​ 🏛️ ​Official Supreme Court nomination thread - Amy Coney Barrett (2 Viewers)

[Henry Ford]

Then prosecute him.  I suspect you know why they haven't and won't.

Just curious, what corroborating evidence really sealed the Cosby case in your opinion?

 

[Bruce Dickinson]

Which do you want it to be?  Did the FBI need more time or was it ok to submarine Kavanaugh because of what the right did to Merrick Garland?  I just need to know which claim you are making.

The FBI needed to be able to investigate how they wanted and what they wanted, unconstrained by time or scope by the White House or any other body.  Since the FBI was told a wide range of topics and people were off-limits, they weren’t allowed to run a complete investigation.

And all that was on top of all the other crap Grassley pulled like withholding most of the documents Kavanaugh created.  The whole thing was run more like a coverup than a confirmation.

The Garland thing is a separate discussion.  If you’re upset because you think the Democrats were trying to push confirmation past midterms, you must have been outraged that McConnell and Grassley refused to hold a hearing on Garland for over a year.  And as far as we know there concerns about Garland’s background, temperment, or history.  They just blocked Garland because of who nominated him.

 

[Dickies]

Just curious, what corroborating evidence really sealed the Cosby case in your opinion?

Duh, he was black

 

[shader]

I think the FBI should have been allowed to do its job.  And Merrick Garland says hi.

Aside from partisan senators, do you have any proof that they weren’t?

 

[Shula-holic]

Just curious, what corroborating evidence really sealed the Cosby case in your opinion?

I don't really know.  I haven't kept up with the Cosby case, not going to pretend I have.  I'm just not big on labeling people with what we all would agree is a horrible title without more evidence than an accusation.  Maybe you and I disagree on that, and if so that's fine.  That just isn't for me.

 

[Rove!]

Well it's the same as this one:

Do you honestly have a problem with this? Yeah, that's exactly what was happening, the fact was Leland Keyser's statement was being misappropriated and a clarification was needed. Shocker: Friends who knew her contacted her to tell her so.

It’s just interesting 

For somebody who presented as a person who really didn’t know much about the govt, she had this lifelong friend with ties to heavy hitters the Preet Bharara and David Laufman....

i guess the contrast is that she has more access than what she cane off as...

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Accusations should eliminate people from job interviews?

No.

This isn't a job interview. No job, with a few exceptions, has any public exposure about one's personal history, candor or character. This is not a job, this is a position on the highest office in the land on a par with the President. It is a coequal branch.

 

[Shula-holic]

The FBI needed to be able to investigate how they wanted and what they wanted, unconstrained by time or scope by the White House or any other body.  Since the FBI was told a wide range of topics and people were off-limits, they weren’t allowed to run a complete investigation.

And all that was on top of all the other crap Grassley pulled like withholding most of the documents Kavanaugh created.  The whole thing was run more like a coverup than a confirmation.

The Garland thing is a separate discussion.  If you’re upset because you think the Democrats were trying to push confirmation past midterms, you must have been outraged that McConnell and Grassley refused to hold a hearing on Garland for over a year.  And as far as we know there concerns about Garland’s background, temperment, or history.  They just blocked Garland because of who nominated him.

I actually wasn't in favor of the Garland move from McConnell.  I've said that just a few posts ago.

 

[Henry Ford]

I don't really know.  I haven't kept up with the Cosby case, not going to pretend I have.  I'm just not big on labeling people with what we all would agree is a horrible title without more evidence than an accusation.  Maybe you and I disagree on that, and if so that's fine.  That just isn't for me.

To be fair, there is more evidence than an accusation, just not any that I think you'd consider proof of the accusation.  There's a ton of evidence that Kavanaugh regularly got drunk as a lord and attended parties in that state during that time period, the person she named as being in the room was a good friend of his, etc.

 

[Mike Damone]

Cool, I hope when your wife, girlfriend or daughter gets sexually assaulted or raped that there is a corroborating witness observing.

Good Lord 

 

[Bronco Billy]

Cool, I hope when your wife, girlfriend or daughter gets sexually assaulted or raped that there is a corroborating witness observing.

How is it okay to put something like this out there?  Seriously, what is wrong with you?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

It’s just interesting 

For somebody who presented as a person who really didn’t know much about the govt, she had this lifelong friend with ties to heavy hitters the Preet Bharara and David Laufman....

i guess the contrast is that she has more access than what she cane off as...

I also find the idea that Ford who was being put forth by (let's face it) Democratic Senators would have been put in touch with Laufman as totally normal. Why is that weird? People leaving DOJ to work in high level DC political arena is pretty typical.

So yeah exactly, she didn't call a local lawyer out the Palo Alto phone book to help guide her through the boiling process of a landmark Congressional hearing.

 

[Henry Ford]

Aside from partisan senators, do you have any proof that they weren’t?

You mean like the White House representative stating on CNN that the FBI was instructed to look into the things Republican Senators wanted to know about and wasn't instructed to look into the things Democrats wanted to know about because they didn't matter because the Democrats had their minds made up anyway?

 

[shader]

Good Lord 

Yeah he needs a timeout

 

[Doug B]

This isn't a job interview. No job, with a few exceptions, has any public exposure about one's personal history, candor or character. This is not a job, this is a position on the highest office in the land on a par with the President. It is a coequal branch.

Good points. It should be noted, nevertheless, that many times in this thread the confirmation process has been closely compared to a job interview.

 

[Bruce Dickinson]

Aside from partisan senators, do you have any proof that they weren’t?

I encourage you to read up a bit on how the FBI investigation went when Anita Hill’s name surfaced and compare/contrast to what the FBI was allowed to do with regard to Christine Ford, Deb Ramirez, or even Brett Kavanaugh’s testimony last week.

 

[Rove!]

I also find the idea that Ford who was being put forth by (let's face it) Democratic Senators would have been put in touch with Laufman as totally normal. Why is that weird? People leaving DOJ to work in high level DC political arena is pretty typical.

So yeah exactly, she didn't call a local lawyer out the Palo Alto phone book to help guide her through the boiling process of a landmark Congressional hearing.

Fird worked Bromwich and Katz who are heavy hitters, as well.  Her friend Monica, has Laufman as a lawyer....

 

[unckeyherb]

How is it okay to put something like this out there?  Seriously, what is wrong with you?

It’s absolutely nauseating

 

[Shula-holic]

To be fair, there is more evidence than an accusation, just not any that I think you'd consider proof of the accusation.  There's a ton of evidence that Kavanaugh regularly got drunk as a lord and attended parties in that state during that time period, the person she named as being in the room was a good friend of his, etc.

I have no doubt he drinks, and likely too much.  I think that is definitely more likely than not.  I don't feel that way when it comes to the allegations of his interactions with Ford.  I could be wrong, I admit that.  I don't know what happened.  But to label someone with that awful title, I think there needs to be more certainty of what happened.

 

[Dickies]

I wouldn't expect anything more classless from someone like you.  Thanks for showing your colors here.  

For the record, yes there needs to be evidence.  Even if someone came out of the shadows and accused you of rape, I'd think that you'd deserve that basic right of having to have corroboration to be found guilty or labeled as such.

How is that classless?  I'm saying that if a woman in your own personal life were to go through a sexual assault that I'd hope someone would listen to them and not just dismiss it because there was not a "corroborating witness" in the room.  Put yourself in these peoples' shoes.  Think about how you would like people close to you treated.  Empathy. 

 

[Bruce Dickinson]

I actually wasn't in favor of the Garland move from McConnell.  I've said that just a few posts ago.

And yet it didn’t stop you from being obtuse.

 

[Henry Ford]

I have no doubt he drinks, and likely too much.  I think that is definitely more likely than not.  I don't feel that way when it comes to the allegations of his interactions with Ford.  I could be wrong, I admit that.  I don't know what happened.  But to label someone with that awful title, I think there needs to be more certainty of what happened.

Unfortunately, in this scenario you either need to label him at least likely an attempted rapist or label her at least likely falsifying an accusation of attempted rape.  There isn't much middle ground and both labels are horrible.

 

[bear]

Not true.

Now did Merrick Garland deserve hearings and a vote?  Absolutely yes.  The GOP was completely wrong with how they treated him.  But you know that Garland didn't have the votes to get confirmed while the GOP held a 54-46 majority.  The GOP gambled that Trump could become president and they were right.

So don't blame the GOP.  Blame Hillary Clinton.  She blew it.  She was a terrible candidate.  She couldn't beat the biggest dope to ever run for president.  She lost 30 states.   In fact, if Hillary had won, the GOP would have scrambled to get Garland confirmed.  He was a fair center-left judge.  Hillary would have nominated someone farther to the left.

No matter how many times this is repeated it will always be a lie.  The choice was exactly what Bloomberg said it was.  Sane and competent vs insane and incompetent.  Clinton vs Trump was as simple as that.  Anyone claiming different is just a coward who needs an excuse for what they have done.

 

[shader]

How is that classless?  I'm saying that if a woman in your own personal life were to go through a sexual assault that I'd hope someone would listen to them and not just dismiss it because there was not a "corroborating witness" in the room.  Put yourself in these peoples' shoes.  Think about how you would like people close to you treated.  Empathy. 

It’s classless and you’ll likely draw a ban for it, so you might as well use that empathy you’re talking about to try and determine why it was a terrible thing to say.

 

[shader]

I encourage you to read up a bit on how the FBI investigation went when Anita Hill’s name surfaced and compare/contrast to what the FBI was allowed to do with regard to Christine Ford, Deb Ramirez, or even Brett Kavanaugh’s testimony last week.

Fair enough

 

[Doug B]

I have no doubt he drinks, and likely too much.  I think that is definitely more likely than not.  I don't feel that way when it comes to the allegations of his interactions with Ford.  I could be wrong, I admit that.  I don't know what happened.  But to label someone with that awful title, I think there needs to be more certainty of what happened.

Generally agree -- though I would think the interaction between Ford and Kavanaugh went much like she reported it (as opposed to being a concocted story). I think it was just that two people came away from a common encounter with hugely different perspectives on what happened.

 

[Shula-holic]

How is that classless?  I'm saying that if a woman in your own personal life were to go through a sexual assault that I'd hope someone would listen to them and not just dismiss it because there was not a "corroborating witness" in the room.  Put yourself in these peoples' shoes.  Think about how you would like people close to you treated.  Empathy. 

If you can't read that post and think if someone said that to me wouldn't that be pretty classless then I'm not sure we really have anything to discuss.  

I can assure you that I have empathy for victims.  I agree that people coming forward should be listened to.  But that doesn't mean that I find it ok to label someone with such a horrible title as rapist without more evidence than what I believe is out there.  This isn't either/or.

 

[Henry Ford]

Generally agree -- though I would think the interaction between Ford and Kavanaugh went much like she reported it (as opposed to being a concocted story). I think it was just that two people came away from a common encounter with hugely different perspectives on what happened.

That's not at all what he testified to.

 

[Johnnymac]

It’s classless and you’ll likely draw a ban for it, so you might as well use that empathy you’re talking about to try and determine why it was a terrible thing to say.

I'm not seeing how what he said was classless.

 

[Shula-holic]

And yet it didn’t stop you from being obtuse.

Nothing like a Shawshank quote to quit the discussion to claim victory.

 

[Doug B]

That's not at all what he testified to.

Understood.

 

[Henry Ford]

I'm not seeing how what he said was classless.

Keep in mind most conservatives think sexual assault is rare and most liberals do not.

Dickies is saying "this thing that is definitely going to happen to some woman in your life, I hope her experience lives up to your standard"

Conservatives received the same statement as "I hope your relative is assaulted."

 

[Henry Ford]

Understood.

So why are you making up a reason he didn't do anything wrong that would also mean he committed perjury?

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Fird worked Bromwich and Katz who are heavy hitters, as well.  Her friend Monica, has Laufman as a lawyer....

I'm always happy to learn something and you're likely more informed on this than me in this instance. - Ford has Bromwich and Katz as counsel, right? And Monica McLean has Laufman, right? And the concern is that Laufman worked at DOJ during the Hillary and Trump investigations? And Laufman and Bromwich have DeepStateTM connections? I really enjoy dot connecting but you're talking about ex-DOJ working in the world of Congressional hearings, and Katz was certainly not up for that. Browmwich had to quit his firm as a result. It's hard for me to even understand the claim.

 

[Cowboysfan8]

Fine, attempted rape.... better?

Hasnt been proven either 

 

[Bruce Dickinson]

Nothing like a Shawshank quote to quit the discussion to claim victory.

I’d love to discuss more about how the FBI was limited in their investigation and Grassley hid most of Kavanaugh’s work.  You ignored that part of my post.

 

[Shula-holic]

Unfortunately, in this scenario you either need to label him at least likely an attempted rapist or label her at least likely falsifying an accusation of attempted rape.  There isn't much middle ground and both labels are horrible.

Yet I'm not sure which.  I don't know truly what occurred.  What you are saying is true, unless you believe that someone assaulted her and it's a mistaken identity or something like that.  

 

[bear]

Try looking at the rules.   Running up votes in new york and california dont get you the white house.

Are you suggesting that the votes of people from California and New York shouldn't count or count less than other peoples votes?  Consider that these two places are two of the biggest economic engines the world has ever known.   Do they not deserve representation in your view?

 

[Henry Ford]

Yet I'm not sure which.  I don't know truly what occurred.  What you are saying is true, unless you believe that someone assaulted her and it's a mistaken identity or something like that.  

Which is kind of crazy, to be honest.  

 

[shader]

OH BULL####

Not picking on you Bruce.  But I do think the Democrats would have done the same thing if all roles were flipped.  I mean, they literally did it before (stood behind an accused rapist and a perjurer)  If you want to argue that they’ve learned their lessons from clinton, fine. But the fact that the party was cool putting him in the White House as the “First Man” and speak at the 2016 Democratic convention, tells me they didn’t.

 

[Cowboysfan8]

Duh, he was black

There it is.

Are you accusing a fellow poster of being a racist?

Maybe take a break

 

[Dickies]

It’s classless and you’ll likely draw a ban for it, so you might as well use that empathy you’re talking about to try and determine why it was a terrible thing to say.

If I draw a timeout for saying that I hope people listen to victims of sexual assault more than our congressmen and some of the people in this thread have, then so be it.  There has been plenty of tasteless #### said in this thread that makes me nervous about my daughter's future.

 

[JIslander]

Are you suggesting that the votes of people from California and New York shouldn't count or count less than other peoples votes?  Consider that these two places are two of the biggest economic engines the world has ever known.   Do they not deserve representation in your view?

Well, unfortunately, NY and Cali votes DO count a lot less than those in Montana, N and S. Dakota and Idaho -- minority rule --

 

[Henry Ford]

Not picking on you Bruce.  But I do think the Democrats would have done the same thing if all roles were flipped.  I mean, they literally did it before (stood behind an accused rapist and a perjurer)  If you want to argue that they’ve learned their lessons from clinton, fine. But the fact that the party was cool putting him in the White House as the “First Man” and speak at the 2016 Democratic convention, tells me they didn’t.

Bill Clinton was not accused of rape by Broaddrick until after his impeachment proceedings had returned a verdict.  In fact, she signed an affidavit refuting it.

 

[Aerial Assault]

Jeff Flake: you coward. 

 

[Aerial Assault]

And hope you enjoyed elected office, Susan Collins.  Truly one of the worst senators of any party (a high bar) in the last 25 to 30 years. 

 

[Doug B]

Keep in mind most conservatives think sexual assault is rare and most liberals do not.

More charitably, but perhaps a distinction without a difference: Most conservatives, way deep down in their innermost thoughts and feelings, probably draw the line of "sexual assault" in a different place than most liberals.

...

Merely an aside not meant to express anything about Kavanaugh's nomination:

I'm not sure that even if Christine Ford had called the police on Bret Kavanaugh on that same night in 1982 ... I'm not sure anything at all would have come of it judging by the likely "moral climate" of that time and place. Just thinking it through ... no removed clothes, nothing would've come up in a rape kit, Judge would've stonewalled and played it off as a gone-too-far prank or something. The cop on the scene wouldn't have likely perceived Kavanaugh's actions through a 2018 lens. Not sure if Kavanaugh's parents held any sway locally ... but if so, that would've also worked to grant Kavanaugh the benefit of the doubt.

Kind of a random thought that doesn't really fit in to the discussions of the last few pages. Just making a point that even an immediate call by Ford to the police probably wouldn't have changed the ultimate outcome in 2018 (except maybe in a butterfly-effect kind of way: Kavanaugh 'scared straight' going forward or something).

 

[JIslander]

Kavanaugh gets in --Blue Wave Bigger--  Lets just impeach his a$$

 

[Dickies]

Keep in mind most conservatives think sexual assault is rare and most liberals do not.

Dickies is saying "this thing that is definitely going to happen to some woman in your life, I hope her experience lives up to your standard"

Conservatives received the same statement as "I hope your relative is assaulted."

I'm actually saying that I think his standard is bull#### and that if that is the standard then he better hope his own family doesn't have anything happen to them.

 

[Henry Ford]

More charitably, but perhaps a distinction without a difference: Most conservatives, way deep down in their innermost thoughts and feelings, probably draw the line of "sexual assault" in a different place than most liberals.

...

Merely an aside not meant to express anything about Kavanaugh's nomination:

I'm not sure that even if Christine Ford had called the police on Bret Kavanaugh on that same night in 1982 ... I'm not sure anything at all would have come of it judging by the likely "moral climate" of that time and place. Just thinking it through ... no removed clothes, nothing would've come up in a rape kit, Judge would've stonewalled and played it off as a gone-too-far prank or something. The cop on the scene wouldn't have likely perceived Kavanaugh's actions through a 2018 lens. Not sure if Kavanaugh's parents held any sway locally ... but if so, that would've also worked to grant Kavanaugh the benefit of the doubt.

Kind of a random thought that doesn't really fit in to the discussions of the last few pages. Just making a point that even an immediate call by Ford to the police probably wouldn't have changed the ultimate outcome in 2018 (except maybe in a butterfly-effect kind of way: Kavanaugh 'scared straight' going forward or something).

I don't find that to be more charitable.  I find it kind of monstrous.