Current Affairs General US politics (ie, not POTUS related)

Status
Not open for further replies.
ilikecheese said:
The long form @dholliday wants in a short form venue. I would follow him if I was looking at facts.

Click to expand...


My take: one the one hand I instinctively support women, knowing what arseholes some men can be and how many women have been intimated by such wretches. On the other hand I also feel instinctively uncomfortable with 40-year old accusations being automatically believed without recourse to due process. I also feel Kavanaugh made as good an account of himself as Ms Ford did (despite how some biased media reported otherwise). So it's one word against another. And when there's 40 years past, then we should err on the side of presumption of innocence.
 
dholliday said:
My take: one the one hand I instinctively support women, knowing what arseholes some men can be and how many women have been intimated by such wretches. On the other hand I also feel instinctively uncomfortable with 40-year old accusations being automatically believed without recourse to due process. I also feel Kavanaugh made as good an account of himself as Ms Ford did (despite how some biased media reported otherwise). So it's one word against another. And when there's 40 years past, then we should err on the side of presumption of innocence.
Click to expand...
She conducted herself with dignity and humility in utterly harrowing circumstances.

He ranted and raved about revenge plots and conspiracy theories. Now one could chalk the anger up to truly believing he’s innocent (rightly or wrongly)

But more importantly:

He has LIED repeatedly under oath, throughout the confirmation process - about matters both concerning and not concerning the allegations.

It’s also been shown that he lied during his confirmation hearings for his current seat.

So tell me again how he gave as good an account of himself as she did? By what measure, exactly? Bear in mind this is utterly apart from any consideration of whether he did it or not.


Also - “presumption of innocence” is all well and good and entirely appropriate in a criminal court, but that IS NOT WHAT THIS IS. It’s a job interview. He has no “right” to a seat on the Supreme Court, nor any presumption of worthiness for that role.
 
BirkenheadBlue said:
She conducted herself with dignity and humility in utterly harrowing circumstances.

He ranted and raved about revenge plots and conspiracy theories.

But more importantly:

He has lied repeatedly throughout the confirmation process - about matters both concerning and not concerning the allegations.

It’s also been shown that he lied during his confirmation hearings for his current seat.

So tell me again how he gave as good an account of himself as she did? By what measure, exactly? Bear in mind this is utterly apart from any consideration of whether he did it or not.


Also - “presumption of innocence” is all well and good and entirely appropriate in a criminal court, but that IS NOT WHAT THIS IS. It’s a job interview. He has no “right” to a seat on the Supreme Court, nor any presumption of worthiness for that role.
Click to expand...

what did he lie about?
 
dholliday said:
what did he lie about?
Click to expand...
His drinking habits during college (as per now multiple people who knew him at the time)
His involvement with “enhanced interrogation policy” during Bush admin
His knowledge of stolen Democratic documents during Bush admin
The meaning of “devil’s Triangle”
The meaning of “boofed”
The meaning of “Renate alumni” - unless you’re genuinely the most credulous person on the planet.

And now as per tweet above, it seems entirely possible that he lied about when he first had knowledge of the Ramirez allegations.


That’s off the top of my head - I’m fairly sure there were others, but it’s late and I’ve just driven 250 miles.
 
Couple more for you:

Kavanaugh’s first words as a nominee:

"No president has ever consulted more widely or talked with more people from more backgrounds to seek input about a Supreme Court nomination." I mean come on, surely we can al admit there’s zero chance that’s actually true.

He lied by saying he drank legally as a senior - there was not a single day of his high school time when he could drink legally

He lied about “Dr Ford’s claims have been refuted by her close friends”. They weren’t refuted, the friends said they didn’t remember. You’d think a judge would know the difference.
 
dholliday said:
My take: one the one hand I instinctively support women, knowing what arseholes some men can be and how many women have been intimated by such wretches. On the other hand I also feel instinctively uncomfortable with 40-year old accusations being automatically believed without recourse to due process. I also feel Kavanaugh made as good an account of himself as Ms Ford did (despite how some biased media reported otherwise). So it's one word against another. And when there's 40 years past, then we should err on the side of presumption of innocence.
Click to expand...

Did you actually read that whole thread?
 
dholliday said:
Hang him! Damn that devil-worshipper back to the Hell he came from!
Click to expand...
It's more about the fact he lied than what it was he did. Everyone knows that high school and college age kids drink underage. The fact that he decided he'd rather lie about it shows a flaw in his character that might not be acceptable for a person about to be put on the countries highest court. I hope you can see this.
 
TheBigIguana said:
It's more about the fact he lied than what it was he did. Everyone knows that high school and college age kids drink underage. The fact that he decided he'd rather lie about it shows a flaw in his character that might not be acceptable for a person about to be put on the countries highest court. I hope you can see this.
Click to expand...

I see character assassination, and I see a flustered defensive conservative who's not handling it in the cool way Obama did when his pot-smoking came out.
 
dholliday said:
I see character assassination, and I see a flustered defensive conservative who's not handling it in the cool way Obama did when his pot-smoking came out.
Click to expand...
I'm being honest here if he came out and said I drank a lot, I drank so much I threw up and occasionally blacked out and all those things in the yearbook mean what you think they mean but I didn't commit a sexual assault I'd be more inclined to believe him than I am after listening to him try to paint himself as some kind of saint or whatever it was he intended to do.
 
dholliday said:
I see character assassination, and I see a flustered defensive conservative who's not handling it in the cool way Obama did when his pot-smoking came out.
Click to expand...

Drinking is far more pernicious than smoking pot, by a long shot however. And smoking pot is rarely implicated in sexual assault, whereas drinking is.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join the Everton conversation today.
Fewer ads, full access, completely free.

→ Log in 🔑 Register
🛒 Visit Shop

Support Grand Old Team by checking out our latest Everton gear!
Back
Top