Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.

5 (45.5%)

A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.

5 (45.5%)

A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.

0 (0%)

More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.

0 (0%)

A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.

1 (9.1%)

More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.

0 (0%)

DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.

0 (0%)

Huge disruption to the day.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM

[REDSTATEWARD]

GOP gives week for additional background check on Kavanaugh!

But... But... Red.assures us the FBI does not do that sort of thing!

Hardly. I posted Joe Biden’s defining explanation of the FBI’s role in SCOTUS nominations.

Above is Redd telling us he never suggested that the FBI doesn't do that sort of thing.

Below is Redd telling us that the FBI would not investigate because there is no crime to investigate.

What is the FBI supposed to investigate?

An alleged sexual assault.

Have you not heard?  It’s been kind of in the news a lot lately.

I take his point,  though.   If Red means,  how can one find evidence of an encounter that happened 36  years ago and where no one sought medical treatment or otherwise made any report?   Especially when details seem conflicting.  TbH,  that's why I find the Renate thing more telling, it's on paper and we know the exact source.   Not that Ms Ford should not seek justice,  but it's hard for me to see how it gets beyond the word of a possible drunk and the word of someone who claimed to have one beer.   Truth finding requires more than people just asserting their alcohol levels 36.years ago and not able to remember key details like location.

The larger point though is the FBI is not charged with investigating alleged crimes that do not involve federal laws.  The “ Renate Thing” has been public knowledge for the same period of time and yet never showed up in any of the previous 6 FBI background checks done for Kavanaugh.

They would not be investigating a crime, they would be conducting a back ground check on a SCOTUS nominee, which the FBI does routinely. I realize you are being purposefully obtuse.

There is no crime to investigate.

And, again, trying to convince us that there can be no FBI investigation.

He will, of course, insist that this is "proof" that he never said they don't or wouldn't, merely asked questions.

That is because he is just as disingeous as Judge Kavanaugh.

Her lawyer is calling it attempted rape.
Saying that he was too inebriated to be successful.

Things are so charged with partisan strife right now that I truly don't know what to think, but I do know there's something really wrong when the admin doesn't have the FBI look into this.     

The FBI is not an investigative body into alleged state crimes that were never reported.
What is the FBI supposed to “ investigate” 36 years after a “ event” that has only one complainant?
We have an account from one person with scant details strongly denied by her alleged “ attacker” and a third party who says there was no such “ event”.  The only “ corroborating “ evidence comes from the alleged “ victim” contained in notes by a marriage counselor dictated by the “ victim”.

Oh, please. Have you ever been the subject or an interviewee of an FBI background check?

The FBI is not an investigative body into alleged state crimes that were never reported.
What is the FBI supposed to “ investigate” 36 years after a “ event” that has only one complainant?
We have an account from one person with scant details strongly denied by her alleged “ attacker” and a third party who says there was no such “ event”.  The only “ corroborating “ evidence comes from the alleged “ victim” contained in notes by a marriage counselor dictated by the “ victim”.

Thanks Josh for proving my point.

[josh]

GOP gives week for additional background check on Kavanaugh!

But... But... Red.assures us the FBI does not do that sort of thing!

Hardly. I posted Joe Biden’s defining explanation of the FBI’s role in SCOTUS nominations.

Above is Redd telling us he never suggested that the FBI doesn't do that sort of thing.

Below is Redd telling us that the FBI would not investigate because there is no crime to investigate.

What is the FBI supposed to investigate?

An alleged sexual assault.

Have you not heard?  It’s been kind of in the news a lot lately.

I take his point,  though.   If Red means,  how can one find evidence of an encounter that happened 36  years ago and where no one sought medical treatment or otherwise made any report?   Especially when details seem conflicting.  TbH,  that's why I find the Renate thing more telling, it's on paper and we know the exact source.   Not that Ms Ford should not seek justice,  but it's hard for me to see how it gets beyond the word of a possible drunk and the word of someone who claimed to have one beer.   Truth finding requires more than people just asserting their alcohol levels 36.years ago and not able to remember key details like location.

The larger point though is the FBI is not charged with investigating alleged crimes that do not involve federal laws.  The “ Renate Thing” has been public knowledge for the same period of time and yet never showed up in any of the previous 6 FBI background checks done for Kavanaugh.

They would not be investigating a crime, they would be conducting a back ground check on a SCOTUS nominee, which the FBI does routinely. I realize you are being purposefully obtuse.

There is no crime to investigate.

And, again, trying to convince us that there can be no FBI investigation.

He will, of course, insist that this is "proof" that he never said they don't or wouldn't, merely asked questions.

That is because he is just as disingeous as Judge Kavanaugh.

Her lawyer is calling it attempted rape.
Saying that he was too inebriated to be successful.

Things are so charged with partisan strife right now that I truly don't know what to think, but I do know there's something really wrong when the admin doesn't have the FBI look into this.     

The FBI is not an investigative body into alleged state crimes that were never reported.
What is the FBI supposed to “ investigate” 36 years after a “ event” that has only one complainant?
We have an account from one person with scant details strongly denied by her alleged “ attacker” and a third party who says there was no such “ event”.  The only “ corroborating “ evidence comes from the alleged “ victim” contained in notes by a marriage counselor dictated by the “ victim”.

Oh, please. Have you ever been the subject or an interviewee of an FBI background check?

The FBI is not an investigative body into alleged state crimes that were never reported.
What is the FBI supposed to “ investigate” 36 years after a “ event” that has only one complainant?
We have an account from one person with scant details strongly denied by her alleged “ attacker” and a third party who says there was no such “ event”.  The only “ corroborating “ evidence comes from the alleged “ victim” contained in notes by a marriage counselor dictated by the “ victim”.

Thanks Josh for proving my point.

You behave as explicitly predicted.

So full of crap. Like Kavanaugh.

Would you commit perjury the way he did?

[josh]

This was posted by a Trump/Kavanaugh supporter.

I endorse this sentiment 100%

[bodiddley]

I just keep wondering who El Bart O' is ....

[bodiddley]

Good article summarizing Kav's evasions, misdirections and lies:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/28/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-fact-check.html
Though in the stolen Dem strategy instance, there is more incriminating detail the article doesn't mention.  One email to Kav was entitled something like Stolen Dem Info. (I forget the exact wording)

I think everyone realizes that Mark Judge is a terrible witness, an admitted drunk with plenty of misogynist writings in his recent past. And the more Kav is linked to Judge the worse it looks for Kav.

From what I read, Judge initially only released a statement to the Senate committee through his lawyer.  Nothing sworn by him or under penalty of perjury.  Saying he had "no recollection" of said event.  And only the right before the  Ford hearing submitted an actual affidavit.

TRump & GOP trying to limit the FBI investigation to the alleged sexual assault.  But there are at least two other women out there.  And they could also look into the various lies and misleading statements regarding the yearbook, Kav's drinking, the stolen DEM startgey material, involvement in Pickering's nom which Kav lied about in previous testimony (to get on the Fed bench).

[bodiddley]

Avenatti has interpreted the yearbook FFFFFourth of July as a variation on the old Big Joe Turner song Flip Flop and FLy.
The modern variant as Find, Fuck, Forget 'em (and you can add in other F's at pleasure (or with force).

[whiskeypriest]

GOP gives week for additional background check on Kavanaugh!

But... But... Red.assures us the FBI does not do that sort of thing!

Hardly. I posted Joe Biden’s defining explanation of the FBI’s role in SCOTUS nominations.

No, you did not just do that. You liar. Own your being wrong. A man would.

[josh]

GOP gives week for additional background check on Kavanaugh!

But... But... Red.assures us the FBI does not do that sort of thing!

Hardly. I posted Joe Biden’s defining explanation of the FBI’s role in SCOTUS nominations.

No, you did not just do that. You liar. Own your being wrong. A man would.

Then he's never been a man in the various lives of this forum.

He may have been one on the NYT, but I didn't spend long there before it closed.

[josh]

Good article summarizing Kav's evasions, misdirections and lies:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/28/us/politics/brett-kavanaugh-fact-check.html
Though in the stolen Dem strategy instance, there is more incriminating detail the article doesn't mention.  One email to Kav was entitled something like Stolen Dem Info. (I forget the exact wording)

I think everyone realizes that Mark Judge is a terrible witness, an admitted drunk with plenty of misogynist writings in his recent past. And the more Kav is linked to Judge the worse it looks for Kav.

From what I read, Judge initially only released a statement to the Senate committee through his lawyer.  Nothing sworn by him or under penalty of perjury.  Saying he had "no recollection" of said event.  And only the right before the  Ford hearing submitted an actual affidavit.

TRump & GOP trying to limit the FBI investigation to the alleged sexual assault.  But there are at least two other women out there.  And they could also look into the various lies and misleading statements regarding the yearbook, Kav's drinking, the stolen DEM startgey material, involvement in Pickering's nom which Kav lied about in previous testimony (to get on the Fed bench).

According to a variety of sources, the FBI had already made plans last night to interview one of the other women over the weekend.

[REDSTATEWARD]

GOP gives week for additional background check on Kavanaugh!

But... But... Red.assures us the FBI does not do that sort of thing!

Hardly. I posted Joe Biden’s defining explanation of the FBI’s role in SCOTUS nominations.

No, you did not just do that. You liar. Own your being wrong. A man would.

My views are written down.

[bodiddley]

They should talk to Renate Dolphin and Leyland whomever who was alleged at the party. 
Renate is likely to be forthcoming about Kav and his prep school crew.
While I always thought it would be more interesting who wasn't willing to sign the letter of support than who did, and she might have some knowledge of that.

And have to investigate the Yale dorm incident as that goes beyond high school into adulthood.  Plus it's pretty bad.

I think we can stipulate that Kav was an obnoxious privileged jerk in prep school and likely early college, and that no one would have wanted their daughter around him.  Maybe not even their sons.
I think that alone should disqualify him.  Is that the type of person we want on the Supreme Court?  Can't we find someone better?

[bankshot1]

They should talk to Renate Dolphin and Leyland whomever who was alleged at the party. 
Renate is likely to be forthcoming about Kav and his prep school crew.
While I always thought it would be more interesting who wasn't willing to sign the letter of support than who did, and she might have some knowledge of that.

And have to investigate the Yale dorm incident as that goes beyond high school into adulthood.  Plus it's pretty bad.

I think we can stipulate that Kav was an obnoxious privileged jerk in prep school and likely early college, and that no one would have wanted their daughter around him.  Maybe not even their sons.
I think that alone should disqualify him.  Is that the type of person we want on the Supreme Court?  Can't we find someone better?

Clearly we can find someone better and better suited to deliver reasoned non-partisan legal decisions than an apparent beligerent and very angry partisan Judge Kavanaugh would deliver.

However, while I've no doubt the BK was an obnoxious privleged jerk in high school and college, and most likely for years after, and still is today, that alone is no reason to disqualify him for service on the Supreme Court.  However lieing about being his past, today, (the cover-up so to speak) can reasonably be viewed as sign of moral weakess and a character flaw that should be disqualifying. Perjury is perjury. What else has he or will he lie about?  I don't believe the man.


Obviously if he was guilty of the sexual assault or other charges levied against him by Dr. Ford and other women, that is disqualifying, and likely criminal, if not subject to criminal charges because of statute of limitations. And if its disqualifying for the Supreme Court, it seems it should also be a disqualifying for his current position.

[LarryBnDC]

This was posted by a Trump/Kavanaugh supporter.

I endorse this sentiment 100%

Ignoring the fact elected officials have to stand for re election and if bad shit came out they would most likely lose.

Kavanaugh is up for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land.

What makes them think he is entitled to that position?

That’s why he went all rage boy at the hearing;

“How dare you try and interrupt my ascendancy to the position of power I was born to?”

[LarryBnDC]

It doesn’t matter if he has a jones for Michelle Obama, this is the same guy who lied us into war among other loads of shit...


https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/09/george-w-bush-is-still-bad/

[bodiddley]

The nation’s 43rd president left office nine years ago in the midst of the worst economic crisis of the last half century. His foreign policy agenda had resulted in a series of horrific, expensive, and unending wars—one of which is now old enough to enlist itself. He sanctioned torture while wrapping his administration in a warm embrace of faith-based discrimination.

Yet the Dems rarely mention this stuff.
And barely capitalized on W's fiascos.
Instead during Obama's time you'd hear people on the Right actually say and believe that Obama was the worst president ever.

Always amazing how the Dems cannot articulate and advance a narrative.  So folks like McCain & Bolton could seriously talk about war with Iran.  Trump and the GOP could push through a giant tax cut for the rich (admittedly not popular now, as folks start to cotton on to who it benefits, what is likely to be cut, and the deficit hypocrisy).

The Dems never forcefully and decisively made the case that the GOP strategy of wars and tax cuts was horrible and disastrous.