Justice Kennedy Retiring

[jdmee]

But what is the specific middle ground you're proposing here? For me, the extreme end on the liberal side is saying Kavanaugh needs to lose his current seat because he perjured himself. Does that mean the extreme end on the conservative side is that Kavanaugh needs to be confirmed without this most recent FBI investigation? So what's the middle ground? Confirm him after an investigation? Confirm some other equally conservative person? Two weeks ago, and I don't think it could be done anymore, I think a middle ground that should've pleased everyone would've been to withdraw Kavanaugh and name someone else with a schedule in place to get the new person confirmed prior to the election.

I disagree with Kavanaugh in one point. These tactics have nothing to do with the Clintons, but everything to do with the Scalia seat. Why did Feinstein and company not handle the letter in a manner to protect the identity of Dr Ford in the hearings and only after the hearings, only after the leak of the letter begin the sexual assault tactics? If they had nothing to do with the leak of the letter, I feel they would have at least brought the charges up in a closed session and delayed the confirmation. They wanted this to drag out to the point that Kavanaugh would have dropped out and they could use the Republicans rushing the next person or delay the next person until the next term. Dr Fords letter being leaked just let this become public.

And what about on other issues? What's the middle ground on single payer healthcare? On issues of race? It's easy to say "we just need more people to come to the middle and have common ground" when you think you're the reasonable person. And no one thinks they're not the reasonable person. Even here, you're saying it's a referendum on dirty political tricks on both sides. But that's obviously not the case. If Kavanaugh gets confirmed, no republicans are going to be like "dang, we really shouldn't have held that Scalia seat open for a year since clearly people don't like political tricks."

If the Democrats were the majority and they held the seat open until past the election then ok. But that not the dirty politics they are using, What they are doing is on a whole different level.

Add to that, sometimes the middle isn't where we need to be as a society. What's the middle ground if we're talking about negotiating with Hitler? I believe there are some instances in which ethically you cannot compromise even a little. I would imagine most Republicans feel that way about abortion. I imagine lots of people think our current system is a good "middle ground" in terms of abortion. It's a system that allows regulation after certain points during pregnancies but it also offers rights to women, etc. But there are many on the right who think, ethically, there is no middle ground besides saying it just needs to be illegal across the board.

I agree, I don't get how someone would think you equated Kavanaugh to Hitler here.

I will say I think more then a middle ground we need a return to some level of civility. It seems too often you can't be on the opposite side and not be the next coming of Satan. This happens too often from both sides of the isle and didn't start with President Trump. It has started long ago and has just gotten worse.

[WuDrWu]

Explosive new testimony from Prof. Ford just released.

Game changer, new vote calling for him to step down any minute.

[Kung Wu]

lmao

[wufan]

Did you hear how that rapist raised his voice in protest?

[Shockm]

I'm looking at the television at thousands of women protesting (most likely paid by Soros) at the Capital and Supreme Court. I think that I can safely say that no one that I can see has ever had a date with a gentleman.

[C0|dB|00ded]

I've heard the going rate is around 18 bux per/hr. Whatever gets them up and out of the basement. We can call it the Soros economic stimulus package. I believe they're chanting, "Who's courts? Our courts!" over and over and over. Whelp, not for long...

Elections have consequences kids.

This generation of entitled pukes thinks everybody will bend to their will. Arrive late to class: no problem, you can take the test later. Don't like your grade: no problem we'll change it. Don't like the results of an election: no problem, we'll obstruct and try to impeach.

It's always been about rules and accountability that these Snowflakes just cannot seem to comprehend. It's not totally their fault though. They are products of their parents.


T


...:cool:

[wufan]

Actually, Soros funded groups give an “expected bond” amount in cash generally.

As to “this generation”, the post millinial generation is the most conservative since the WWI gen. That’s about 100 years folks, and interestingly it immediately followed the first progressive movement which was pro-temperance, worries that over population would lead to food shortages, and was keenly interested in eugenics. To draw a modern corollary, the modern progressive movement is concerned with toxic masculinity, climate change, and white priveledge.

[C0|dB|00ded]

"As to “this generation”, the post millinial generation is the most conservative since the WWI gen. That’s about 100 years folks"

I don't know about that bro.

http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2018/02/the-post-millennials-should-scare-the-hell-out-of-the-gop.html

T


...:cool:

[C0|dB|00ded]

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/04/opinion/trump-kavanaugh-ford-allegations.html

WTF??? You absolutely HAVE to read this lol.

Ummmm, thank you Bret Stephens!

Twilight Zone stuff.


T


...:cool:

[ShockTalk]

About 4 hours late on that one, Cold.

[ShockTalk]

But what is the specific middle ground you're proposing here?

Just to be clear here, my middle ground statement was not aimed at this situation in particular, but in general. As a people, we are getting farther and farther away from each other to the point that our leaders (both sides are at fault) are losing all civility in dealing with our future with no care for the populace as a whole.

I didn't vote for Trump and I don't like his tasteless verbal tactics now. Feinstein's tactics in this situation was equally tasteless. For 2 months, positive corroboration could have been searched out so this did not become a "he said, she said" situation with very sketchy details leading the way for the accuser. For me, it appeared to be nothing but a stalling tactic with two families smeared in the name of party. While Kavanaugh appeared to be the early leader when the first list of candidates came out, he was not mine.

Healthcare? There is certain a wide field between you pay for your own to it's totally paid for you.

I cannot turn back the clock on what man has done to each other, not only with race, but between religions, people of different countries, people of different "status", different sex, but all that "history" does go away with the snap of the fingers. I wish it did. It takes work, understanding, and, unfortunately, patience. What was the norm 200 years ago, 100 years, 50 years, or even 30 years, isn't the norm today. However, you are dealing with many, many people, still alive today, that grew up with some of those old "norms".

You brought up abortion. While I am personally against it in most situations and feel there are much better potential solutions, some requiring more individual care and fortitude, I am not a woman. I can only sympathize, not empathize.

Hitler??? The objective of civil discourse and working together for a better tomorrow is a solid path to never having to face a Hitler. Hilters breed with hate and distrust of the "other side".

[ShockCrazy]

Also I think many are attributing faaaar more cunning to Diane freaking Feinstein than she has ever been capable of.

[jdmee]

Like Grassley said during the hearing. There is a process in place to handle these things confidentially. She did not follow that process.

[wufan]

So Feinstein could have:
a. Ignored it and voted no
b. Released it at the time received
c. Handled it confidentially
d. Released it at the 11th hour

How would you rank these in moral order?

[Shockm]

Some on here have "dirty minds". A good number of Kavanaugh's classmates said that "Devils Triangle" referred to a drinking game. Whoever said that the "Devils Triangle" was a sexual term was evidently way off according to the 1980's. Obviously, we were better off then. :)

[ShockerPrez]

When I was 17, I could probably have come up with at least 25 sexually related topics/items, etc to name a devils triangle....

[Shockm]

I don't know if that says more about you or others. :)

[Teddy Graham]

By the way, for anyone still thinking it's equally likely that Kavanaugh lied about the terms "boof" and "devil's triangle" as it is that he separately invented terms, used by millions of people, with specific and discrete meanings, his former roommate is saying he definitely remembers Kavanaugh and his friends using those words in the manner the rest of us know them.

JD how you are describing what Kav's former roommate said about his use of those terms is just not accurate. Did you listen to the video you linked? All that guy said was that, and I'm summarizing, "what Brett said about drinking and using those terms...I know he was lying because I was his roommate." The rest of the video is him describing how Kav drank a lot in college. Nowhere does he reference Kav's friends and what they meant. Nowhere. That is a big deal, because those guys are the only ones (and Kav) that would know what they meant. And now it turns out that 4 of Kav's high school buddies just said that "devil's triangle" was indeed a drinking game and they provided the rules. Accuracy matters. It never made sense that he would risk so much just to avoid saying that those words meant what you thought they meant.

[Shockm]

Maybe his roommate is the one with a drinking problem and he doesn't remember.

[jdshock]

I admittedly didn't watch the video. There's a quote in the article atributed to him where he says he heard Kavanaugh and his friends using those terms.

[wufan]

The author of the op ed stated that he didn’t know if BK whipped out his tallywhacker at that party, but it sounded like something he and his friends would do. He also stated that he heard BK use boof and Devil’s Triangle and when they used those terms it was in reference to the mid-2000s urban dictionary meaning.

[wufan]

But what is the specific middle ground you're proposing here? For me, the extreme end on the liberal side is saying Kavanaugh needs to lose his current seat because he perjured himself. Does that mean the extreme end on the conservative side is that Kavanaugh needs to be confirmed without this most recent FBI investigation? So what's the middle ground? Confirm him after an investigation? Confirm some other equally conservative person? Two weeks ago, and I don't think it could be done anymore, I think a middle ground that should've pleased everyone would've been to withdraw Kavanaugh and name someone else with a schedule in place to get the new person confirmed prior to the election.

And what about on other issues? What's the middle ground on single payer healthcare? On issues of race? It's easy to say "we just need more people to come to the middle and have common ground" when you think you're the reasonable person. And no one thinks they're not the reasonable person. Even here, you're saying it's a referendum on dirty political tricks on both sides. But that's obviously not the case. If Kavanaugh gets confirmed, no republicans are going to be like "dang, we really shouldn't have held that Scalia seat open for a year since clearly people don't like political tricks."

Add to that, sometimes the middle isn't where we need to be as a society. What's the middle ground if we're talking about negotiating with Hitler? I believe there are some instances in which ethically you cannot compromise even a little. I would imagine most Republicans feel that way about abortion. I imagine lots of people think our current system is a good "middle ground" in terms of abortion. It's a system that allows regulation after certain points during pregnancies but it also offers rights to women, etc. But there are many on the right who think, ethically, there is no middle ground besides saying it just needs to be illegal across the board.

The extreme leftist argument is that BK needs to lose his seat because enough questions were raised. The extreme right wing argument is that BK should get his seat because we’re in power and it doesn’t matter that he and friends Bill Cosby’d Chicks in college.

I’ve heard leftist senators propose the former. Ive heard leftist columnists suggest the latter of deplorables. The middle ground is bringing credible evidence to bare at the time it is received and discussing its credibility BEFORE deciding which way to vote.

[jdshock]

But, and I truly don't mean offense here, but that's your actual stance. Of course you think that's the reasonable middle ground.

Look, I'm not aware of a dem senator saying that. Maybe they did. But McConnell said he was going to vote for him no matter what Blasey Ford said. You're painting kind of a disingenuous picture here.

[wufan]

No offense taken. Cory Booker was the senator that stated that. Don Lemmon was the news persona.

There are fine reasons to NOT support BK. One could question his rulings on spying on Americans, torture, or lying. While I disagree, those are reasonable objections. Being that those reasonable objections had already been made clear, if there was additional evidence that could sway otherwise “yes” voters to “no” voters, that action should have been taken during the confirmation hearing or in private rather that at the 11th hour; which resulted in some serious smearing.

That’s my middle ground! I have what I believe, you have what you believe, vote your conscience and move forward under the rules of society.

[wufan]

Irrelevant side note that has been on my mind since the confirmation hearings began:

My college roommate (CL) had a very large member. He used to walk around the dorm (males only) baby style (shirt only). Not surprisingly, he was single. I, and our other two roommates had girlfriends at the time. We invited our girls over for a night of drinking, and in the midst of the evening, one of my roommates gf asked CL if he was well endowed. She was sitting on her bfs lap, and CL walked over, whipped it out and said, “you know you want it in your mouth.”

I can tell you the place and month of year and every person in the room at that time (20 years ago). Weird.

[RoyalShock]

I hope her bf subsequently dropped him on the dorm room floor and left him sobbing in the fetal position.

[wufan]

He did not. Everyone involved seemed mildly put off, but somewhat okay with what transpired. It was almost as it it was a childish prank.

[C0|dB|00ded]

Funny story wufan. I lol'd.

Baby style ROFL! They call it shirt cockin' now.

Very typical college behavior. You want to hear some stories about assault, call up the frat boys back when hazing was real. I bet 99% of the men on the Senate floor have seen and done things that would make a sailor blush.

Everybody in this clown show is a hypocrite.


T


...:cool:

[C0|dB|00ded]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/kav...-drinking-game

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b028e1fe3c224c

https://www.cnn.com/2018/10/04/polit...gle/index.html

My mind is completely blown right now. Kavanaugh gets 4 classmates from Georgetown to corroborate his definition of Boof and Devil's Triangle?

At this point, and with all the evidence taken into consideration, I'm starting to really doubt the veracity of Ford's account. With these new letters, Brett's testimony is nearly completely corroborated. Ford meanwhile has a couple of buddies that say they believe her but know nothing about her incident. This investigation has run its course and the facts have come to light. All things considered, Brett Kavanaugh is more than worthy for a seat on the Supreme Court. I just hope his family can heal after all of this.


T


...:cool:

[ShockingButTrue]

Ford's stated witness to the account said it never even happened. Maybe cnn overlooked that?

Case closed. Oh wait, it was just "advise and consent."

[jdmee]

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/friend-of-christine-blasey-ford-reportedly-felt-pressure-to-revisit-statement-on-allegations.amp

Keyser told the investigators that she was -- as the Journal notes -- urged to clarify her statement by Monica McLean, a former FBI agent and friend of Ford’s, the paper reported, citing people familiar with the matter

A person close to the former classmates told the Journal she believed mutual friends of both Ford and Keyser – including McLean – simply reached out to Keyser to warn her that her statement was being used by Republicans as vindication for Kavanagh and if she felt she needed to clarify what she meant, she should. The person said the mutual friends did not “pressure” Keyser.

[1972Shocker]

Sounds to me like witness tampering. And McLean was the friend who Ford's boyfriend said that Ford helped preopare for a polygraph. McLean denied that happened but if she is willing to tamper with a witness her credibilty regarding that denial is highly questionable.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/friend-of-dr-ford-felt-pressure-to-revisit-statement-1538715152

[jdshock]

Taking a step back: if even one of Swetnick's, Ramirez's, or Blasey-Ford's allegations had been known prior to the nomination of Kavanaugh, there's zero percent chance he's selected. None. I'd bet an irresponsible amount of money on that proposition. It doesn't matter how much the GOP says they're false claims or how much the GOP says Kavanaugh is an upstanding citizen and these are democratic plants or whatever. There's no chance. It wouldn't be worth the political risk. And this is something that has certainly happened over and over again throughout history. There are dozens of extremely qualified potential nominees, and no one is ever crying about "innocent until proven guilty" or "due process" or whatever when something like that happens.

Republicans were put in a tough situation because those allegations didn't come out in time. They were made public later in the process than Republicans would have liked. It looked like a lose-lose situation. On the one hand, they look weak if they withdraw his nomination or foolish for selecting him in the first place. On the other, they look like they don't care about finding the truth if they just ram him through without a full investigation of the claims.

Democrats were put in a tough spot because Feinstein, who was in her own tough spot. Ultimately, the decision she made is probably not ideal. But it's the decision she made. Blasey-Ford sent her allegation to folks prior to the selection of Kavanaugh. There is no claim that it was passed on to the White House at that time, but if it had been... if it had been made known to the proper parties, then there's just no chance they would've picked Kavanaugh. So a lot of Democrats are stuck saying why stick with him just because you didn't find out about it two months sooner?

There are lots of legitimate reasons to not support this guy. He was misleading in his testimony multiple times. He was unhinged in his speech last week, and he said Democrats were conspiring on behalf of the Clintons, and he was openly partisan. And, for anyone who is thinking about saying that's not true, Kavanaugh wrote an op-ed last night apologizing for his behavior. Republican-appointed Justice Stevens has said this guy shouldn't be confirmed. Thousands of law professors have said he shouldn't be confirmed. None of these reasons are dependent on the allegations being true. But that's what Grassley and McConnell want people to think this is about. They want people to believe this is a question about whether or not we have evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Kavanaugh did those things he is accused of.

[C0|dB|00ded]

"There are lots of legitimate reasons to not support this guy. He was misleading in his testimony multiple times. He was unhinged in his speech last week, and he said Democrats were conspiring on behalf of the Clintons, and he was openly partisan. And, for anyone who is thinking about saying that's not true, Kavanaugh wrote an op-ed last night apologizing for his behavior."

I no longer believe he was misleading in his testimony multiple times after the four statements submitted by classmates. The only thing remaining is whether or not he ever "blacked out". That would be kind of difficult to track hence the very definition of blacking out is to have periods of no memory.

His speech was FAR from unhinged. In fact it completely saved his ass. You put yourself in the shoes of an innocent man who has done EVERTHING right from day one professionally (hiring the most women, etc.) and then gets trashed for being a misogynist at best and a rapist at worst... yeah... you're gonna go apeshit too. The Democrats made the nomination process wholly political; it wasn't inappropriate for Kavanaugh to follow them down that road a little after the trash they circulated.

And the reason he's coming out now and apologizing about his behavior is because it worked and he's about to get confirmed. It's merely a case of sweeping up after the bull went through the china shop. He loses nothing by apologizing.


T


...:cool:

[pinstripers]

https://www.lankford.senate.gov/news/press-releases/senator-lankford-addresses-judge-kavanaughs-recent-fbi-investigation-gives-encouraging-message-to-parents-with-teens

[ShockCrazy]

Murkowski is a no. This is gonna get interesting. I can't see Collins wanting to sit on this by herself. Manchin will certainly vote with Dems if they get one more. I wouldn't be shocked to see this rejected by a larger vote than expected. Flake, Sasse, and Gardner could all possibly vote no.

[jdshock]

Put 30 hours on the clock. I think it's time for predictions:

Murkowski - no on cloture seems like she's a no on Kavanaugh. I'd say she feels like she can vote no because she knows they've got the votes to get him through.
Collins - I think she's going to be announcing early this afternoon that she's a yes.
Manchin - I think he'll probably side with whoever he thinks is going to win. So I'll say he's a yes.
Flake - He'll be a yes.

As one other wrinkle, I've seen stuff saying Daines out of Montana won't be around tomorrow because of his daughter's wedding. Unless they hustle up the vote tonight or early in the morning tomorrow, I guess that means he couldn't vote tomorrow? And I can't imagine Manchin would be willing to be the deciding vote in favor of Kavanaugh. So I imagine they must be finding a way for him to vote. If he does, I think it's going to pass with 51 votes.