Politics Thread

[Caf]

thinking both are bad and caring about and acting on those thoughts are two different things. please point me to any of bobbie's screeds about hillary clinton's conflicts of interest while she was secretary of state or running for the presidency

That's fine and true. However, if your concern is hypocrisy and Clinton supporters enabling bad behavior, then I think you'd agree a lot of people are guilty of it today for Trump. Instead of remembering what it was like to be on the other side then, they're basically saying 'It's our turn.'

Whataboutism is a hell of a drug folks.

[chico]

If one of the Supreme's died, I'm sure The Grim Reaper would call off his 6 month vacation and try for another Bozo like Thomas.

I don't care to get involved in all the political discourse, but this statement is just plain wrong.

Read Thomas' concurrence in this case and tell me with a straight face he's a bozo. His methodical explanation of how the founder of Planned Parenthood was a supporter of eugenics, and the further explanation of the inherent connection between eugenics and abortion, is just brilliant.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinion...8-483_3d9g.pdf

[paulxu]

Show me some evidence Paul, cause no one else has,

That's exactly the point MOR, and what disturbs me.
In almost every case of "he said...she said" the problem is that it's one person's word against another's.
These actions most often happen where there are no witnesses...forcing us to rely on the person's word, and we end up with nonsense on all sides.
People on both sides asserting the character, credibility, etc of both parties.

But...and this is critical...there was a witness to the Kavanaugh situation. His buddy was in the room when the alleged incident happened.
That's pretty damn simple...have the buddy testify to which person is telling the truth.

But the Republicans running the Senate hearings would not call his buddy to testify. That would concern most people I would think. Maybe not.

[X-man]

That's exactly the point MOR, and what disturbs me.
In almost every case of "he said...she said" the problem is that it's one person's word against another's.
These actions most often happen where there are no witnesses...forcing us to rely on the person's word, and we end up with nonsense on all sides.
People on both sides asserting the character, credibility, etc of both parties.

But...and this is critical...there was a witness to the Kavanaugh situation. His buddy was in the room when the alleged incident happened.
That's pretty damn simple...have the buddy testify to which person is telling the truth.

But the Republicans running the Senate hearings would not call his buddy to testify. That would concern most people I would think. Maybe not.

It would be amazing to think that MOR wouldn't understand this. However he is so partisan that logic and objective reality simply escapes him...over and over again.

[xudash]

It would be amazing to think that MOR wouldn't understand this. However he is so partisan that logic and objective reality simply escapes him...over and over again.

What are your thoughts on the following:

No corroborating witnesses. Including the ones Ford tried to use.
No support from Ford’s family.
No explanation as to how the timeline detailed by Ford could not match up between the house and the club.
No explanation as to how Ford got all the way Home.
Why did Ford have 2 lawyers at her table “advising” her when it was not a trial? And Kavanaugh had none?
Why did Feinstein wait over 60 days to bring this hot letter to light?
Oh. And what happened to all that supporting evidence like Ford’s alleged psychologists notes that never, EVER, showed up despite being promised to the Committee.

[bobbiemcgee]

I don't care to get involved in all the political discourse, but this statement is just plain wrong.

Read Thomas' concurrence in this case and tell me with a straight face he's a bozo. His methodical explanation of how the founder of Planned Parenthood was a supporter of eugenics, and the further explanation of the inherent connection between eugenics and abortion, is just brilliant.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinion...8-483_3d9g.pdf

he asked one question in 10 years - brilliant. I'm sure he has excellent clerks.

[paulxu]

What are your thoughts on the following:

No corroborating witnesses. Including the ones Ford tried to use.
No support from Ford’s family.
No explanation as to how the timeline detailed by Ford could not match up between the house and the club.
No explanation as to how Ford got all the way Home.
Why did Ford have 2 lawyers at her table “advising” her when it was not a trial? And Kavanaugh had none?
Why did Feinstein wait over 60 days to bring this hot letter to light?
Oh. And what happened to all that supporting evidence like Ford’s alleged psychologists notes that never, EVER, showed up despite being promised to the Committee.

Dash,
Those are of concern, as well as issues like that on the other side (was he a binge drinker, did he black out, etc.)
Just take one question: why doesn't she remember how she got home?
Is that not credible? I don't remember how I got home from every party in high school.
If she had just been traumatized, maybe that years later is the clearest memory she has?

Those are all the things I alluded to in my question. People will rise up to criticize both sides, and support both sides.

But it fails to answer the simple one. The one that makes all theses cases so hard on everyone...no witnesses.
There was a witness here.

Failure to call that witness should give anyone pause.

[chico]

he asked one question in 10 years - brilliant. I'm sure he has excellent clerks.

So you're basing his competence on whether he asks questions, not his legal reasoning and what he's written. Got it.

[noteggs]

Dash,
Those are of concern, as well as issues like that on the other side (was he a binge drinker, did he black out, etc.)
Just take one question: why doesn't she remember how she got home?
Is that not credible? I don't remember how I got home from every party in high school.
If she had just been traumatized, maybe that years later is the clearest memory she has?

Those are all the things I alluded to in my question. People will rise up to criticize both sides, and support both sides.

But it fails to answer the simple one. The one that makes all theses cases so hard on everyone...no witnesses.
There was a witness here.

Failure to call that witness should give anyone pause.

I get your point to certain degree, but how do you take the politics out the hearings? Mark Judge was investigated by FBI and both sides had access to their findings.

Also Judge sent a letter to the FBI and said:

"I never saw Brett act in the manner Dr. Ford describes. I am knowingly submitting this letter under penalty of felony." So not exactly a he said she said situation

I can’t remember the last time Congress continued their hearings after a closed FBI investigation and came up with a different conclusion. It’s just political theater at that point.

[xudash]

Dash,
Those are of concern, as well as issues like that on the other side (was he a binge drinker, did he black out, etc.)
Just take one question: why doesn't she remember how she got home?
Is that not credible? I don't remember how I got home from every party in high school.
If she had just been traumatized, maybe that years later is the clearest memory she has?

Those are all the things I alluded to in my question. People will rise up to criticize both sides, and support both sides.

But it fails to answer the simple one. The one that makes all theses cases so hard on everyone...no witnesses.
There was a witness here.

Failure to call that witness should give anyone pause.

No problem Paul. I give you that. But I give you that, knowing that her own witnesses were somewhere between less than stellar and non-existent; they weren't all-in in terms of backing her story.

The Democrats on the panel screwed the pooch in that process. Seriously, you have to agree with that. It was a travesty and it was embarrassing for the nation.

Finally, how did we come to a place where foggy high school behavior becomes the pivotal go/no go point in this level of decisioning?