4merper4mer Posted September 28, 2018 Posted September 28, 2018 33 minutes ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said: I know it does. So I was a bit hesitant when I first heard. I mean, I disliked the choice because I find his ruling on contraceptives to be laughably stupid, but there was a grain of salt. And then two more, independent claims cane in. And then the FBI has not allowed to corroborate or disprove them. Then I saw this rambling incoherent mess of explanations. I'm sorry for you man, but at this point the way Kavanaugh handled it is indefensible. And yet....so many nutbags are intent on doing so. FBI stuff is beyond stupid. A member of the Senate judiciary committee asked a candidate to turn to a staff member of the executive branch and ask for a specific type of investigation. So:. Legislator asks member of the judiciary to tell executive to usurp the power of the legislature. That sounds like a good idea.
Buffalo_Gal Posted September 28, 2018 Posted September 28, 2018 Joe Manchin is a yes: https://mobile.twitter.com/elainaplott/status/1045478279220797440 Donnelly, Collins, Murkowski also expected to vote the same https://mobile.twitter.com/burgessev/status/1045482455078236163 Oh yeah, and Bob Corker is a yes https://mobile.twitter.com/SenBobCorker/status/1045475440528412678 1
BeginnersMind Posted September 28, 2018 Posted September 28, 2018 Sad moment for the nation. Both stories from today have holes and some lies, but neither testimony was utterly damning or convincing. I found them both credible. Both sides' politicians did nothing to lead today. Nothing to heal a divide. No one took a shot at hearing the other side. Everyone suited up in battle armor and grandstanded while the Dems moved their piece against the R's piece. No end in sight for this divide because there's no one stepping into any middle ground leadership role and neither side wants to hear the other. Gross political day. I'll be happy when this vote is in the rearview mirror. 1 1
Buffalo_Gal Posted September 28, 2018 Posted September 28, 2018 Floor vote Saturday? I didn't see that coming https://mobile.twitter.com/elainaplott/status/1045465154341810177
BeginnersMind Posted September 28, 2018 Posted September 28, 2018 (edited) 2 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: Floor vote Saturday? I didn't see that coming https://mobile.twitter.com/elainaplott/status/1045465154341810177 That's procedural. Vote will be next week, assuming they don't delay for any reason. Edited September 28, 2018 by BeginnersMind
whatdrought Posted September 28, 2018 Posted September 28, 2018 7 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said: Sad moment for the nation. Both stories from today have holes and some lies, but neither testimony was utterly damning or convincing. I found them both credible. Both sides' politicians did nothing to lead today. Nothing to heal a divide. No one took a shot at hearing the other side. Everyone suited up in battle armor and grandstanded while the Dems moved their piece against the R's piece. No end in sight for this divide because there's no one stepping into any middle ground leadership role and neither side wants to hear the other. Gross political day. I'll be happy when this vote is in the rearview mirror. The cant both be credible.
billsfan1959 Posted September 28, 2018 Posted September 28, 2018 They should confirm Kavanaugh on a vote early next week and end this lunacy.
DC Tom Posted September 28, 2018 Posted September 28, 2018 1 hour ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said: I know it does. So I was a bit hesitant when I first heard. I mean, I disliked the choice because I find his ruling on contraceptives to be laughably stupid, but there was a grain of salt. And then two more, independent claims cane in. And then the FBI has not allowed to corroborate or disprove them. Then I saw this rambling incoherent mess of explanations. I'm sorry for you man, but at this point the way Kavanaugh handled it is indefensible. And yet....so many nutbags are intent on doing so. The FBI does not corroborate or disprove criminal violations of state law. It does not investigate criminal complaints in a background investigation. That is NOT THE SCOPE of a background investigation. A background investigation is not a criminal investigation. If, in a background investigation, the FBI discovers I have six missing hookers buried in my backyard, they will NOT investigate that. They will refer it to the appropriate jurisdiction in a big goddamn hurry for criminal investigation, but they will not perform the investigation, because a background investigation is not a criminal investigation. Investigating this accusation was not in the scope of the FBI's background check, and was not in the FBI's jurisdiction. Period. What SHOULD have happened was that a criminal complaint was filed in the state of MD, who has jurisdiction (and no statute of limitations on felony charges). Once that investigation was opened, it would have been in NCIC within 48 hours, then into Kavanaugh's BI package when the FBI ran the NCIC check. Then it's 1) in front of the Senate committee sooner, 2) a matter of official record, and 3) not an accusation, but a criminal investigation. Imagine the difference between "confirming a nominee who's accused of rape" and "confirming a nominee who's under criminal investigation for a felony." That is how badly !@#$ed-up this was: Democrats consciously ignored all rules of criminal justice and procedure, to attempt a trial by mob rule, for a strictly political result. They flagrantly violated Senate rules, violated victims' rights, violated HIPAA, violated all fundamental Constitutional principles of due process, and tainted a criminal case beyond repair, to stop a judicial nomination. And you fell for it. All of it. You're a complete idiot. 11 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said: Gross political day. I'll be happy when this vote is in the rearview mirror. You think this is the end of it? This shitshow's just getting started. In a couple of years, you'll look back fondly on today, remembering "It wasn't so bad back then..." 5 minutes ago, whatdrought said: The cant both be credible. Yes they can. They can't both be true. 2 1
4merper4mer Posted September 28, 2018 Posted September 28, 2018 2 minutes ago, DC Tom said: The FBI does not corroborate or disprove criminal violations of state law. It does not investigate criminal complaints in a background investigation. That is NOT THE SCOPE of a background investigation. A background investigation is not a criminal investigation. If, in a background investigation, the FBI discovers I have six missing hookers buried in my backyard, they will NOT investigate that. They will refer it to the appropriate jurisdiction in a big goddamn hurry for criminal investigation, but they will not perform the investigation, because a background investigation is not a criminal investigation. Investigating this accusation was not in the scope of the FBI's background check, and was not in the FBI's jurisdiction. Period. What SHOULD have happened was that a criminal complaint was filed in the state of MD, who has jurisdiction (and no statute of limitations on felony charges). Once that investigation was opened, it would have been in NCIC within 48 hours, then into Kavanaugh's BI package when the FBI ran the NCIC check. Then it's 1) in front of the Senate committee sooner, 2) a matter of official record, and 3) not an accusation, but a criminal investigation. Imagine the difference between "confirming a nominee who's accused of rape" and "confirming a nominee who's under criminal investigation for a felony." That is how badly !@#$ed-up this was: Democrats consciously ignored all rules of criminal justice and procedure, to attempt a trial by mob rule, for a strictly political result. They flagrantly violated Senate rules, violated victims' rights, violated HIPAA, violated all fundamental Constitutional principles of due process, and tainted a criminal case beyond repair, to stop a judicial nomination. And you fell for it. All of it. You're a complete idiot. So, did they hop in the car for Maryland when they left?
Doc Posted September 28, 2018 Posted September 28, 2018 Would Ford’s case have even qualified for felony charges?
billsfan1959 Posted September 28, 2018 Posted September 28, 2018 1 hour ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said: I know it does. So I was a bit hesitant when I first heard. I mean, I disliked the choice because I find his ruling on contraceptives to be laughably stupid, but there was a grain of salt. And then two more, independent claims cane in. And then the FBI has not allowed to corroborate or disprove them. Then I saw this rambling incoherent mess of explanations. I'm sorry for you man, but at this point the way Kavanaugh handled it is indefensible. And yet....so many nutbags are intent on doing so. Speaking of rambling and incoherent. Those two independent claims are ludicrous on their face. The FBI has conducted six background investigations on Kavanaugh and there is nothing here to investigate. The four witnesses named by the accuser stated it never happened. Time to move on and confirm him already
DC Tom Posted September 28, 2018 Posted September 28, 2018 10 minutes ago, BeginnersMind said: That's procedural. Vote will be next week, assuming they don't delay for any reason. Democrats will be absent en masse, to try to prevent a quorum. Note that the Constitution says a quorum is 51 Senators. Note that we've learned the last two weeks that the Democrats give exactly no ***** about Constitutional requirements. So they'll try anyway. They won't block the vote, and they know that. They'll absent themselves so they can go back to Democratic voters and campaign on "The Republicans stole your participation in government by voting without a quorum!" And note that this will work, because we've learned the last two weeks that the Democratic voters give exactly no ***** about Constitutional requirements either. 1
whatdrought Posted September 28, 2018 Posted September 28, 2018 @DC Tom Credible implies believable- at this point in time it is not possible to believe both of the stories as they are absolutely contradictory.
DC Tom Posted September 28, 2018 Posted September 28, 2018 1 minute ago, Doc said: Would Ford’s case have even qualified for felony charges? Honestly...it depends on the DA. A third degree felony sexual assault includes "suffocate...in the course of the crime" and a "aided and abetted by another," both of which can be borne out by the accusation (he put his hand over her mouth; someone else was there.) It's a stretch...but in a blue state like MD (Republican governor aside), I'd expect it a stretch they'd make in this case. And there's no "fourth degree" felony sexual assult...the next lowest is misdemeanor.
billsfan1959 Posted September 28, 2018 Posted September 28, 2018 4 minutes ago, Doc said: Would Ford’s case have even qualified for felony charges? No. Aside from statute of limitation issues, there is literally no evidence - merely an allegation. 1
Doc Posted September 28, 2018 Posted September 28, 2018 2 minutes ago, DC Tom said: Honestly...it depends on the DA. A third degree felony sexual assault includes "suffocate...in the course of the crime" and a "aided and abetted by another," both of which can be borne out by the accusation (he put his hand over her mouth; someone else was there.) It's a stretch...but in a blue state like MD (Republican governor aside), I'd expect it a stretch they'd make in this case. And there's no "fourth degree" felony sexual assult...the next lowest is misdemeanor. Even for a minor?
DC Tom Posted September 28, 2018 Posted September 28, 2018 Just now, whatdrought said: @DC Tom Credible implies believable- at this point in time it is not possible to believe both of the stories as they are absolutely contradictory. "Credible" means "capable of being true." It does NOT mean "true." Two opposing statements can easily be capable of being true even if only one of them can be true. Usually, this is because of the principle known as "not enough information." You want me to mathematically prove it? I hope not - it's an easy proof, but a stone cold B word to type on a keyboard. 1
KD in CA Posted September 28, 2018 Posted September 28, 2018 1 hour ago, DC Tom said: Bet it won't be anything factual, like "We have a criminal justice system based on liberal principles that the Democrats completely threw out and turned the Senate into a clown show." I think she missed that one.
DC Tom Posted September 28, 2018 Posted September 28, 2018 2 minutes ago, Doc said: Even for a minor? Yep. Only distinction the statute makes on the age of the defendant is whether or not the defendant is 4 or more years older than the victim. 17 minutes ago, 4merper4mer said: So, did they hop in the car for Maryland when they left? Probably took a helicopter...
bdutton Posted September 28, 2018 Posted September 28, 2018 How !@#$ing stupid do you have to be to be COACHED ON LIVE NATIONAL TV TO RAISE YOUR HAD FOR THE OATH???!!! Jesus farking Christ have you no independent brain function to activate your right hand??? 1 1
Recommended Posts