Politics

Blue&White
Posts: 2612
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:01 am

Re: Politics

Postby Blue&White » Fri Oct 05, 2018 11:55 am

Senate voted 51 - 49 to send him for final confirmation vote. I doubt someone who voted "yes" on procedure is going to vote "no" on confirmation but it could happen, I suppose. NYT is reporting that Collins, Flake and Manchin are still in play.

Meanwhile, some of his former college friends wrote a combined OpEd to The Washington Post stating that Kavanaugh lied under oath about his college days during his testimony last week and that he should not be confirmed.

This whole thing is really insane. Forget about the political maneauvering on the timing of the allegations. The allegations are real and so are the accusations that he has perjured himserlf. He has lost support from the ABA, the Jesuits, and even the National Council of Churches. None of those are liberal or leftwing organizations. The ABA is completely non-partison and the Jesuits and NCC are conservative religious groups. And, they are all saying "wait a sec......". The investigation seems to have ignored - deliberately - anything about his basically lying under oath and focused on corroborating 30+ year old allegations which we all knew going in were going to boil down to he said/she said. But, we have some pretty good indications that some of what he said were lies - under oath.

And yet, in all likelihood he is going to be a US Supreme Court justice. What a world.
Is it baseball season yet?

PSUgrower
Posts: 713
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:52 am

Re: Politics

Postby PSUgrower » Fri Oct 05, 2018 1:41 pm

Completely agree with your post! The world is coming to an end

That is why I was wondering if he could be investigated in the future for lying under oath. It would not surprise me that if Kavanaugh gets in the Democrats could have him investigated for perjury. I am guessing that if he is found guilty of perjury he will not be able to be a supreme court judge. That is the only card play the Democrats have at this point IMO.

PSUgrower
Posts: 713
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:52 am

Re: Politics

Postby PSUgrower » Fri Oct 05, 2018 1:43 pm

BTW, this was a headline on one of CNN's new stories. I almost spit water out of my mouth. I did not click on it because I don't care
Protesters hold kegger outside of Sen. McConnell's house

Blue&White
Posts: 2612
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:01 am

Re: Politics

Postby Blue&White » Fri Oct 05, 2018 1:59 pm

That is why I was wondering if he could be investigated in the future for lying under oath.

Could they? Sure. I wouldn't hold my breath, though. This whole thing has been a total political disaster for both sides. I can't imagine the Democrats really want to open this up again. And, it is better for their electoral strategy to have him on there, quite honestly.
Is it baseball season yet?

sameoldlama
Posts: 662
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 7:43 am

Re: Politics

Postby sameoldlama » Fri Oct 05, 2018 6:05 pm

I disagree that Ford wasn't exposed for being less than truthful - her "fear of flying" claim was completely discredited and exposed for the tactic to get her testimony on her home court that it was. As far as her account - I guess whether it is truthful depends on which account you consider as she changed people present, time of event, place and details as the investigation involved and aspects of the story were either discredited or couldn't be corroborated.

I listened to Susan Collin's speech this afternoon - probably the most measured and rationale thing I've heard from a political figure in quite some time given it's length. She clearly explained what guided her decision making process which included - get this - analysis of Kavanaugh's judicial records and opinions.
She also ripped Feinstein's office as she implied that's where the leak of Ford's name originated from and was done so for political aims. She stated she reviewed the testimony and the FBI report and her standard was it more likely than not that Kavanaugh committed an assault (almost like a civil case standard) and she said it just wasn't there. She stated even Ford's witnesses couldn't corroborate or even contradicted her assertion Kavanuagh assaulted her - both Collins and Manchin both stated they believe Ford may have been assaulted somewhere, sometime, someplace but there was no evidence it was Kavanaugh. She completely ripped Avanatti and his client as being basically full of crap.

Of anyone - either Rs or Ds she by far gave the what I felt was an honest, open and fair minded assessment of this event and I honestly believe she didn't make a decision based on politics but on the facts presented to her and the rules which govern the process. I listened to the speech and just thought - wow.
Wendall : That's very linear Sheriff
Ed Tom : Age will flatten a man Wendall

PSUgrower
Posts: 713
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:52 am

Re: Politics

Postby PSUgrower » Fri Oct 05, 2018 8:52 pm

I am assuming she addressed that Kavanaugh perjured himself? Again, I have no clue what happened between Ford and Kavanaugh. That would have to be investigated in a different way if you ask me. I am surprised the Dems are going after this perjury narrative. We have a bunch of crabby old white people in office who think women and minorities are treated fairly in the US and the #metoo movement was a crock of shit. It will be interesting to see how this country reacts in the next few months.

Crowbar
Posts: 696
Joined: Sun Aug 27, 2017 12:54 pm

Re: Politics

Postby Crowbar » Sat Oct 06, 2018 6:01 am

PSUgrower wrote:It will be interesting to see how this country reacts in the next few months.


My guess is same as always.

People will complain and protest for a few days. The media will claim this is a "turning point" in human evolution.

Then we will forget about it and move on to the next issue to fight about.
National Champions 1911, 1912, 1969, 1981, 1982, 1986, 1994

LioninVa
Posts: 674
Joined: Tue Aug 15, 2017 11:49 am

Re: Politics

Postby LioninVa » Sat Oct 06, 2018 7:56 am

She did give an excellent and measured speech. I understand her logic but disagree that Kavanaugh will be as open minded and fact based if/when Roe returns to the court, and it will. I fail to understand how one can state that you believe someone’s claims up to but not including the point where your guy is implicated. That is not logica to me in any way, but it attempts to appease the women out there, I guess.

Nat@PSU
Posts: 287
Joined: Sun Aug 13, 2017 5:56 pm

Re: Politics

Postby Nat@PSU » Sun Oct 07, 2018 10:12 am

sameoldlama wrote:I disagree that Ford wasn't exposed for being less than truthful - her "fear of flying" claim was completely discredited and exposed for the tactic to get her testimony on her home court that it was. As far as her account - I guess whether it is truthful depends on which account you consider as she changed people present, time of event, place and details as the investigation involved and aspects of the story were either discredited or couldn't be corroborated.

I listened to Susan Collin's speech this afternoon - probably the most measured and rationale thing I've heard from a political figure in quite some time given it's length. She clearly explained what guided her decision making process which included - get this - analysis of Kavanaugh's judicial records and opinions.
She also ripped Feinstein's office as she implied that's where the leak of Ford's name originated from and was done so for political aims. She stated she reviewed the testimony and the FBI report and her standard was it more likely than not that Kavanaugh committed an assault (almost like a civil case standard) and she said it just wasn't there. She stated even Ford's witnesses couldn't corroborate or even contradicted her assertion Kavanuagh assaulted her - both Collins and Manchin both stated they believe Ford may have been assaulted somewhere, sometime, someplace but there was no evidence it was Kavanaugh. She completely ripped Avanatti and his client as being basically full of crap.

Of anyone - either Rs or Ds she by far gave the what I felt was an honest, open and fair minded assessment of this event and I honestly believe she didn't make a decision based on politics but on the facts presented to her and the rules which govern the process. I listened to the speech and just thought - wow.


I listened to the same speech and thought . . . "well, politics as usual." That anyone could look at Kavanaugh's testimony, particularly his refusal to acknowledge his transgressions as a young man and his outright lying (Devil's Triangle is a drinking game . . . :roll: ) and see someone fit for the highest court in our land is comical. Furthermore, his unmoored rant about this being a political conspiracy, naming payback for the Clinton's among the reason, speaks to his inability to be an impartial juror. Brett Kavanaugh is a wealthy, entitled, well-connected judge and his appointment to the Supreme Court reflects that. He was a petulant child on the stand, much as he was as the a-hole youth he appeared to be during his days at Georgetown Prep.

Susan Collins voted along party lines because she thought that would be the best way to get re-elected. Nothing more, nothing less. And she doesn't believe Ford or she couldn't in good conscience vote to approve a lifetime appointment where there are plenty of other qualified judges. We will see if that's the case, but to put her up as some bastion of character and integrity is, in my opinion, laughable.

Did you see that Merrick Garland recused himself from the ethics complaint against Brett Kavanaugh? That's what character and integrity look like, especially when viewed through the nature of his own nomination process. But Republican's see Brett Kavanaugh as a victim. Like I said, laughable.
- Nat

Let's Go State!!

Blue&White
Posts: 2612
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:01 am

Re: Politics

Postby Blue&White » Sun Oct 07, 2018 11:18 am

There were a few thousand documents that were not previously disclosed dumped in the night before the vote. You can be sure that the Democrats and the press will be combing through those to see if they can find evidence that Kavanaugh perjured himself during his confirmation hearings. Or, should I say "further proof" that he perjured himself, because it seems pretty clear that he did.

If the Democrats take the House, I don't think Trump is going to be the first target for impeachment. I think it's going to be Kavanaugh (assuming the Democrats leadership has the stones to actually go through with it, which I really don't think they do. At least not while Pelosi and Schumer are in charge).
Is it baseball season yet?