Kavanaugh Confirmation

#2,102
#2,102
  • Like
Reactions: Septic and Grand Vol
#2,103
#2,103
lawgator1 said:
The thing about this is that both sides can twist things and say the other is doing it out of bad motive. The GOP can say the Dems are having her ask for the investigation to delay and have Trump say no. The Dems can say the reason that Trump and the GOP want to move forward without it is to prevent corroboration from being discovered.

Whole thing is very depressing to watch. Again, both sides.
Click to expand...

********. In most cases I would agree with the both sides argument, but not in this case. This is all Dems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpaceCoastVol and Franklin Pierce
#2,104
#2,104
volinbham said:
But the very call itself for an investigation by the FBI before the accuser will testify is a virtually unmeetable and absurd demand. It is not a serious call for anything other than delay. Of course the GOP has to call it what it is. Obviously you are pro-Dem but you have to admit this a BS move.
Click to expand...

She's calling for it. And there is as logic to it. Again, it's just a circle of attacking motives.

I can do it, too, as you know. Sadly, none of the involved folks can be trusted by the other side, so we get nowhere.
 
#2,106
#2,106
lawgator1 said:
She's calling for it. And there is as logic to it. Again, it's just a circle of attacking motives.

I can do it, too, as you know. Sadly, none of the involved folks can be trusted by the other side, so we get nowhere.
Click to expand...

Do you think she's really calling the shots on this process?
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88
#2,107
#2,107
volinbham said:
But the very call itself for an investigation by the FBI before the accuser will testify is a virtually unmeetable and absurd demand. It is not a serious call for anything other than delay. Of course the GOP has to call it what it is. Obviously you are pro-Dem but you have to admit this a BS move.
Click to expand...
It's giving the Dems more broadsides to go after. Call the thing a witch hunt or a farce and you're a sexist who hates women and just wants to ram in a pro life sex pervert. I'm starting to think they've decided they're going to cede this ground but not without extracting some political capital. They can't stop the GOP in this fight but they can make them look like awful people headed into the midterms.

Again this is amazing to me that the Dems want to lay the blueprints for such a ploy. It's so short sighted it's unbelievable. Let's say everything goes their way in the midterms AND Ginsburg retires/bites it. Do they think they'll be shown any quarter?
 
Last edited:
#2,109
#2,109
So when K is confirmed to the court. Do we impeach all of the women in order to keep them from being sexually assaulted?
 
#2,110
#2,110
SLICKYINC said:
So when K is confirmed to the court. Do we impeach all of the women in order to keep them from being sexually assaulted?
Click to expand...

I don't think he'll make it. There won't be an FBI investigation so there will be no testimony from Ford. Still I'm betting Collins bails.
 
#2,111
#2,111
lawgator1 said:
She's calling for it. And there is as logic to it. Again, it's just a circle of attacking motives.

I can do it, too, as you know. Sadly, none of the involved folks can be trusted by the other side, so we get nowhere.
Click to expand...

No, there is no logic in asking a Federal agency to investigate something that's out of their purview. She and DiFi might as well as the FBI to investigate a random purse snatching.
 
#2,114
#2,114
volinbham said:
Do you think she's really calling the shots on this process?
Click to expand...


I really don't know. Do you? And if so how?

Other than that it's bad for K, what's the proof of that? I mean sure, it's possible. Seems like an awful lot to expose oneself to at someone else's bidding.
 
#2,117
#2,117
lawgator1 said:
I really don't know. Do you? And if so how?

Other than that it's bad for K, what's the proof of that? I mean sure, it's possible. Seems like an awful lot to expose oneself to at someone else's bidding.
Click to expand...

I was referring to the sudden switch from "my client is happy to testify in open session" to "my client will not testify until the FBI does an investigation (whatever that means)". Do you think that was her idea or maybe someone said, oh crap, they took us up on the open hearing let's regroup.
 
#2,118
#2,118
volinbham said:
I was referring to the sudden switch from "my client is happy to testify in open session" to "my client will not testify until the FBI does an investigation (whatever that means)". Do you think that was her idea or maybe someone said, oh crap, they took us up on the open hearing let's regroup.
Click to expand...
Bluff got called.
 
#2,119
#2,119
So it looks like Corker and Flake are on board. Just need one of Collins or Murkowski to vote yes, and he’ll get confirmed.
 
#2,122
#2,122
volinbham said:
Corker's not on the Judiciary Committee. I suppose Collins could abstain and it could come out a tie?
Click to expand...
I know he’s not on the committee, I meant the full senate vote. Collins isn’t on the committee either. The only one on the Judiciary Committee who was questionable was Flake, but he came out earlier and said if she doesn’t show on Monday, he supports moving ahead to a vote.
 
#2,123
#2,123
Boston Vol said:
I know he’s not on the committee, I meant the full senate vote. Collins isn’t on the committee either. The only one on the Judiciary Committee who was questionable was Flake, but he came out earlier and said if she doesn’t show on Monday, he supports moving ahead to a vote.
Click to expand...

Thanks for the correction - not sure why I thought Collins was on there.
 
#2,125
#2,125
Democratic operative just said:

1. Some Dems don't believe Ellison's accuser
2. This experience is good for Kavanaugh so he'll be able to relate to the poor and minority people who come before him falsely accused of crimes and experiencing the full weight of the system.

LOL
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement

Back
Top