Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

​ 🏛️ ​Official Supreme Court nomination thread - Amy Coney Barrett


Sinn Fein

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, timschochet said:

And this is why, @HellToupee that I wrote last night that Laura Ingraham has no credibility and Diane Feinstein does. You need to stop basing your trust of people on how closely they share your political opinions. 

We will hear an avalanche of statements in public that amount to "the fact of whether or not he tried to rape a girl 35 years ago should have no bearing on whether he can decide if a woman can control her own body under the law."

Edited by Henry Ford
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Maurile Tremblay said:

Republicans have lit themselves on fire. You’ll see the results in November.

Democrats should follow the same strategy when they come into power only if they want this year’s blue wave to be followed by a subsequent red wave.

“The other side is immolating itself. To get even, we must do the same!”

What are you expecting in November? Seriously, what are your expectations? The Dems get a slim majority in the House? Take back the Senate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Henry Ford said:

We will hear an avalanche of statements in public that amount to "the fact of whether or not he tried to rape a girl 35 years ago should have no bearing on whether he can decide if a woman can control her own body under the law."

The judge from the Brock Turner case has suddenly rocketed up to the top of the Republican party short list for SCOTUS nominees.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no idea how this is gonna shake out, but it certainly doesn't help Kavanaugh that he's already been caught red-handed being, at a minimum, incredibly misleading in testimony before Congress on other matters.

Nor does it help him that he was nominated by a man who has been credibly accused of sexual assault and responded with outraged denials.

 

The GOP keeps shooting themselves in the foot this election cycle. Nominate a less extreme/controversial/partisan judge and drop the ACA lawsuit and they would easily hold the Senate IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TobiasFunke said:

I have no idea how this is gonna shake out, but it certainly doesn't help Kavanaugh that he's already been caught red-handed being, at a minimum, incredibly misleading in testimony before Congress on other matters.

Nor does it help him that he was nominated by a man who has been credibly accused of sexual assault and responded with outraged denials.

 

The GOP keeps shooting themselves in the foot this election cycle. Nominate a less extreme/controversial/partisan judge and drop the ACA lawsuit and they would easily hold the Senate IMO.

You don't think they are going to easily hold the Senate?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, sn0mm1s said:

You don't think they are going to easily hold the Senate?

Easily? No.

I'm not sure what the current odds are, but I think it's something like 3-to-1 on them maintaining it. But that's not a negligible risk of them not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, sn0mm1s said:

You don't think they are going to easily hold the Senate?

I think they will hold it, but not easily.  I think it'll be close to the current split of 51/49. 

If they'd nominated a less troubling judge for the Court and dropped the ACA lawsuit I think they would have gotten closer to 55/45, which would then have let them keep the Senate after 2020 even if Trump/the GOP candidate loses by a decisive margin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, sn0mm1s said:
4 minutes ago, TobiasFunke said:

I have no idea how this is gonna shake out, but it certainly doesn't help Kavanaugh that he's already been caught red-handed being, at a minimum, incredibly misleading in testimony before Congress on other matters.

Nor does it help him that he was nominated by a man who has been credibly accused of sexual assault and responded with outraged denials.

 

The GOP keeps shooting themselves in the foot this election cycle. Nominate a less extreme/controversial/partisan judge and drop the ACA lawsuit and they would easily hold the Senate IMO.

You don't think they are going to easily hold the Senate?

Democrats take the house 227-208

Republicans keep the senate 51-49

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, lod001 said:

Feinstein serving up a big ole NOTHINGBURGER. What a lamer. No name ? Never happened. You got nothing lady. Made up BS by a Trump haters.

Yeah, women totally should want to come forward in public.  It's worked out so well for them in this sort of situation.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, timschochet said:

Ivan I was basing my thoughts on your quote that she was locked in a room that she easily left. Now I’m reading that he forced himself on her and tried to rape her. If that’s true it changes everything, wouldn’t you agree? 

I am putting literally zero weight on an anonymous allegation from 35 years ago that is getting leaked at the 11th hour.  If there's one thing that we've learned over the past couple of years, it's that there's never just one incident -- there's always a pattern.  If other people come forward with similar stories, then yeah of course that changes things.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Sammy3469 said:

Hmmm Farrow vs Ingraham.  One guys nailed every story on this sort of thing for almost 2 years now and the other, well...

If this really happened, this will just be the start.  There’s hardly ever just one victim.

Yeah, this doesn't start with "hey, man, you hang out in here and turn the music up while I try to rape this girl."  Nor end with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, IvanKaramazov said:

I am putting literally zero weight on an anonymous allegation from 35 years ago that is getting leaked at the 11th hour.  If there's one thing that we've learned over the past couple of years, it's that there's never just one incident -- there's always a pattern.  If other people come forward with similar stories, then yeah of course that changes things.  

My point is that it’s a serious enough charge that there needs to be an investigation before a vote. That’s my only argument. Do you agree? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, irishidiot said:

A last ditch Hail Mary from High school no less.  She said, he said.  I can't believe you people are believing this.  On second thought, I can believe it.

have fun guys & girls.

I think most people are reserving judgment.  As already stated, if this happened once it likely happened many more times.  If that's the case, there will be more accusers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, The Indestructible said:

John Bresnahan‏ @BresPolitico

.@ChuckGrassley releases a letter from 65 women who knew Kavanaugh in high school (showing Rs knew about this high-school rape allegation.) These women say Kavanaugh “behaved honorably and treated women with respect.”

:unsure:

Regardless of the validity of the allegation about Kavanuah, this is an awful, ugly tactic. The obvious implication is that if a man didn't sexually assault these women then he couldn't have sexually assaulted any women. Gross. It's like the GOP is telling women not to vote for them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Henry Ford said:

Yeah, this doesn't start with "hey, man, you hang out in here and turn the music up while I try to rape this girl."  Nor end with it.

I mean I do have one college friend who is still married to a classmate of ours after picking her up by asking if she wanted to see his stereo and “making out” to Megadeth turned up so loud Public Safety had to come and ask them to turn it down at 3 in the morning, so I guess anything is possible :shrug: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, IvanKaramazov said:

No.  Right now there's nothing to investigate. 

Well we disagree. There’s an allegation of rape. I want to know how credible it is. This is a lifetime appointment to the most powerful court in the land. It can wait a week or so while this gets sorted out. If it turns out to be nothing, fine. But it should not be ignored. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TobiasFunke said:

Regardless of the validity of the allegation about Kavanuah, this is an awful, ugly tactic. The obvious implication is that if a man didn't sexually assault these women then he couldn't have sexually assaulted any women. Gross. It's like the GOP is telling women not to vote for them.

Ummmm..... How else do you handle an anonymous allegation from 35 years ago? 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, timschochet said:

I’m amazed at you guys offering such bland assurances. How does anybody know? 

I also don't really get the "hail mary" thing. If the Dems wanted to kill the nomination it seems to me they would have leaked this earlier. The Senate has clearly known about this for some time- Grassley's letter and list of 65 women didn't just materialize this morning. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, timschochet said:

Well we disagree. There’s an allegation of rape. I want to know how credible it is. This is a lifetime appointment to the most powerful court in the land. It can wait a week or so while this gets sorted out. If it turns out to be nothing, fine. But it should not be ignored. 

It is almost impossible to determine if this accusation is credible. People don't remember events properly from 3 years ago.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, parasaurolophus said:

Ummmm..... How else do you handle an anonymous allegation from 35 years ago? 

 

You investigate its veracity and proceed accordingly. If the investigation stalls because the alleged victim is unwilling to testify, there's no corroborating evidence and the accused denies the charges under oath, so be it.  But what the hell does "he didn't rape me!"  have to do with anything, ever?  I'm pretty sure I could find 65 people who knew Jeffrey Dahmer that weren't killed and eaten by him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, TobiasFunke said:

I also don't really get the "hail mary" thing. If the Dems wanted to kill the nomination it seems to me they would have leaked this earlier. The Senate has clearly known about this for some time- Grassley's letter and list of 65 women didn't just materialize this morning. 

Other than the accusation itself that letter is the worst thing about this story. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TobiasFunke said:

You investigate its veracity and proceed accordingly. If the investigation stalls because the alleged victim is unwilling to testify, there's no corroborating evidence and the accused denies the charges under oath, so be it.  But what the hell does "he didn't rape me!"  have to do with anything, ever?  I'm pretty sure I could find 65 people who knew Jeffrey Dahmer that weren't killed and eaten by him.

These women said "he didnt rape me"? I thought it said he treated women with respect. Those things are different. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Apparently this woman contacted her Representative awhile back via letter. The Representative forwarded it to Feinstein, who has had it since July and did nothing with it due to the woman not wanting her name public. Other Democrats on the committee felt she was holding back information from them through and after the hearings, asked for it, and she gave it to the FBI. Democrats on the committee wanted information from her on what it was and she finally briefed them.

That committee needs younger leadership from each party. Grassley and Feinstein are old and slow and both remind me of Grandfather Clock on Captain Kangaroo.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, timschochet said:

So what are you suggesting? We don’t try to investigate at all? Just move to a vote? 

A 5 minute investigation. 

Do you have this incident recorded? Did you report it to the police when it happened? Was anybody else in the room that will corroborate your story? If the answer to these three questions is no, which it likely is, then the response should be, Ok, we are done here.  

There is literally no other way to corroborate a 35 year old story and be able to come to a reasonable conclusion. Having a long drawn out public investigation gives the media an excuse for clickbait headlines and serves as a guilt sentence. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Clayton Gray changed the title to ***Official Supreme Court nomination thread: Welcome New Justice

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
  • Create New...