US Politics Thread |OT| SAD TRUMP

[Propagandhim]

The denial for the investigation seems reasonably strategic to me and not really indicative of guilt.    An FBI investigation could potentially stall until midterms where they could risk losing the Senate and the confirmation.  Do I have this wrong?  What am I missing here?   Of course the implication is that Ford is lying, which seems hard to believe, too.  Nothing I saw today seemed so egregiously determinate of guilt.

[Maiden Voyage]

https://twitter.com/LisaDNews/status/1045464083162640384

Looks like we have a new justice

[Propagandhim]

https://twitter.com/LisaDNews/status/1045464083162640384

Looks like we have a new justice

So given that the vote will happen tomorrow, it seems like not acquiescing to all the pleading for an investigation was not an indication of guilt, but actually a reasonable course of action for an individual who wants to work on the Supreme Court?  "If he's innocent why won't he allow an FBI investigation?"  Uhhh, he's not an imbecile?

[Boredfrom]

The denial for the investigation seems reasonably strategic to me and not really indicative of guilt.    An FBI investigation could potentially stall until midterms where they could risk losing the Senate and the confirmation.  Do I have this wrong?  What am I missing here?   Of course the implication is that Ford is lying, which seems hard to believe, too.  Nothing I saw today seemed so egregiously determinate of guilt.

The problem is that it shouldn’t be this way. Whatever or not he is innocent, the priority should be make the investigation over politics.

So given that the vote will happen tomorrow, it seems like not acquiescing to all the pleading for an investigation was not an indication of guilt, but actually a reasonable course of action for an individual who wants to work on the Supreme Court?  "If he's innocent why won't he allow an FBI investigation?"  Uhhh, he's not an imbecile?

 

He is a fucking judge.

[Propagandhim]

The denial for the investigation seems reasonably strategic to me and not really indicative of guilt.    An FBI investigation could potentially stall until midterms where they could risk losing the Senate and the confirmation.  Do I have this wrong?  What am I missing here?   Of course the implication is that Ford is lying, which seems hard to believe, too.  Nothing I saw today seemed so egregiously determinate of guilt.

The problem is that it shouldn’t be this way. Whatever or not he is innocent, the priority should be make the investigation over politics.

So given that the vote will happen tomorrow, it seems like not acquiescing to all the pleading for an investigation was not an indication of guilt, but actually a reasonable course of action for an individual who wants to work on the Supreme Court?  "If he's innocent why won't he allow an FBI investigation?"  Uhhh, he's not an imbecile?

 

He is a fucking judge.

Not a rhetorical question:  Why is it his prerogative to allow for an FBI investigation?  Why are we relying on the desires of the accused if that's 'not the way it should be'?  It's not a surprise that he would say no to an investigation spurned by people that are trying to deny a Republican judge pick at all costs.  I don't blame him at all.   So, why do we need his go-ahead? 

[Boredfrom]

The denial for the investigation seems reasonably strategic to me and not really indicative of guilt.    An FBI investigation could potentially stall until midterms where they could risk losing the Senate and the confirmation.  Do I have this wrong?  What am I missing here?   Of course the implication is that Ford is lying, which seems hard to believe, too.  Nothing I saw today seemed so egregiously determinate of guilt.

The problem is that it shouldn’t be this way. Whatever or not he is innocent, the priority should be make the investigation over politics.

So given that the vote will happen tomorrow, it seems like not acquiescing to all the pleading for an investigation was not an indication of guilt, but actually a reasonable course of action for an individual who wants to work on the Supreme Court?  "If he's innocent why won't he allow an FBI investigation?"  Uhhh, he's not an imbecile?

 

He is a fucking judge.

Not a rhetorical question:  Why is it his prerogative to allow for an FBI investigation?  Why are we relying on the desires of the accused if that's not the way it should be?  It's not a surprise that he would say no to an investigation spurned by people that are trying to deny a Republican judge pick at all costs.  Why do we need his go-ahead?

You mean, the job where the whole point is being impartial and fair?

[Mandark]

if you think Ford is lying just say so

[Maiden Voyage]

The thought that the Senate is holding a vote only because Trump demanded it entered my mind, but then I realized that was crazy talk.

I do hope there is a comparable McCain thumbs down moment that implodes the whole thing.

[Great Rumbler]

The thought that the Senate is holding a vote only because Trump demanded it entered my mind, but then I realized that was crazy talk.

I do hope there is a comparable McCain thumbs down moment that implodes the whole thing.

Could be they've got 49 confirmed Yes are hoping that forcing the issue will cause one of the two No's to flip at the last minute, but that's a really optimistic take.

[james]

He needs to be taken out

[Propagandhim]

The denial for the investigation seems reasonably strategic to me and not really indicative of guilt.    An FBI investigation could potentially stall until midterms where they could risk losing the Senate and the confirmation.  Do I have this wrong?  What am I missing here?   Of course the implication is that Ford is lying, which seems hard to believe, too.  Nothing I saw today seemed so egregiously determinate of guilt.

The problem is that it shouldn’t be this way. Whatever or not he is innocent, the priority should be make the investigation over politics.

So given that the vote will happen tomorrow, it seems like not acquiescing to all the pleading for an investigation was not an indication of guilt, but actually a reasonable course of action for an individual who wants to work on the Supreme Court?  "If he's innocent why won't he allow an FBI investigation?"  Uhhh, he's not an imbecile?

 

He is a fucking judge.

Not a rhetorical question:  Why is it his prerogative to allow for an FBI investigation?  Why are we relying on the desires of the accused if that's not the way it should be?  It's not a surprise that he would say no to an investigation spurned by people that are trying to deny a Republican judge pick at all costs.  Why do we need his go-ahead?

You mean, the job where the whole point is being impartial and fair?

So his denial of an investigation is an indication of bad moral character.  The guy is a liar.  Why isn't the system set up to deal with this predicament?   Why are we relying on a liar and a morally bankrupt charlatan's prerogative here?  That's my question here.
 

[Mandark]

The thought that the Senate is holding a vote only because Trump demanded it entered my mind, but then I realized that was crazy talk.

I do hope there is a comparable McCain thumbs down moment that implodes the whole thing.

Could be they've got 49 confirmed Yes are hoping that forcing the issue will cause one of the two No's to flip at the last minute, but that's a really optimistic take.

I think this is right. Collins and Murkowski (and maybe Flake) are probably not officially Yes at this point, and from McConnell's perspective waiting a week doesn't improve the odds, and leaves less time to squeeze a replacement through. They've been willing to hold votes on bills where they didn't have the votes for sure (ACA repeal, immigration, some other stuff I'm forgetting), so there's a precedent.

Still think he gets confirmed, but that seems like the state of things right now.

[agrajag]

That's some circular logic homie.

[agrajag]

I'm just saying guys, prepare for a punch to the gut in the form of Manchin voting yes. He was huddling with Collins, Murkowski and Flake. They are all gonna vote yes

[Maiden Voyage]

I think he is confirmed and this hurts the Republicans during the midterms. Then the voters forget by 2020.

[shosta]

As noted earlier by a dissident voice with a Cassandra complex, an investigation wouldn't matter. The committee can already interview anyone they want to get their hands on, although an FBI investigation would be much faster (the one over Clarence Thomas lasted just four days, didn't it?). Even if Kavanaugh is innocent, which I don't believe, but assuming he was, he still wouldn't want an investigation to happen because all it does is put more attention on his accusers (and we already know what they're going to say—that he raped or attempted to rape them!), tarnish his name, and give Republicans another headache during the midterms.

The solution to all of this of course is to just drop him and take Amy Barrett but that would be way too easy.

I think he is confirmed and this hurts the Republicans during the midterms. Then the voters forget by 2020.

I don't think this really affects anyone who wasn't already disgusted by Trump. The needle won't budge, not even this year.

[Boredfrom]

The denial for the investigation seems reasonably strategic to me and not really indicative of guilt.    An FBI investigation could potentially stall until midterms where they could risk losing the Senate and the confirmation.  Do I have this wrong?  What am I missing here?   Of course the implication is that Ford is lying, which seems hard to believe, too.  Nothing I saw today seemed so egregiously determinate of guilt.

The problem is that it shouldn’t be this way. Whatever or not he is innocent, the priority should be make the investigation over politics.

So given that the vote will happen tomorrow, it seems like not acquiescing to all the pleading for an investigation was not an indication of guilt, but actually a reasonable course of action for an individual who wants to work on the Supreme Court?  "If he's innocent why won't he allow an FBI investigation?"  Uhhh, he's not an imbecile?

 

He is a fucking judge.

Not a rhetorical question:  Why is it his prerogative to allow for an FBI investigation?  Why are we relying on the desires of the accused if that's not the way it should be?  It's not a surprise that he would say no to an investigation spurned by people that are trying to deny a Republican judge pick at all costs.  Why do we need his go-ahead?

You mean, the job where the whole point is being impartial and fair?

So his denial of an investigation is an indication of bad moral character.  The guy is a liar.  Why isn't the system set up to deal with this predicament?   Why are we relying on a liar and a morally bankrupt charlatan's prerogative here?  That's my question here.

“Why people want to have some standards?”

[Mandark]

The committee can already interview anyone they want to get their hands on

how salient is that when they're deliberately not interviewing anyone else in order to protect kavanaugh?

[agrajag]

I think he is confirmed and this hurts the Republicans during the midterms. Then the voters forget by 2020.

My take is that this can't hurt them more than the already oncoming blue wave. The question is, does the confirmation energize the Republican voters to go to the polls, or do they stay complacent, basking in the euphoria of their victory?

[Maiden Voyage]

I think he is confirmed and this hurts the Republicans during the midterms. Then the voters forget by 2020.

My take is that this can't hurt them more than the already oncoming blue wave. The question is, does the confirmation energize the Republican voters to go to the polls, or do they stay complacent, basking in the euphoria of their victory?

I'm largely skeptical of the blue wave, to be honest. Liberals don't show up to vote. If people are angered close to election, I see it as more likely.

[Boredfrom]

I think he is confirmed and this hurts the Republicans during the midterms. Then the voters forget by 2020.

My take is that this can't hurt them more than the already oncoming blue wave. The question is, does the confirmation energize the Republican voters to go to the polls, or do they stay complacent, basking in the euphoria of their victory?

I'm largely skeptical of the blue wave, to be honest. Liberals don't show up to vote. If people are angered close to election, I see it as more likely.

Lol People are perpetually angry at this point.

[Mandark]

I'm largely skeptical of the blue wave, to be honest. Liberals don't show up to vote. If people are angered close to election, I see it as more likely.

Dems are going to have a big margin in total votes cast in the House, but districting and clustering means they still might not get a majority. Could be the electoral college all over again.

[agrajag]

well, if polls are to be believed (and I guess there is some lingering doubt concerning those), Democratic voters' enthusiasm is at a historic high compared to previous midterms. Sure, this might energize more women to come vote, but I tend to think the woman vote might've been near maxed out prior to this. And for any additional votes, Kav's performance today might drive more white men with a hurt sense of entitlement and "women for Kavanaugh" types to cancel the women vote out..

[Propagandhim]

The denial for the investigation seems reasonably strategic to me and not really indicative of guilt.    An FBI investigation could potentially stall until midterms where they could risk losing the Senate and the confirmation.  Do I have this wrong?  What am I missing here?   Of course the implication is that Ford is lying, which seems hard to believe, too.  Nothing I saw today seemed so egregiously determinate of guilt.

The problem is that it shouldn’t be this way. Whatever or not he is innocent, the priority should be make the investigation over politics.

So given that the vote will happen tomorrow, it seems like not acquiescing to all the pleading for an investigation was not an indication of guilt, but actually a reasonable course of action for an individual who wants to work on the Supreme Court?  "If he's innocent why won't he allow an FBI investigation?"  Uhhh, he's not an imbecile?

 

He is a fucking judge.

Not a rhetorical question:  Why is it his prerogative to allow for an FBI investigation?  Why are we relying on the desires of the accused if that's not the way it should be?  It's not a surprise that he would say no to an investigation spurned by people that are trying to deny a Republican judge pick at all costs.  Why do we need his go-ahead?

You mean, the job where the whole point is being impartial and fair?

So his denial of an investigation is an indication of bad moral character.  The guy is a liar.  Why isn't the system set up to deal with this predicament?   Why are we relying on a liar and a morally bankrupt charlatan's prerogative here?  That's my question here.

“Why people want to have some standards?”

True, they should have found a different nominee.  At the same time, I can understand stepping down would be a tacit admission of guilt, which would be completely unacceptable to an innocent man and could destroy your career forever.  So in the absence of the truth, I see him not backing down as reasonable.   Obviously I'm making these inferences from the assumption that he's innocent.  I can't imagine Ford is lying, either.  I'm genuinely at a loss with what to think with this.

[Mandark]

True, they should have found a different nominee.  At the same time, I can understand stepping down would be a tacit admission of guilt, which would be completely unacceptable to an innocent man and could destroy your career forever.  So in the absence of the truth, I see him not backing down as reasonable.   Obviously I'm making these inferences from the assumption that he's innocent.  I can't imagine Ford is lying, either.  I'm genuinely at a loss with what to think with this.

spoiler (click to show/hide)

he's probably guilty, dude

[close]

[agrajag]

The Jeff Flake of the Bore

[Mandark]

What I don't get are these TV ads imploring to confirm Kav...but they're like voter ads. This isn't a voter issue, so who are those ads targeting?

I see a lot of stuff like that but I'm in the DC media market, so those ads are also targeting Thought Leaders and Thinkfluencers.

These mostly aim at states with a potential swing vote Senator, or a close upcoming Senate race, trying to pressure them via public opinion.

[shosta]

how salient is that when they're deliberately not interviewing anyone else in order to protect kavanaugh?

Well, the benefit of the subpoena is that they're under oath when they testify. Kavanaugh has already made statements about Ramirez and Swetnick under oath today. Swetnick herself already gave sworn testimony about her particular accusation. The only thing that would come out of hauling the accusers before Congress is to make a political circus for people to gawk at, and by extension the only point of an FBI investigation at this point is for them to write down their statements so that the senators can read them out loud to Kavanaugh and tell him he's an evil person. Which is what you want if you're a Democrat but ultimately inconsequential as far as the hearings are concerned. We already know everything we need to know. The Republicans have made up their mind. It's up to constituents to punish them for that should they choose to do so. I hope Murkowski and Collins don't betray women but you can't be sure.

This confirmation is ethically derelict, but I don't see this as some kind of perversion or neglect of process.

[Kara]

Things can destroy the career of a conservative federal judge? News to me.

[shosta]

By the way

It's not funny that a serial rapist will be occupying a political office that masquerades as an independent judiciary for life.

Yes it is!

Now that I fully realize he is going to be confirmed, it's not funny anymore

[Mandark]

Even with the handicap of working a cold case, you're selling short what investigators would be able to do, Shosta. Kavanaugh made a bunch of statements about his past behavior, specifically his drinking, that could be confirmed or refuted by third parties. Which is pretty relevant cause Kav's defense relies on asserting that he would never have an alcohol-fueled memory gap.

[shosta]

First off, no, his defense relies on "I'm a good person, it never happened, here are all these women who also say I'm a good person and four witnesses in particular". Second, I forget the particular exchange but he explicitly denied ever being blackout drunk and then refused to answer the clarifying question, so he definitely has been, but honestly: if it suddenly was corroborated by a friend that he has been blackout drunk before, is that really a smoking gun? Or does that even provide a better picture of his life that can be used to determine whether or not he assaulted this woman in highschool?

He admitted to partying a lot. Saying he never blacked out is equivalent to "but I didn't inhale". There are several women willing to ruin his reputation and life by alleging sexual misconduct. That is enough for me, and it should be enough for everyone. If that isn't enough to budge the calculus of certain people then no amount of circumstantial evidence is, certainly not the fuzzy kind you'd get from an investigation. Be real.

[Mandark]

Be real.

here i am being nice to you in spite of all your shitty posts and you come at me with this tone

for shame

[shosta]

coward

[agrajag]

Whatever happened to Nola?

[Great Rumbler]

I know sometimes it feels like things couldn't possibly get any worse and that eventually it'll start to get better, but then a day like today happens and it reminds us all that things can always get worse and there's no guarantee that tomorrow will be better.

[Propagandhim]

I know sometimes it feels like things couldn't possibly get any worse and that eventually it'll start to get better, but then a day like today happens and it reminds us all that things can always get worse and there's no guarantee that tomorrow will be better.

And then Ginsberg and Breyer die in an incumbent presidency.

[shosta]

naturally I checked Bill Kristol's twitter tonight

https://twitter.com/BillKristol/status/1045482892527382528
https://twitter.com/BillKristol/status/1045484642105790464

these takes are pretty bad.

[agrajag]

Kristol's smug avatar makes those tweets

[shosta]

https://babylonbee.com/news/kavanaugh-produces-star-wars-bed-sheets-to-prove-he-was-virgin-in-high-school

[kingv]

I think he is confirmed and this hurts the Republicans during the midterms. Then the voters forget by 2020.

I do feel like if this happens the Dems have a solid shot at taking the Senate. Something that would have been unheard of 18 months ago.

I suspect if Republicans can get to 51, they will pick up Manchin.

[VomKriege]

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/kavanaugh/570409/

Just for a not completely crazy conservative opinion.

[seagrams hotsauce]

luckily he's a shitty gambler, so there's still a slim chance his bookie will cut his brake lines

[Maiden Voyage]

American Bar Association: Delay Kavanaugh until FBI investigates assault allegations

In a strongly worded letter obtained by CNN Thursday, the organization said it is making the extraordinary request "because of the ABA's respect for the rule of law and due process under law," siding with concerns voiced by Senate Democrats since Christine Blasey Ford's decades-old allegations became public.

"The basic principles that underscore the Senate's constitutional duty of advice and consent on federal judicial nominees require nothing less than a careful examination of the accusations and facts by the FBI," said Robert Carlson, president of the organization, in a Thursday night letter addressed to Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley and ranking Democrat Dianne Feinstein.

"Each appointment to our nation's Highest Court (as with all others) is simply too important to rush to a vote," Carlson wrote. "Deciding to proceed without conducting additional investigation would not only have a lasting impact on the Senate's reputation, but it will also negatively affect the great trust necessary for the American people to have in the Supreme Court."

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/27/politics/kavanaugh-american-bar-association/index.html

[Propagandhim]

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/kavanaugh/570409/

Just for a not completely crazy conservative opinion.

Frum doesn't admit he's the quintessential moderate because he knows how toxic that word is, plus he loves to preamble all his letters with "As a conservative", as some sort of credit to himself when he's always cosigning to the Democrat perspective on contention.   God, David.  Just say you're a progressive that leans right on a few things.  Who cares?  You're right most of the time anyway, you war criminal.   

[agrajag]

Reports are saying Flake is a yes. Quelle surprise.

[james]

This country is lost because the greatest objection to this attack on democracy the left can muster is "dont forget to vote in November"

Not "shut down the highways"
Not "call a general strike"
Not "launch guerrilla warfare"

Just "dont forget to vote (even though none of the resetera mods do)"

[Mandark]

After hearing more than 30 hours of testimony from Judge Kavanaugh earlier this month, I was prepared to support his nomination based on his view of the law and record as a judge. In fact, I commented at the time that had he been nominated in another era, he would have likely received 90+ votes.

When Dr. Ford's allegations against Judge Kavanaugh surfaced two weeks ago, I insisted that she be allowed to testify before the committee moved to vote. Yesterday, we heard compelling testimony from Dr. Ford, as well as a persuasive response from Judge Kavanaugh. I wish that I could express the confidence that some of my colleagues have conveyed about what either did or did not happen in the early 1980s, but I left the hearing yesterday with as much doubt as certainty.

What I do know is that our system of justice affords a presumption of innocence to the accused, absent corroborating evidence. That is what binds us to the rule of law. While some may argue that a different standard should apply regarding the Senate's advice and consent responsibilities, I believe that the constitution's provisions of fairness and due process apply here as well.

Last paragraph is such bullshit. He's not extending "due process" to this case to live up to the spirit of the law, he's taking the one thing from the criminal justice system (presumption of innocence) that would help Kavanaugh while ignoring the rest (a police investigation, calling multiple witnesses, etc.).

As Stro pointed out, there's a possible eyewitness that they're just letting chill in Bethany Beach! Hell, there are two other women who have gone public with accusations and there seems to be zero interest from the SJC in hearing them.

[Great Rumbler]

Never mind that this isn't a criminal case, it's a job interview. For the one of the most important jobs in the entire country.

Flake is just being true to his name.

[agrajag]

How dude that is shamelessly lying about his past right now have the character for the highest office in the judicial branch?

[Mandark]

Round of applause to all the sites that ran "Has #metoo Gone Too Far?" essays the last couple months.

Amazing timing, guys.

[Propagandhim]

How dude that is shamelessly lying about his past right now have the character for the highest office in the judicial branch?

Too bad Cuomo ruined it by putting it out there in the interview that this woman is a Republican.    Now Era-minded folks can't use this video because there's no integrity in a racist's testimony.  Huge loss. 

[Mandark]

you dipshits keep the other forum talk to the trash thread

[Propagandhim]

you dipshits keep the other forum talk to the trash thread

   Sorry

[Kara]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/national/health-science/trump-administration-sees-a-7-degree-rise-in-global-temperatures-by-2100/2018/09/27/

[Mandark]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/national/health-science/trump-administration-sees-a-7-degree-rise-in-global-temperatures-by-2100/2018/09/27/

Best part is that they're using a dire projection of global warming to argue AGAINST emission standards, on the reasoning of "we're fucked anyways."

[agrajag]

How dude that is shamelessly lying about his past right now have the character for the highest office in the judicial branch?

Too bad Cuomo ruined it by putting it out there in the interview that this woman is a Republican.    Now Era-minded folks can't use this video because there's no integrity in a racist's testimony.  Huge loss.

this isn't the Era thread, guy.

[Great Rumbler]

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/national/health-science/trump-administration-sees-a-7-degree-rise-in-global-temperatures-by-2100/2018/09/27/

Best part is that they're using a dire projection of global warming to argue AGAINST emission standards, on the reasoning of "we're fucked anyways."

Step 1: Argue that climate change isn't real and oppose any and all legislation to curb greenhouse gases until we're past the point where climate change can be stopped
Step 2: Admit that climate change can't be stopped so there's no longer any reason to curb greenhouse gases
Step 3: ???
Step 4: Profit...?

[Mandark]

"Nobody really knows how the climate is going to change."

"The data shows temperatures have plateaued and might be falling."

"The data shows temperatures rising, but only because they were rigged."

"Rising temperatures are caused by sunspot activity."

"Of course humans are causing global warming, but it's too late to do anything about it."

[james]

Im making a ranking of shithole countries and Im having trouble slotting the US in

1. Syria
2. Venezuela
3. USA
4. North Korea
5. Zimbabwe

Thoughts?