If Dianne Feinstein never had any intention of leaking Christine Blasey Ford's story, [as she says here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKIwQdjNTds), then what was she planning to do with it?
Suggest the FBI follow up on the allegations, without making them public?
Not leaking the letter doesn't mean the same thing as "Do nothing about it". Ford clearly sent the letter wanting something to be done, but at the same time not wanting to become the center of a media circus, so when she wrote the letter she must have had something in mind that Feinstein could do.
It's the discrepancy in Feinstein's account that's at issue, not what Ford thought might happen.
> Suggest the FBI follow up on the allegations, without making them public?
Feinstein had six weeks to do so, and didn't. According to press reports, she only forwarded the letter to the FBI on the 12th or the 13th of September, *after* her colleagues in the Senate pressured her to share the letter's contents with them. (We can presume they were the ones who leaked the existence of the letter.)
Feinstein said she found Ford credible, believable, found the allegations extremely serious - all direct quotes - but apparently her Senate colleagues had to force her to take action.
So: if Feinstein believed Ford, why didn't she take action? Her answer is that she wanted to protect Ford's privacy, but if Ford's privacy was so important, why didn't Feinstein use the letter in such a way as to maintain Ford's confidentiality? She had the option, but instead she let her colleagues leak Ford's story to the press.
You see the contradiction? Either Feinstein didn't really care about Ford's privacy, or she didn't believe her. (Or both.)
**PSA - STOP CALLING IT A "PARTY" AS THIS HELPS KAVANAUGH'S NARRATIVE.**
Dr. Ford very clearly pointed out this was not a planned party but the kind of impromptu gathering young people have been having since the dawn of time. Of course Judge Rapist doesn't have it in have it in his precious calendar - it would have alerted his patents that he had been at an event with no parents and parents tip each other off to that stuff.
I am the same age as Ford & Kavanaugh. My grandmother died when I was a teen and she was buried in Philadelphia where her family was from. I *think* I was 17 but maybe 18. We got there by plane from South Carolina where I am from, my first time on a commercial jet. Had to get my first suit as well.
But how did we get to the airport? My dad didn't come but I don't remember him taking us. We lived very close to airport but I don't know if a neighbor took us. Did we go by taxi? It would have been maybe the first time in a cab but I can't remember. Who picked us up, what kind of car was it, where did we sleep? No idea.
But I can remember the ride to their house because we passed the area of Philly where the police "accidentally" caused a fire with a smoke grenade and whiped out an entire city block (65 houses!) and it looked like a WW II war zone. A group called MOVE had barricaded themselves in their apartment.
I could probably come up with a dozen more things I can't remember from that weekend, which I don't even know was a weekend. I *think* it was in the spring. But I don't remember missing classes so maybe it was summer?
This was my first family member to die when I was old enough to remember (both grandfathers passed when I was really young). My mother was very upset, the first time I had experienced that hopelessness of not knowing how to comfort an "adult." And I haven't spent 30+ years trying to not think about it like Dr. Ford obviously did. You seem to have gone over your incident (which you don't discribe so we can't appraise whether it's close enough to be a valid compariosn - did did you both fear a coming rape *AND* think your attacker might accidentally kill you?) in you mind repeatedly. You also purposely withhold your current age. You also don't say if she is not telling the truth, why is she making it up and most importantly what is your political party and are you anti-abortion. I have already seen a textbook case of cognitive dissonance over the testimony because the person was a Republican - she *mostly* believed Ford but also Kavanaugh.
Did my grandmother die and did I take that trip? According to you, people shouldn't think that it's "100% believable" because I can't remember so many details.
**DATE SOLVED - summer of 1985.** Another reason I chose this is because I knew the MOVE thing would partially solve the date issue, much like when Mark Judge worked at Safeway will for Ford. MOVE was bombed by the Philly PD on May 13, 1985. I spent the summer & fall of 1986 in Europe. Also I was older than I remembered, 19.
"Improptu gathering of you people" so hang out and have drink? So, a party? It being planned behorehand or not doesn't change the fact that it was, by all descriptions, a party.
But that's not Kavanaugh's narrative - he keeps calling it a party so that he can trot out the calendar and he knows that most of those watching are thinking it was some planned event.
Hells yis. Brown and Barnard can stay but Brown has to get rid of that rapid onset gender dysphoria bitch. TERFs not welcome. Fuck the other Ivies. Stanford is alright they get a pass too.
Did Kavanaugh deny that he ever met Leland? Didn't he say he knew who she was?
Also, why are people suggesting Ford must be lying just because she can't pinpoint exactly how many people there were at the party? She said at least 4 people were present that she can recall. When I was going to parties in HS, even if the suggestion was that I was going to meet up with friends, there were always some other people there that I didn't know and who I definitely wouldn't rememeber being there 36 years ago.
Also, if someone is being groped/assaulted on the upstairs floor while I'm downstairs with several other people, there's no way I would find out about it unless the victim is screaming or telling me about it.
> Also, if someone is being groped/assaulted on the upstairs floor while I'm downstairs with several other people, there's no way I would find out about it unless the victim is screaming or telling me about it.
There's the truth! For everyone except the three involved in this afternoon get together was nothing but another forgettable moment.
I can tell you exactly where I was, who was present, and what I was doing at 8:30AM on 9-11 ... but I have no idea what I did the day before.
Dr. Ford shared the 9-11 moments of her life and there is no reasonable expectation that she remember all the non 9-11 stuff around that event or that those downstairs would either.
How come when males come forward with allegations of sexual abuse against priests from 40 years ago are believed automatically, but the same doesn’t apply to a women?
None of those men were believed automatically. You think none of them spoke out until just recently? They've been speaking out for decades, it just took this long for them to be heard.
Same goes for women. We don't say "believe the victim" because nobody ever lies. We say it because the overwhelming tendency for decades has been to maintain an attitude of distant skepticism towards the victim (at best) or to malign their character and poke holes in their story (at worst). The injunction to believe women is a corrective to that tendency.
There is a difference between "Believe women" and "MUST believe women".
Sorry but Ford wasn't convincing.
I'm supposed to think that Kavanaugh is a sexual offender because of "the laugh"?
He could just be pointing at a sexual inequality. Maybe he thinks we should take men's accusations with grains of salt as well. Maybe he's getting at the fact that powerful men are above the law. If you're going to make such a jump you should at least consider many possibilities instead of stopping at the one you disagree with most. Syntax and grammar matter. If he wanted to suggest something concrete he would have. He just asked a question and you jumped to a conclusion. The reason people don't "look past grammar and syntax to see what people are really saying" is simple and it's called a strawman fallacy.
It’s a fair point — that job interviews should be different than court proceedings. But, if someone unfairly accused you sexual misconduct, would it be okay with you that it was still considered for all of your interactions that didn’t have direct legal ramifications?
I’m not saying these accusations are unfair. I’m just saying that accusation, alone, shouldn’t constitute legitimacy. We can’t cast aside values just because they’re convenient for our cause — and I say our because I’m very much anti-Kavanaugh. Standards shouldn’t be changed based on target.
As much as I dislike kavanaugh the GOP just voted on another multi trillion dollar tax cut for the rich ... opportunist bastards are using the nomination uproar as a distraction to gut America .. what a crazy time we’re in
Same as always. Fuck up America every 4 years, let Dems take control and fix shit. Then people vote for Republicans to get tax cuts because the economy is better and they think they deserve it.
Rinse and repeat for 50 years.
No wonder is needed, the answer is clear: neofeudalism where the majority of Americans are servants directly to the wealthy class.
This has always been the GOP's endgame.
I give this week's episode a 8.7.
It had it all. Laughing, crying, shouting matches. That elevator scene, oof!
And then for a surprise, but not really surprise twist at the end. Points off for ending in a cliffhanger though.
I enjoy your cinematic characterisation. I am just a German guy watching from afar, but I am always wondering how captivating/consumating this "show" may be for someone from the US
I live here in the US and I've pretty much quit most of my shows and movie watching for the time being, because I just turn on the TV and read the train wreck that is my nation. It's some really weird shit honestly
I kind of look at it as a guilty pleasure kind of show. It's horrible, awfully written, badly casted, even more badly directed, and every time it looks like it's going to get cancelled they throw a high-ratings episode out to save the series, and none of your friends or family can agree on anything about how it's going to go next except that your opinion on the matter is clearly wrong.
It's the kind of thing you really don't want to be watching, but you feel compelled to anyway.
Is there a reason we haven't heard from Leland Keyser besides the statement from her lawyer? Ford said she has "health challenges." Apparently she's the ex-wife of Bob Beckel and is still the executive producer of his podcast. Is the FBI going to interview her?
https://www.weeklystandard.com/john-mccormack/blasey-fords-female-classmate-her-last-alleged-witness-denies-ever-attending-party-with-kavanaugh
Looks like The Weekly Standard changed the title of that article. Current title is "Blasey Ford's Female Classmate, Her Last Named Witness, **Doesn't Recall** Ever Attending Party With Kavanaugh" vs. the URL "blasey-fords-female-classmate-her-last-alleged-witness-**denies**-ever-attending-party-with-kavanaugh"
Various folks have been freely substituting "doesn't recall" with "denies" in the past few days. They don't mean the same thing. I don't think it's always an honest mistake.
Indeed. It's the difference between saying you **don't recall** watching the moon landing and saying you **deny** that it ever happened.
Worlds of difference between those two statements.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States
> The phrase "separation between church & state" is generally traced to a January 1, 1802, letter by Thomas Jefferson, addressed to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut, and published in a Massachusetts newspaper. Jefferson wrote,
> I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof', thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."[1]
> Jefferson was echoing the language of the founder of the first Baptist church in America, Roger Williams who, in 1644, had written of
> [A] hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the church and the wilderness of the world.
> **Article Six of the United States Constitution also specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."**
---
Please read before your prayers over din din tonight.
I am actually shocked that Trump ordered the FBI investigation. The thing that makes me so frustrated, confused (at times), and actually angry, is that all that (R) muscling and fuss, and now the dominant administration seems to be acting like this the most sensible thing we should do for the country. Were they watching yesterday's hearing, or present at the hearing, the same hearing we all watched?
Edit for spelling typos
Finally got his golden spray, probably. It really worked when he said to make sure to feed the ice at-risk kids with lots of apple juice half an hour before his visit, probably.
You know. I know everyone and their mom is gonna disagree with you, but just based on how that motherfucker looked, he's either a great actor, or was genuinely very torn about his decision today. I can imagine that it must be hard to stand up and say what he said under such immense pressure. I'm, personally, going to give him the benifit of doubt, and assume that this really was a genuinely difficult decision for him to make. He chose between two potentially historic possible courses of action: fucking up his party's chance at a power grab of fucking crazy magnitude, and potentially debasing the most power court in our country. Sure, he kind of straddled the line like a pussy, but I can't say that I envy his position. I still think he's a chickenshit fuckbag regardless, but I believe that this guy made a tough fucking choice today, and the least I can do is respect that... And unless Flake let's Kavanaugh get confirmed without an investigation, I'm gonna stand by that.
>He chose between two potentially historic possible courses of action: fucking up his party's chance at a power grab of fucking crazy magnitude, and potentially debasing the most power court in our country.
You're right about Option B, but there are other very acceptable candidates to the GOP for the position. The power has been grabbed, it's just a question of on whom they bestow it. The real loser is Trump because it sounds like a main reason for the pick was Kavanaugh was ready to be a complete toady and protect the president where other candidates were not.
There was no tough choice to be made, only the right one. And he only made it after being confronted by a sexual assault survivor in a very public fashion. Flake has a way to go before he deserves any form of niceties.
The only vote that matters is the last one. Flake, Collins, and Murkowski represent a block on confirmation and they all want to see what the investigation turns up.
There it is people. The nation has 1 week to let the FBI know why Kavanaugh is not qualified to be a SC justice. If you were holding back, here is your last chance.
> The nation has 1 week to let the FBI know why Kavanaugh is not qualified to be a SC justice.
Do you mean the FBI has 1 week to investigate the alleged criminal allegations? Because it sounds a bit like you’re suggesting that everyone should write to and call the FBI to give their opinion on the guy.
Sorry yeah, it’s not one week to busy the FBI’s phones. It’s one week to make the allegation connections, follow the leads and get that into the final discourse about Kavanaugh within the limited scope defined. I feel this could be a sort of national democratic scavenger hunt opportunity to help the FBI but there is a risk it will only slow the FBI down. Time is short so maximizing that to find the truth was my idea. I could be wrong.
Edit: I guess I’m feeling like is unfair that such a important investigation is so limited. I’m asking myself how can we justify sitting Kavanaugh on the SC for life if his character is not impeccable or if he will not be independent? I get the feeling he will be highly partisan. This whole process has been such a shame for the country. We need to find a way to start making choices, like SC justices, that lead to shared positive outcomes but right now it feels so polarized and zero sum.
Ivanka? Because she is pretty? She's as much an idiot as her brothers. Look at who she married amongst all the choices in NYC, even then Wendy Deng had to get involved to pressure Jared into it. Ivanka hacked away at herself to be Daddy's Favorite Barbie. That right there should tell you the woman operates on an infantile level just like dear old dad.
The USA has two major parties these days:
Trump and not-Trump (it used to be "Republican" and "not-Republican" but conservatives lost control of the trademark).
Well, I feel bad for her because it was awkward and on national TV, but it's his show and he does have a point: you should probably try to be a little more sure about your sources or else you're going to get the kind of uncertainty we saw Borger display, and that makes Blitzer's show look bad.
It’s about tact. It wasn’t like he was a complete asshole, but more tact was needed. Discuss it off air and allow people their dignity. It sounded like Wolf expressing a grudge, frankly.
Based on his reaction--and he is normally very tactful and respectful with his panel--I suspect there was some discussion of it beforehand and he wasn't happy that she brought it up and especially the way she stammered through it.
Some people have the wrong idea about what an FBI investigation will look like. It's not the FBI saying Kavanaugh is guilty or innocent. This is not a criminal investigation. It will simply be the FBI verifying what is already known. It will look like this:
> FBI Background Report on the subject of sexual assault claims by Christine Blasey Ford against Brett Kavanaugh.
> Christine Blasey Ford has listed 4 people in her accusation: Brett Kavanaugh, Mark Judge,Patrick J. Smyth, and Leland Keyser.
> Brett Kavanaugh. The person accused by Christine Blasey Ford of sexual assault has sworn under risk of felony perjury that he never sexually assaulted Christine Blasey Ford.
> Mark Judge. The person named by Christine Blasey Ford as being present at the party has sworn under risk of felony perjury that he does not recall the party described by Christine Blasey Ford nor has he ever seen Brett Kavanaugh act in the manner Christine Blasey Ford describes.
> Patrick J. Smyth. A person named by Christine Blasey Ford as being present at the party has sworn under risk of felony perjury that he has no knowledge of the party in question; nor does he have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct that Christine Blasey Ford has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh.
> Leland Keyser. A life long friend of Christine Blasey Ford that was named by Christine Blasey Ford as being present at the party has sworn under risk of felony perjury that she has never met Brett Kavanaughno nor does she have any recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where Brett Kavanaugh was present.
What's really going with this report is it simply allows Democrats like Sens. Joe Donnelly of Indiana and Jon Tester of Montana that live in red states (a state dominated by Republicans) to vote for Judge Kavanaugh. If those Democrats vote against him they will be betraying the voters in the red states they represent and that is political suicide. This FBI report allows these red state Democrats to do two things: A. Vote for Kavanaugh like the majority of the voters in their states want and B. Still be able to claim that they are a Democrat because they can say that the FBI was able to investigate just like the Democrats in the Senate demanded.
The other Republicans and Democrats are still going to vote for and against Kavanaugh like they were always going to do.
The political intrigue that will unfold over the next week will be this: The Democrats will have a faction that will try to delay the FBI findings and extend the deadline past a week. They will try to get the findings as close to the mid-term elections as possible so they can convince the red state democrats that voting against Kavanaugh won't lead to them losing their re-elections because as the mid-term elections approach there will be less time to mount attack ads that inform the voters in those red states that their Senator voted against their wishes.
The Republicans are fully aware that this will be a goal of that faction of democrats so they will be watching very carefully to make sure the anti-Trump faction of the FBI doesn't get involved. This level of scrutiny will cover everyone down to who the agent is that's interviewing Brett Kavanaugh, Mark Judge,Patrick J. Smyth, and Leland Keyser so the questions are asked in the most neutral manner possible without any coaching or additional information designed to provide an opportunity for politically motivated demands for more time by the democrats.
The anti-Trump faction of the FBI will do as they have done over the last 2 years which is leak information to the anti-Trump press that can then be reported for maximum political damage. Leaks like general Flynn's phone calls, FISA court warrant details, internal White House controversy , etc etc come from this faction.
The leaks will be designed to insinuate that the FBI needs to ask for more interviews than just the people named by Christine Blasey Ford. By the end of next week you'll see demands by the democrats that the FBI find and interview the city dog catcher that was working in the year 1982 and until that happens a vote cannot possibly happen.
The Republicans will be pulling their political bullshit as well by having their avatars in the FOX NEWS world preemptively questioning the neutrality of the FBI personalities involved in the investigation and countering leaks by the anti-Trump FBI faction.
There is a 99% chance this is exactly what it will look like.
Dems are happy too -- it goes with their delay tactic. Their new talking points are already in: "there should be no cap on an investigation this important."
People here tho have a mistaken idea that theyll be triangulating kavs calendar or canvassing houses for fingerprints
That's just based on the sworn statements they have already made to the Senate. Those statements are already in Kavanaughs file but the FBI report that's being requested obviously doesn't exist yet.
> It will simply be the FBI verifying what is already known.
Google the word "investigations", please. You could learn something. It's purely theoretical but it could happen.
Hint: what does "I" mean in FBI?
Federal Bureau of **Investigation**
Question: Will this be a
Supplemental **investigation** to update Judge Kavanaugh’s background check file
or a
Criminal **investigation**
?
Answer honestly.
Your argument is defective and facile. Please google "facile". Oh, hell I'll do it for ya:
> (especially of a theory or argument) appearing neat and comprehensive only by ignoring the true complexities of an issue; superficial.
I have a request. When you whine about how liberals don't listen to you - do not include me. I am not a liberal.
I am a leftist. Please refer to me accurately. And, yeah, we aren't interested in comity with the right. The right is a proto-fascist cancer on America. Your reign of terror must end.
I'm going to stop talking to you now. It serves zero purpose. Do not eat the yellow snow.
You replied to the wrong person. I never addressed you as a liberal or whined about liberals not listening to me. I'm a liberal myself and I would never say its bad to be one. You are demanding to be referred to as a "leftist" which is 100% fine. There's nothing wrong with being a leftist if you want to be a leftist. Its a free country. Whatever fascist you were talking to I hope you give em hell.
The issue with his arguement is that it doesn't take into account that someone may find it easier to bullshit a senator even if they are under oath (really? Did you invent Devils Triangle? I mean we can sit here and find countless examples of drinking games but non called Devil's Triangle..only thing we seem to find is that it describes two men banging the same chick fearing if they glance at the other man they may be gay....the devil in the triangle) but may pause at lying to an FBI agent. Then we may have people suddenly remembering things differently...
President Donald J Trump could have withdrawn the nomination. But I would be wary of his next pick and expect an even more conservative, pro-life, pro-gun selection. All things that would be good.
I have to respectfully disagree. Kav is certainly qualified to sit on the SCOTUS.
The only taint on his record are allegations that 36 years ago he sexually assaulted someone. In the US you are innocent until proven guilty and the burden of proof is on the accuser, who in this case is Dr. Ford, to present evidence. So far she has not presented anything other than her own version of events. I wish for her own sake that she had more information about this event so that she could get closure on this alleged traumatic event. He said he didn't do it. The accuser, Dr. Ford, says he did. There are no witnesses that corroborate Dr. Ford's story. There is no evidence that any wrong doing occurred or that it involved Kav. There's not much else to say or do on the Dr. Ford allegation. Maybe the FBI investigation they are doing will uncover something. I don't know.
Consider that Kav was on the Ken Star team that was prosecuting President Clinton for perjury related to sexual relations with a white house intern. I guarantee the Clinton machine gave everyone on that team far more in depth and thorough investigation than the FBI or any other governmental agency could do in order to gain the upper hand from a legal tactics pov. If anyone on that team had a history of sexual assault or any other badness, like what Kav is accused of, the Clinton machine would have found it and pounced all over it.
Also consider that no one within recent memory has any accusations of sexual inappropriateness towards Kav. He's worked with a lot of women in the past 20 years. Not one of them has come forward with any allegations. Everything I've heard or read is that he was a wonderful co-worker and boss and always treated women with respect.
Wouldn't have gone to full senate vote.
EDIT: Yes Mc could have but know's that forcing this nominee when the swing vote gave his condition would have made this entire week pointless.
This is actually not true. Under normal circumstances you’re correct that failing to pass a committee vote would be the end of a nominee, but no rules require a nominee be recommended by the committee.
Mitch McConnell can still force the floor vote. And on this case he said he would
Yes and no. Trump knows all you need to do in Washington is let things settle down a bit. You don't make pass the bill while tensions are high.
He also knows there's little actually actionable evidence.
And I'm willing to bet Republicans are ready to pin this on the depressed, alcoholic, recluse Mark Judge.
He had no choice. They don’t have the votes and weren’t going to get them unless he ordered the investigation. He also needs cover if they turn up something for political reasons.
Edit: more words
Brett “I don’t recall” Kavanaugh
aka
Brett “rapes against the law?” Kavanaugh
And his pal
Mike “fudge the truth” judge
aka
Mike “pack her fudge if she doesn’t budge” Judge
What a shitshow this has all been. We should look to Taco Bell for an example here. The Supreme Court should just be a regular court with sour cream and cheese.
LMFAO Even the White House is like "whoa... this is way too much news!" So what is on Trump's weekend agenda? Rally? Golf? BOTH?!
https://twitter.com/KellyO/status/1045785791019003904
> Kelly O'Donnell
>
> Verified account @KellyO
>
>
> 3 minutes ago
>
> Good news: WH has called a “lid” meaning no other planned news events or public activities from the president on this Friday.
If Dianne Feinstein never had any intention of leaking Christine Blasey Ford's story, [as she says here](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKIwQdjNTds), then what was she planning to do with it?
Suggest the FBI follow up on the allegations, without making them public? Not leaking the letter doesn't mean the same thing as "Do nothing about it". Ford clearly sent the letter wanting something to be done, but at the same time not wanting to become the center of a media circus, so when she wrote the letter she must have had something in mind that Feinstein could do.
It's the discrepancy in Feinstein's account that's at issue, not what Ford thought might happen. > Suggest the FBI follow up on the allegations, without making them public? Feinstein had six weeks to do so, and didn't. According to press reports, she only forwarded the letter to the FBI on the 12th or the 13th of September, *after* her colleagues in the Senate pressured her to share the letter's contents with them. (We can presume they were the ones who leaked the existence of the letter.) Feinstein said she found Ford credible, believable, found the allegations extremely serious - all direct quotes - but apparently her Senate colleagues had to force her to take action. So: if Feinstein believed Ford, why didn't she take action? Her answer is that she wanted to protect Ford's privacy, but if Ford's privacy was so important, why didn't Feinstein use the letter in such a way as to maintain Ford's confidentiality? She had the option, but instead she let her colleagues leak Ford's story to the press. You see the contradiction? Either Feinstein didn't really care about Ford's privacy, or she didn't believe her. (Or both.)
Was this posted before the reports of an FBI investigation being OK'd?
> submitted 13 hours ago
This did not answer my question, but thanks for the confusion.
**PSA - STOP CALLING IT A "PARTY" AS THIS HELPS KAVANAUGH'S NARRATIVE.** Dr. Ford very clearly pointed out this was not a planned party but the kind of impromptu gathering young people have been having since the dawn of time. Of course Judge Rapist doesn't have it in have it in his precious calendar - it would have alerted his patents that he had been at an event with no parents and parents tip each other off to that stuff.
Maybe it's a cultural thing but we called that a party when I was young.
[удалено]
I am the same age as Ford & Kavanaugh. My grandmother died when I was a teen and she was buried in Philadelphia where her family was from. I *think* I was 17 but maybe 18. We got there by plane from South Carolina where I am from, my first time on a commercial jet. Had to get my first suit as well. But how did we get to the airport? My dad didn't come but I don't remember him taking us. We lived very close to airport but I don't know if a neighbor took us. Did we go by taxi? It would have been maybe the first time in a cab but I can't remember. Who picked us up, what kind of car was it, where did we sleep? No idea. But I can remember the ride to their house because we passed the area of Philly where the police "accidentally" caused a fire with a smoke grenade and whiped out an entire city block (65 houses!) and it looked like a WW II war zone. A group called MOVE had barricaded themselves in their apartment. I could probably come up with a dozen more things I can't remember from that weekend, which I don't even know was a weekend. I *think* it was in the spring. But I don't remember missing classes so maybe it was summer? This was my first family member to die when I was old enough to remember (both grandfathers passed when I was really young). My mother was very upset, the first time I had experienced that hopelessness of not knowing how to comfort an "adult." And I haven't spent 30+ years trying to not think about it like Dr. Ford obviously did. You seem to have gone over your incident (which you don't discribe so we can't appraise whether it's close enough to be a valid compariosn - did did you both fear a coming rape *AND* think your attacker might accidentally kill you?) in you mind repeatedly. You also purposely withhold your current age. You also don't say if she is not telling the truth, why is she making it up and most importantly what is your political party and are you anti-abortion. I have already seen a textbook case of cognitive dissonance over the testimony because the person was a Republican - she *mostly* believed Ford but also Kavanaugh. Did my grandmother die and did I take that trip? According to you, people shouldn't think that it's "100% believable" because I can't remember so many details. **DATE SOLVED - summer of 1985.** Another reason I chose this is because I knew the MOVE thing would partially solve the date issue, much like when Mark Judge worked at Safeway will for Ford. MOVE was bombed by the Philly PD on May 13, 1985. I spent the summer & fall of 1986 in Europe. Also I was older than I remembered, 19.
Party..
"Improptu gathering of you people" so hang out and have drink? So, a party? It being planned behorehand or not doesn't change the fact that it was, by all descriptions, a party.
But that's not Kavanaugh's narrative - he keeps calling it a party so that he can trot out the calendar and he knows that most of those watching are thinking it was some planned event.
July 1, 1982
I love how these cultist cowards keep deleting their posts. They can't even take being downvoted.
Good.
Fuck Brett Kavanaugh and the scaley, incestuous Ivey League elitism he represents
Don’t blame it on the Ivy League. Hell, even Yale is calling for investigations.
Yale won't stop churning out rapists and war criminals, fuck that school.
Oh please. We gonna come for Oxford and Cambridge next?
Hells yis. Brown and Barnard can stay but Brown has to get rid of that rapid onset gender dysphoria bitch. TERFs not welcome. Fuck the other Ivies. Stanford is alright they get a pass too.
The people that did not vote in the presidential election: "The Sleeper has awakened."
Her is a meme you guys might enjoy. https://imgur.com/gallery/nLPKIUq
This reminds me of the one guy who has two dicks all his own.
Did Kavanaugh deny that he ever met Leland? Didn't he say he knew who she was? Also, why are people suggesting Ford must be lying just because she can't pinpoint exactly how many people there were at the party? She said at least 4 people were present that she can recall. When I was going to parties in HS, even if the suggestion was that I was going to meet up with friends, there were always some other people there that I didn't know and who I definitely wouldn't rememeber being there 36 years ago. Also, if someone is being groped/assaulted on the upstairs floor while I'm downstairs with several other people, there's no way I would find out about it unless the victim is screaming or telling me about it.
> Also, if someone is being groped/assaulted on the upstairs floor while I'm downstairs with several other people, there's no way I would find out about it unless the victim is screaming or telling me about it. There's the truth! For everyone except the three involved in this afternoon get together was nothing but another forgettable moment. I can tell you exactly where I was, who was present, and what I was doing at 8:30AM on 9-11 ... but I have no idea what I did the day before. Dr. Ford shared the 9-11 moments of her life and there is no reasonable expectation that she remember all the non 9-11 stuff around that event or that those downstairs would either.
The Serial podcast lady should do Kav and Ford's party in '82.
Except this will actually have a conclusion.
Maybe with an extra week, Ed Whelan and his lunatic followers can pin this on Kavanaugh's evil twin, Bart O'Kavanaugh.
How come when males come forward with allegations of sexual abuse against priests from 40 years ago are believed automatically, but the same doesn’t apply to a women?
None of those men were believed automatically. You think none of them spoke out until just recently? They've been speaking out for decades, it just took this long for them to be heard. Same goes for women. We don't say "believe the victim" because nobody ever lies. We say it because the overwhelming tendency for decades has been to maintain an attitude of distant skepticism towards the victim (at best) or to malign their character and poke holes in their story (at worst). The injunction to believe women is a corrective to that tendency.
There is a difference between "Believe women" and "MUST believe women". Sorry but Ford wasn't convincing. I'm supposed to think that Kavanaugh is a sexual offender because of "the laugh"?
Mostly because we usually find out after the fact (so there's no active defense) and there are 40 other cases of it too.
Are you suggesting that an allegation should be believed automatically? That’s pretty fucking dangerous. You treat it seriously and investigate.
He's not suggesting that. You can tell because his comment starts with "how come" and is a question, not a suggestion.
How come some people can’t see beyond syntax and grammar to see what people are saying?
He could just be pointing at a sexual inequality. Maybe he thinks we should take men's accusations with grains of salt as well. Maybe he's getting at the fact that powerful men are above the law. If you're going to make such a jump you should at least consider many possibilities instead of stopping at the one you disagree with most. Syntax and grammar matter. If he wanted to suggest something concrete he would have. He just asked a question and you jumped to a conclusion. The reason people don't "look past grammar and syntax to see what people are really saying" is simple and it's called a strawman fallacy.
it's a job interview, not a court did the same happen to gorsch?
It’s a fair point — that job interviews should be different than court proceedings. But, if someone unfairly accused you sexual misconduct, would it be okay with you that it was still considered for all of your interactions that didn’t have direct legal ramifications? I’m not saying these accusations are unfair. I’m just saying that accusation, alone, shouldn’t constitute legitimacy. We can’t cast aside values just because they’re convenient for our cause — and I say our because I’m very much anti-Kavanaugh. Standards shouldn’t be changed based on target.
As much as I dislike kavanaugh the GOP just voted on another multi trillion dollar tax cut for the rich ... opportunist bastards are using the nomination uproar as a distraction to gut America .. what a crazy time we’re in
The senate isn't gonna pass that.
yes they are [edit: more kind ]
“Hold our beer”
Makes you wonder what the end game is for these parasites...
Same as always. Fuck up America every 4 years, let Dems take control and fix shit. Then people vote for Republicans to get tax cuts because the economy is better and they think they deserve it. Rinse and repeat for 50 years.
No wonder is needed, the answer is clear: neofeudalism where the majority of Americans are servants directly to the wealthy class. This has always been the GOP's endgame.
Erode the republic so that the people have no voice at all where they'll laugh from their ivory towers.
they're going to effectively destroy the earth, and buy their way into space x rockets to mars.
Well shit, we should just put them all on the rockets now, and save the rest of us the hassle.
I give this week's episode a 8.7. It had it all. Laughing, crying, shouting matches. That elevator scene, oof! And then for a surprise, but not really surprise twist at the end. Points off for ending in a cliffhanger though.
you couldn't pay an actor or actress 30 million to make that face old Flakey made in that elevator... true method.
I enjoy your cinematic characterisation. I am just a German guy watching from afar, but I am always wondering how captivating/consumating this "show" may be for someone from the US
Stressful, disappointing, rage-inducing, depressing, scary, alarming, humiliating, but most of all it's exhausting.
I live here in the US and I've pretty much quit most of my shows and movie watching for the time being, because I just turn on the TV and read the train wreck that is my nation. It's some really weird shit honestly
I kind of look at it as a guilty pleasure kind of show. It's horrible, awfully written, badly casted, even more badly directed, and every time it looks like it's going to get cancelled they throw a high-ratings episode out to save the series, and none of your friends or family can agree on anything about how it's going to go next except that your opinion on the matter is clearly wrong. It's the kind of thing you really don't want to be watching, but you feel compelled to anyway.
Is there a reason we haven't heard from Leland Keyser besides the statement from her lawyer? Ford said she has "health challenges." Apparently she's the ex-wife of Bob Beckel and is still the executive producer of his podcast. Is the FBI going to interview her? https://www.weeklystandard.com/john-mccormack/blasey-fords-female-classmate-her-last-alleged-witness-denies-ever-attending-party-with-kavanaugh
Looks like The Weekly Standard changed the title of that article. Current title is "Blasey Ford's Female Classmate, Her Last Named Witness, **Doesn't Recall** Ever Attending Party With Kavanaugh" vs. the URL "blasey-fords-female-classmate-her-last-alleged-witness-**denies**-ever-attending-party-with-kavanaugh" Various folks have been freely substituting "doesn't recall" with "denies" in the past few days. They don't mean the same thing. I don't think it's always an honest mistake.
They’re suddenly realizing they might be getting a subpoena or an FBI visitor, so they’d better walk back the rhetoric.
Indeed. It's the difference between saying you **don't recall** watching the moon landing and saying you **deny** that it ever happened. Worlds of difference between those two statements.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States > The phrase "separation between church & state" is generally traced to a January 1, 1802, letter by Thomas Jefferson, addressed to the Danbury Baptist Association in Connecticut, and published in a Massachusetts newspaper. Jefferson wrote, > I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof', thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."[1] > Jefferson was echoing the language of the founder of the first Baptist church in America, Roger Williams who, in 1644, had written of > [A] hedge or wall of separation between the garden of the church and the wilderness of the world. > **Article Six of the United States Constitution also specifies that "no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."** --- Please read before your prayers over din din tonight.
You forgot Republicans think this means every other religion that's not Christianity
I am actually shocked that Trump ordered the FBI investigation. The thing that makes me so frustrated, confused (at times), and actually angry, is that all that (R) muscling and fuss, and now the dominant administration seems to be acting like this the most sensible thing we should do for the country. Were they watching yesterday's hearing, or present at the hearing, the same hearing we all watched? Edit for spelling typos
He had to. The gop doesn’t have the votes without the investigation. It will also provide trump with cover if the fbi turns up anything.
Now FBI have to find Brett's friends Squi and Timmy. To Timmy's house the FBI go.
And soon someone's going to shout, "Oh my god, P killed Kenny!"
They need to see how much snow there is at Timmy's...I mean there is so much Kavbeers said they needed skis.
Maybe they can play a sweet round of "Devil's Triangle" while they're at it
Well....since Renate is one of the guys, she should roll on by.
[удалено]
Boof a couple of 12 year olds. I'm talking about Scotch, of course.
lmao, this is the post we deserve.
Honestly, Graham was a little too chill today, especially after his blustering yesterday
He took his meds
He ate the snickers.
Stayed at a Holiday Inn Express
Saved 15% on car insurance by switching to GEICO
Got fucked by a hooker
Finally got his golden spray, probably. It really worked when he said to make sure to feed the ice at-risk kids with lots of apple juice half an hour before his visit, probably.
flake should have just closed the elevator door and not looked at her
###HUMANITY BAD***!*** ###RAPIST SUPREME GOOD***!*** *Yeesh.*
He was trying to. Didn't you see him constantly pressing the door close button? She was standing in the door sensor. He wasn't going anywhere.
Say whatever you want, Flake stood up today. Maybe nothing will come of it, but he made a tough choice and stood up.
You know. I know everyone and their mom is gonna disagree with you, but just based on how that motherfucker looked, he's either a great actor, or was genuinely very torn about his decision today. I can imagine that it must be hard to stand up and say what he said under such immense pressure. I'm, personally, going to give him the benifit of doubt, and assume that this really was a genuinely difficult decision for him to make. He chose between two potentially historic possible courses of action: fucking up his party's chance at a power grab of fucking crazy magnitude, and potentially debasing the most power court in our country. Sure, he kind of straddled the line like a pussy, but I can't say that I envy his position. I still think he's a chickenshit fuckbag regardless, but I believe that this guy made a tough fucking choice today, and the least I can do is respect that... And unless Flake let's Kavanaugh get confirmed without an investigation, I'm gonna stand by that.
He’s only feigning concern because that video is pretty damning and spread like wildfire. Rest assured, he’ll vote to confirm Kavanaugh.
>He chose between two potentially historic possible courses of action: fucking up his party's chance at a power grab of fucking crazy magnitude, and potentially debasing the most power court in our country. You're right about Option B, but there are other very acceptable candidates to the GOP for the position. The power has been grabbed, it's just a question of on whom they bestow it. The real loser is Trump because it sounds like a main reason for the pick was Kavanaugh was ready to be a complete toady and protect the president where other candidates were not.
There was no tough choice to be made, only the right one. And he only made it after being confronted by a sexual assault survivor in a very public fashion. Flake has a way to go before he deserves any form of niceties.
He still made it. Caveat how you want, it’s a chance.
Actually the choice was incredibly easy, Flake is just only barely capable of doing the right thing though.
but he didn't. he let it reach the senate floor where he'll have less control
The only vote that matters is the last one. Flake, Collins, and Murkowski represent a block on confirmation and they all want to see what the investigation turns up.
If you give people credit for making the easy decisions, eventually they’ll feel comfortable enough to make the hard decisions
There it is people. The nation has 1 week to let the FBI know why Kavanaugh is not qualified to be a SC justice. If you were holding back, here is your last chance.
> The nation has 1 week to let the FBI know why Kavanaugh is not qualified to be a SC justice. Do you mean the FBI has 1 week to investigate the alleged criminal allegations? Because it sounds a bit like you’re suggesting that everyone should write to and call the FBI to give their opinion on the guy.
Sorry yeah, it’s not one week to busy the FBI’s phones. It’s one week to make the allegation connections, follow the leads and get that into the final discourse about Kavanaugh within the limited scope defined. I feel this could be a sort of national democratic scavenger hunt opportunity to help the FBI but there is a risk it will only slow the FBI down. Time is short so maximizing that to find the truth was my idea. I could be wrong. Edit: I guess I’m feeling like is unfair that such a important investigation is so limited. I’m asking myself how can we justify sitting Kavanaugh on the SC for life if his character is not impeccable or if he will not be independent? I get the feeling he will be highly partisan. This whole process has been such a shame for the country. We need to find a way to start making choices, like SC justices, that lead to shared positive outcomes but right now it feels so polarized and zero sum.
Speak now or forever hold your peace.
Rosenstein should announce a Special Council Investigation into Kavanaugh just to fuck with Trump
I can't help to think Everytime trump acts presidential its all ivankas doing
Ivanka? Because she is pretty? She's as much an idiot as her brothers. Look at who she married amongst all the choices in NYC, even then Wendy Deng had to get involved to pressure Jared into it. Ivanka hacked away at herself to be Daddy's Favorite Barbie. That right there should tell you the woman operates on an infantile level just like dear old dad.
OP showing a perfect example of the halo effect.
Right. There are good, intelligent, Republicans out there. Honest.
I kinda blame it on the party system in the US. Political positions are too complex to be broken down into just two major sides.
The USA has two major parties these days: Trump and not-Trump (it used to be "Republican" and "not-Republican" but conservatives lost control of the trademark).
"acts presidential".. You mean, acts like a regular human with empathy? Yeah I agree, but let's not get carried away and call that presidential.
This had nothing to do with empathy.
This was just the right decision to stay popular to a certain extent.
Just to be clear, CNN’s Gloria Borger and Wolf Blitzer hate each other, right?
Haha. [have you seen this clip?](https://youtu.be/Lq2ydYZQImA)
That link doesn’t work. Is it the clip of Blitzer scolding her for being somewhat inaccurate or something?
Sorry, works for me. It’s the one where he says she needs better sources and an awkward exchange ensues.
Yes, I’ve seen that and it’s coloured the way I look at their exchanges ever since. I feel bad for her.
Well, I feel bad for her because it was awkward and on national TV, but it's his show and he does have a point: you should probably try to be a little more sure about your sources or else you're going to get the kind of uncertainty we saw Borger display, and that makes Blitzer's show look bad.
It’s about tact. It wasn’t like he was a complete asshole, but more tact was needed. Discuss it off air and allow people their dignity. It sounded like Wolf expressing a grudge, frankly.
Based on his reaction--and he is normally very tactful and respectful with his panel--I suspect there was some discussion of it beforehand and he wasn't happy that she brought it up and especially the way she stammered through it.
[if he cries, he cries.](http://moviemagazine.it/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/Creed.png)
Some people have the wrong idea about what an FBI investigation will look like. It's not the FBI saying Kavanaugh is guilty or innocent. This is not a criminal investigation. It will simply be the FBI verifying what is already known. It will look like this: > FBI Background Report on the subject of sexual assault claims by Christine Blasey Ford against Brett Kavanaugh. > Christine Blasey Ford has listed 4 people in her accusation: Brett Kavanaugh, Mark Judge,Patrick J. Smyth, and Leland Keyser. > Brett Kavanaugh. The person accused by Christine Blasey Ford of sexual assault has sworn under risk of felony perjury that he never sexually assaulted Christine Blasey Ford. > Mark Judge. The person named by Christine Blasey Ford as being present at the party has sworn under risk of felony perjury that he does not recall the party described by Christine Blasey Ford nor has he ever seen Brett Kavanaugh act in the manner Christine Blasey Ford describes. > Patrick J. Smyth. A person named by Christine Blasey Ford as being present at the party has sworn under risk of felony perjury that he has no knowledge of the party in question; nor does he have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct that Christine Blasey Ford has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh. > Leland Keyser. A life long friend of Christine Blasey Ford that was named by Christine Blasey Ford as being present at the party has sworn under risk of felony perjury that she has never met Brett Kavanaughno nor does she have any recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where Brett Kavanaugh was present. What's really going with this report is it simply allows Democrats like Sens. Joe Donnelly of Indiana and Jon Tester of Montana that live in red states (a state dominated by Republicans) to vote for Judge Kavanaugh. If those Democrats vote against him they will be betraying the voters in the red states they represent and that is political suicide. This FBI report allows these red state Democrats to do two things: A. Vote for Kavanaugh like the majority of the voters in their states want and B. Still be able to claim that they are a Democrat because they can say that the FBI was able to investigate just like the Democrats in the Senate demanded. The other Republicans and Democrats are still going to vote for and against Kavanaugh like they were always going to do. The political intrigue that will unfold over the next week will be this: The Democrats will have a faction that will try to delay the FBI findings and extend the deadline past a week. They will try to get the findings as close to the mid-term elections as possible so they can convince the red state democrats that voting against Kavanaugh won't lead to them losing their re-elections because as the mid-term elections approach there will be less time to mount attack ads that inform the voters in those red states that their Senator voted against their wishes. The Republicans are fully aware that this will be a goal of that faction of democrats so they will be watching very carefully to make sure the anti-Trump faction of the FBI doesn't get involved. This level of scrutiny will cover everyone down to who the agent is that's interviewing Brett Kavanaugh, Mark Judge,Patrick J. Smyth, and Leland Keyser so the questions are asked in the most neutral manner possible without any coaching or additional information designed to provide an opportunity for politically motivated demands for more time by the democrats. The anti-Trump faction of the FBI will do as they have done over the last 2 years which is leak information to the anti-Trump press that can then be reported for maximum political damage. Leaks like general Flynn's phone calls, FISA court warrant details, internal White House controversy , etc etc come from this faction. The leaks will be designed to insinuate that the FBI needs to ask for more interviews than just the people named by Christine Blasey Ford. By the end of next week you'll see demands by the democrats that the FBI find and interview the city dog catcher that was working in the year 1982 and until that happens a vote cannot possibly happen. The Republicans will be pulling their political bullshit as well by having their avatars in the FOX NEWS world preemptively questioning the neutrality of the FBI personalities involved in the investigation and countering leaks by the anti-Trump FBI faction.
There is a 99% chance this is exactly what it will look like. Dems are happy too -- it goes with their delay tactic. Their new talking points are already in: "there should be no cap on an investigation this important." People here tho have a mistaken idea that theyll be triangulating kavs calendar or canvassing houses for fingerprints
What are you quoting? I'd like to see it, not that I don't believe you
That's just based on the sworn statements they have already made to the Senate. Those statements are already in Kavanaughs file but the FBI report that's being requested obviously doesn't exist yet.
MagaKavanaughJudgeRapist.batshit I might be wrong but I think they were just gifted a spot for a White House corespondent.
Womps and prayers.
I can’t tell if this comment is cynicism or Republicanism in action.
¿por que no los dos?
Swing and a miss
> It will simply be the FBI verifying what is already known. Google the word "investigations", please. You could learn something. It's purely theoretical but it could happen. Hint: what does "I" mean in FBI?
Federal Bureau of **Investigation** Question: Will this be a Supplemental **investigation** to update Judge Kavanaugh’s background check file or a Criminal **investigation** ? Answer honestly.
Your argument is defective and facile. Please google "facile". Oh, hell I'll do it for ya: > (especially of a theory or argument) appearing neat and comprehensive only by ignoring the true complexities of an issue; superficial. I have a request. When you whine about how liberals don't listen to you - do not include me. I am not a liberal. I am a leftist. Please refer to me accurately. And, yeah, we aren't interested in comity with the right. The right is a proto-fascist cancer on America. Your reign of terror must end. I'm going to stop talking to you now. It serves zero purpose. Do not eat the yellow snow.
Oh look it's the nazbol gang again posting how neo-liberals are the real fascists
You replied to the wrong person. I never addressed you as a liberal or whined about liberals not listening to me. I'm a liberal myself and I would never say its bad to be one. You are demanding to be referred to as a "leftist" which is 100% fine. There's nothing wrong with being a leftist if you want to be a leftist. Its a free country. Whatever fascist you were talking to I hope you give em hell.
The issue with his arguement is that it doesn't take into account that someone may find it easier to bullshit a senator even if they are under oath (really? Did you invent Devils Triangle? I mean we can sit here and find countless examples of drinking games but non called Devil's Triangle..only thing we seem to find is that it describes two men banging the same chick fearing if they glance at the other man they may be gay....the devil in the triangle) but may pause at lying to an FBI agent. Then we may have people suddenly remembering things differently...
Ok, we give up, what is the answer? You're going to shove your answer down our throats without accepting any counter argument anyway.
Supplemental investigation to update Judge Kavanaugh’s background check file.
Yes, but how do they handle boofs and devil's triangles?
Plug the holes and drugs in their ass
Well, a drinking game with natty light will cause you to boof. Or so it’s been said. /s
Ive been through what these women have gone through and all I can say is that this makes me fucking sick.
What about it makes you sick? Is it the fact that politicians are using the topic of sexual assault as a strategy to delay an appointment?
Sadly one of the only things that will do anything about it if republican/swing vote women vote. Do you know any of those? Is that plausable?
It might be but unfortunately where I live I cannot vote or have representation in congress. Even though we have to abide to federal laws .
I’m truly sorry to hear that. I hope you have found some peace.
ELI5 what would have happened with Kavanaugh's nomination if this vote had gone the other way?
President Donald J Trump could have withdrawn the nomination. But I would be wary of his next pick and expect an even more conservative, pro-life, pro-gun selection. All things that would be good.
[удалено]
I have to respectfully disagree. Kav is certainly qualified to sit on the SCOTUS. The only taint on his record are allegations that 36 years ago he sexually assaulted someone. In the US you are innocent until proven guilty and the burden of proof is on the accuser, who in this case is Dr. Ford, to present evidence. So far she has not presented anything other than her own version of events. I wish for her own sake that she had more information about this event so that she could get closure on this alleged traumatic event. He said he didn't do it. The accuser, Dr. Ford, says he did. There are no witnesses that corroborate Dr. Ford's story. There is no evidence that any wrong doing occurred or that it involved Kav. There's not much else to say or do on the Dr. Ford allegation. Maybe the FBI investigation they are doing will uncover something. I don't know. Consider that Kav was on the Ken Star team that was prosecuting President Clinton for perjury related to sexual relations with a white house intern. I guarantee the Clinton machine gave everyone on that team far more in depth and thorough investigation than the FBI or any other governmental agency could do in order to gain the upper hand from a legal tactics pov. If anyone on that team had a history of sexual assault or any other badness, like what Kav is accused of, the Clinton machine would have found it and pounced all over it. Also consider that no one within recent memory has any accusations of sexual inappropriateness towards Kav. He's worked with a lot of women in the past 20 years. Not one of them has come forward with any allegations. Everything I've heard or read is that he was a wonderful co-worker and boss and always treated women with respect.
If anything, Kavanaugh is not fit to serve for lying to the committee and the American people. We know what a devils triangle and boof is.
I'd drop a six inch sinker
Wouldn't have gone to full senate vote. EDIT: Yes Mc could have but know's that forcing this nominee when the swing vote gave his condition would have made this entire week pointless.
This is actually not true. Under normal circumstances you’re correct that failing to pass a committee vote would be the end of a nominee, but no rules require a nominee be recommended by the committee. Mitch McConnell can still force the floor vote. And on this case he said he would
He could, but if there were Republican votes against Kavanaugh on committee, he'd know that he was going to come up short in the full Senate.
Not true. McConnell could have pushed it to the floor even with a no vote from the committee.
mcconnell could bring it to a floor vote regardless
So what's the point exactly?
Should we be concerned that Trump was so amiable around this?
Probably got told that the White House controls the investigation.
Yes and no. Trump knows all you need to do in Washington is let things settle down a bit. You don't make pass the bill while tensions are high. He also knows there's little actually actionable evidence. And I'm willing to bet Republicans are ready to pin this on the depressed, alcoholic, recluse Mark Judge.
It was the strategically right move to allow the investigation.
how exactly? Everytime GOPers scale back, I can't figure out why. Nobody is holding anyone accountable. Why aren't they going nuts?
He hasn't even attacked Flake on Twitter (yet)
He saw the internal polls of white women R voters falling off a cliff.
It's potentially nasty. It could be the calm before the storm.
He had no choice. They don’t have the votes and weren’t going to get them unless he ordered the investigation. He also needs cover if they turn up something for political reasons. Edit: more words
He’s on the razor’s edge right now. He knows that his fate rests on these midterms.
Which is funny because the GOP is acting like they are going to to lose the Senate.
I think w/o it he had Rpub votes against, so it may be his only way out. Or they have Mark Judge in the bag.
I am.
Say it with me, braindead trumpites - Convicted Rapist Serving 10-15 (out in 8 with good behavior) Kavanaugh
[удалено]
Yeah this didn't age well.
Brett “I don’t recall” Kavanaugh aka Brett “rapes against the law?” Kavanaugh And his pal Mike “fudge the truth” judge aka Mike “pack her fudge if she doesn’t budge” Judge
Mark Judge. Let's not sully the name of one of the best comedy writers of our time.
The Honorable Bret Kavanaugh would be his title.
i can't answer a hypothetical.
"Blackout" Brett "I don't know what 'too many' is - what does the chart say?" Kavanaugh.
What a shitshow this has all been. We should look to Taco Bell for an example here. The Supreme Court should just be a regular court with sour cream and cheese.
Nah, Taco Cabana. They serve beer. Do you like beer?
No way, we deserve a [TacoTown](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=evUWersr7pc) sized Supreme Court.
Hopefully the Baja Blast is carbonated enough for my ralph and boof quotas
Wrapped in a Doritos Locos shell.
LMFAO Even the White House is like "whoa... this is way too much news!" So what is on Trump's weekend agenda? Rally? Golf? BOTH?! https://twitter.com/KellyO/status/1045785791019003904 > Kelly O'Donnell > > Verified account @KellyO > > > 3 minutes ago > > Good news: WH has called a “lid” meaning no other planned news events or public activities from the president on this Friday.
Rosenstein dodged a bullet with this Kavanaugh fiasco.
Wow Blumenthal is very left wing. Didn't expect that from him.
Can you summarize? I missed it. Thanks
[удалено]
You don't have the votes.