Politics Thread

[Caf]

If you say it's true, why not have some investigative body look into it?

At the risk of sounding insensitive, finding out that her allegations are true won't change any minds about his nomination. Any conservatives/republicans here on this board who would be against his nomination if the FBI somehow proves this to the utmost certainty? Any democrats/liberals on this board who supported him in the first place?

If this happened, I'm sorry that it did, but I have a hard time buying that this makes him unfit to be on the court in anyone's mind. The only reason the Republicans have stuttered on this is that it might hurt their appeal to female voters come November.

[GoMuskies]

At the risk of sounding insensitive, finding out that her allegations are true won't change any minds about his nomination. Any conservatives/republicans here on this board who would be against his nomination if the FBI somehow proves this to the utmost certainty?

I hate to be cast with the Republican label (ew), but I'd say I lean conservative. And if her allegations (as stated) are true, I think he should step aside. I mean, she claimed he fondled her against her will and tried to forcibly take off her clothes. If those are true, yeah, he's out. And should be.

[Juice]

I have no idea if it's true or not. However, if you say it's not true what is this woman's motive? She has a decent job, family, all things are going her way right now. Why would you stir up a nation's animosity just to provide a political hail mary.

If you say it's true, why not have some investigative body look into it? You can then have them both sit in front of congress and testify to the findings. If you don't, it will degrade to he said she said. There would be no accountability and no reason to stick to any kind of truth.

A few things stick out to me, she passed a lie detector test. Yes that is largely meaningless, but she at least believes what she says is true. She and her husband spoke with a therapist about this incident six years ago. The third person named in the room wants nothing to do with sitting and answering congressional questions.

The FBI can't investigate this. It's not a federal matter. She gave no major details to investigate other than that it was Kavanaugh 36 years ago, but not a place or date. Also, the FBI has investigated him at least 6 times prior to this.

Also, the lie detector test was administered by HER lawyer in her lawyer's office. That test isn't worth shit in court and shouldn't be with the general public.

I'm open to these allegations being true but she has provided nothing to back up her claims. She has provided contradicting details and the two people she said would corroborate this, in fact did not corroborate her story.

And to Caf's question, if he did then he needs to go away and let the next man/woman up be put up for nomination.

[Caf]

And to Caf's question, if he did then he needs to go away and let the next man/woman up be put up for nomination.

Based on yours and Go' answers, Senate Republicans are going to get dragged through the mud on this. It's either, 'this doesn't matter' or 'we can't prove it'. The 'we can't prove it' defense is really damn weak if they don't even try.

[GoMuskies]

Based on yours and Go' answers, Senate Republicans are going to get dragged through the mud on this. It's either, 'this doesn't matter' or 'we can't prove it'. The 'we can't prove it' defense is really damn weak if they don't even try.

Oh, I don't think they owe it to anyone to try very hard to prove/disprove anything. They should have this hearing next Monday, and if there's no other corroboration/evidence, Kavanaugh should be confirmed. But it WILL give cover to the Dem senators in Republican states who thought they had to vote for Kavanaugh to win in November. It's 100% going to be 51-49 now.

[Juice]

Based on yours and Go' answers, Senate Republicans are going to get dragged through the mud on this. It's either, 'this doesn't matter' or 'we can't prove it'. The 'we can't prove it' defense is really damn weak if they don't even try.

They should have a hearing and Kavanaugh and Ford should both be given the opportunity to answer questions and speak to the Senate.

[Caf]

Oh, I don't think they owe it to anyone to try very hard to prove/disprove anything. They should have this hearing next Monday, and if there's no other corroboration/evidence, Kavanaugh should be confirmed. But it WILL give cover to the Dem senators in Republican states who thought they had to vote for Kavanaugh to win in November. It's 100% going to be 51-49 now.

If the allegation is bad enough that you think he should drop out if true, then how is it not bad enough to think they need to investigate it?

FWIW I agree with what you think the senate should do. I'm just curious what your thoughts are overall. This is something there's no precedent for and instance #1,000,000 of, 'we can't beat the ideas, let's beat the person'. Which I'm pretty tired of seeing.

[GoMuskies]

The guy's been investigated 8.7 million times, approximately. The due diligence has been done. If you put on the brakes NOW, you're just rewarding those who want the process delayed for political reasons (and encouraging similar tactics in the future). A mere allegation isn't enough. Give it a fair hearing. If something comes up, or one of the 11 Republicans on the Judiciary Committee sees enough from the meeting to prevent the appointment from getting out of Committee, then it gets delayed or he is moved aside.

Otherwise, get on with it already and let Collins decide what she's going to do. It's basically up to her.

[ArizonaXUGrad]

The FBI can't investigate this. It's not a federal matter. She gave no major details to investigate other than that it was Kavanaugh 36 years ago, but not a place or date. Also, the FBI has investigated him at least 6 times prior to this.

Also, the lie detector test was administered by HER lawyer in her lawyer's office. That test isn't worth shit in court and shouldn't be with the general public.

I'm open to these allegations being true but she has provided nothing to back up her claims. She has provided contradicting details and the two people she said would corroborate this, in fact did not corroborate her story.

And to Caf's question, if he did then he needs to go away and let the next man/woman up be put up for nomination.

I believe it was given by a retired FBI agent and not her lawyer. Before you freak out get your facts straight. I actually wrote, "investigative body" also. I don't care who, just pick one and tell them to cowboy up and get to work.

The lie detector shows she believes her answers to be true. I understand there are two sides to each story and the truth is in the middle, but we are talking about sexual assault here. The fact that the incident may or may not have taken place decades ago is not germane to the issue. I am not seeing anywhere that states the victim has convoluted facts.

[Juice]

I believe it was given by a retired FBI agent and not her lawyer. Before you freak out get your facts straight. I actually wrote, "investigative body" also. I don't care who, just pick one and tell them to cowboy up and get to work.

The lie detector shows she believes her answers to be true. I understand there are two sides to each story and the truth is in the middle, but we are talking about sexual assault here. The fact that the incident may or may not have taken place decades ago is not germane to the issue. I am not seeing anywhere that states the victim has convoluted facts.

She told her therapist it was 4 guys and didn't name Kavanaugh (not saying that precludes him, just saying she didn't name him). Now she say's it was mainly Kavanaugh with another guy who came into the room. She said two men would corroborate her story. They did not.