi. Both are extremists who blindly recite what they are ordered to believe. henry quirk is so extremist that anyone can predict what his opinion will be; what he was ordered to believe.

Meanwhile, patriotic Americans - moderates - learn facts long before making any conclusion. Only a nazi type (no different from a radical liberal) is that anti-American.

What the hate that will follow. Another characteristic of an extremist - an anti-American.

what's that, tw? blahblahblahblahblahblahblah? yeah, I hear ya
 

.