45th President of the United States, Donald Trump. (Vol 5)
Discussion
4x4Tyke said:
ecurie said:
Don’t get me wrong: the way Kavanaugh acted during the hearing doesn’t befit someone who is nominated for one of the most important jobs in the US.
But Dershowitz’s legal argumentation holds the road and is why he pleads for an FBI investigation. Looking at it objectively, right now, from a legal point of view, there isn’t enough proof, which is not the same as saying it didn’t happen.
I am convinced though that Ford is speaking the truth and Kavanaugh is lying and the GOP is trying everything to rush his confirmation through.
Enough proof of what? That it happened? The testimony is certainly enough proof to warrant an (FBI) investigation to determine if he should face criminal charges.But Dershowitz’s legal argumentation holds the road and is why he pleads for an FBI investigation. Looking at it objectively, right now, from a legal point of view, there isn’t enough proof, which is not the same as saying it didn’t happen.
I am convinced though that Ford is speaking the truth and Kavanaugh is lying and the GOP is trying everything to rush his confirmation through.
However to all intent and purposes an interview, the burden of proof in on him to show he is a fit and proper person for the role. It is not on Ford or his other accusers.
Someone updated the wikipedia entry for "Devils Triangle" to match the answer Kavanaugh gave yesterday:
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/09/27/politics/devils...
Devils Triangle is a threesome between two men and a woman. Which is not the answer Kvanaugh gave, and as people searched google to find out if his answer was correct they will have seen the answer on Wiki.
The lengths some people are going to protect him are crazy.
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/09/27/politics/devils...
Devils Triangle is a threesome between two men and a woman. Which is not the answer Kvanaugh gave, and as people searched google to find out if his answer was correct they will have seen the answer on Wiki.
The lengths some people are going to protect him are crazy.
Edited by DMN on Friday 28th September 09:41
MC Bodge said:
RobDickinson said:
Its a massive political football because it decides on fundamental ideology like abortion rights.
Which in itself tells you a lot about their country....Nobody mentions anything other.
hing about it being a circus, it's a circus because of the PT Barnum wannabee in the White House picking the most odious and partisan SCOTUS pick and because the GOP are facing stty poll numbers in november they're seeking to steamroller what is already a deeply flawed procedure into a rubber stamp. The other complaint about some democrats hoping to derail the nomination so the seat can remain open until 2020; if it was good for Aside from this, the whole process is a farce; imposed partisan deadlines because of elections, no set procedures to deal with allegations of criminality. There needs to be a rulebook for this s
t so no-one gets to make it up as they go along. Perhaps there could be pre-nomination hearings at the beginning of each new administration in preparation for a SCOTUS vacancy, that way there would be no rush and no means of inserting jokers in the pack.hidetheelephants said:
MC Bodge said:
RobDickinson said:
Its a massive political football because it decides on fundamental ideology like abortion rights.
Which in itself tells you a lot about their country....Nobody mentions anything other.
hing about it being a circus, it's a circus because of the PT Barnum wannabee in the White House picking the most odious and partisan SCOTUS pick and because the GOP are facing stty poll numbers in november they're seeking to steamroller what is already a deeply flawed procedure into a rubber stamp. The other complaint about some democrats hoping to derail the nomination so the seat can remain open until 2020; if it was good for Aside from this, the whole process is a farce; imposed partisan deadlines because of elections, no set procedures to deal with allegations of criminality. There needs to be a rulebook for this s
t so no-one gets to make it up as they go along. Perhaps there could be pre-nomination hearings at the beginning of each new administration in preparation for a SCOTUS vacancy, that way there would be no rush and no means of inserting jokers in the pack.This is really what the conservatives want, they want the ability to force a religious viewpoint on the state (and on those in that state that are not religious). I would hazard a guess they dont want their tax dollars being spent on abortions, much better to spend it on litigation, cost of schools, cost of welfare and cost of prison instead to prove a religious point to a non-existent god.
I would assume the 69% statistic covers all states, but it would be good to see those stats on a state by state basis.
sugerbear said:
If Roe v Wade is overturned then it will be down to states to decide on abortion rather than to have a federal law that forces it on states, so those very religious states will get to ban it and those more liberal states will get to keep it.
This is really what the conservatives want, they want the ability to force a religious viewpoint on the state (and on those in that state that are not religious). I would hazard a guess they dont want their tax dollars being spent on abortions, much better to spend it on litigation, cost of schools, cost of welfare and cost of prison instead to prove a religious point to a non-existent god.
I would assume the 69% statistic covers all states, but it would be good to see those stats on a state by state basis.
http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/compare/views-about-abortion/by/state/This is really what the conservatives want, they want the ability to force a religious viewpoint on the state (and on those in that state that are not religious). I would hazard a guess they dont want their tax dollars being spent on abortions, much better to spend it on litigation, cost of schools, cost of welfare and cost of prison instead to prove a religious point to a non-existent god.
I would assume the 69% statistic covers all states, but it would be good to see those stats on a state by state basis.
rscott said:
sugerbear said:
If Roe v Wade is overturned then it will be down to states to decide on abortion rather than to have a federal law that forces it on states, so those very religious states will get to ban it and those more liberal states will get to keep it.
This is really what the conservatives want, they want the ability to force a religious viewpoint on the state (and on those in that state that are not religious). I would hazard a guess they dont want their tax dollars being spent on abortions, much better to spend it on litigation, cost of schools, cost of welfare and cost of prison instead to prove a religious point to a non-existent god.
I would assume the 69% statistic covers all states, but it would be good to see those stats on a state by state basis.
http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/compare/views-about-abortion/by/state/This is really what the conservatives want, they want the ability to force a religious viewpoint on the state (and on those in that state that are not religious). I would hazard a guess they dont want their tax dollars being spent on abortions, much better to spend it on litigation, cost of schools, cost of welfare and cost of prison instead to prove a religious point to a non-existent god.
I would assume the 69% statistic covers all states, but it would be good to see those stats on a state by state basis.
I can understand why politicians end up pandering to these groups however wrong we non us'ers feel their views are. They simply wont get elected unless they can show they are upholding the religious viewpoint of the majority.
sugerbear said:
Pretty much as expected. I took their data on religious view per state and you can see that where there are high numbers of Catholics and Evangelicals there is a very high likely hood of a view that abortion shouldn't be allowed (i.e more than 50% of the people surveyed said no to abortion where the state had more than 50% of people identifying themselves as Catholic / Evangelical).
I can understand why politicians end up pandering to these groups however wrong we non us'ers feel their views are. They simply wont get elected unless they can show they are upholding the religious viewpoint of the majority.
They're in the union, there are costs and benefits; as the europeans are fond of repeating right now you don't get to cherry-pick.I can understand why politicians end up pandering to these groups however wrong we non us'ers feel their views are. They simply wont get elected unless they can show they are upholding the religious viewpoint of the majority.
There's a GOP hack on CNN now arguing about how the GOP base will have lapped up Kavanaugh's testimony(probably true) because they've all been frustrated by all this talking in big rooms and now Brett's outburst was 'sticking it to the man' and fighting the elite; because the Washington DC Appeals Court Judge Brett Kavanaugh, Yale graduate and privately educated, is not at all a member of the elite.
The guy's a man-baby with an entitlement complex rivalling Trump's.Edited by hidetheelephants on Friday 28th September 12:44
DMN said:
Someone updated the wikipedia entry for "Devils Triangle" to match the answer Kavanaugh gave yesterday:
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/09/27/politics/devils...
Devils Triangle is a threesome between two men and a woman. Which is not the answer Kvanaugh gave, and as people searched google to find out if his answer was correct they will have seen the answer on Wiki.
The lengths some people are going to protect him are crazy.
Edited anonymously from House of Representatives. https://edition.cnn.com/2018/09/27/politics/devils...
Devils Triangle is a threesome between two men and a woman. Which is not the answer Kvanaugh gave, and as people searched google to find out if his answer was correct they will have seen the answer on Wiki.
The lengths some people are going to protect him are crazy.
https://twitter.com/congressedits
4x4Tyke said:
DMN said:
Someone updated the wikipedia entry for "Devils Triangle" to match the answer Kavanaugh gave yesterday:
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/09/27/politics/devils...
Devils Triangle is a threesome between two men and a woman. Which is not the answer Kvanaugh gave, and as people searched google to find out if his answer was correct they will have seen the answer on Wiki.
The lengths some people are going to protect him are crazy.
Edited anonymously from House of Representatives. https://edition.cnn.com/2018/09/27/politics/devils...
Devils Triangle is a threesome between two men and a woman. Which is not the answer Kvanaugh gave, and as people searched google to find out if his answer was correct they will have seen the answer on Wiki.
The lengths some people are going to protect him are crazy.
https://twitter.com/congressedits
4x4Tyke said:
p1stonhead said:
Cant believe he thought he could get away with inventing a drinking game on the spot
He does take a while to think about it with his eyes darting about, can't remember if left right/right for lies, but there is definitely a micro grin or two on those responses.Throwing questions back to the Senate was insane - 'have you ever blacked out drunk?' 'HAVE YOU?!'
"Did you drink to excess?"
I was top in my class.
"Did you ever black out?"
I was captain of the basketball team.
He is insane and definitely not suitable for a judge with that temper.
And the whole thing was a sham. What was the point in calling anyone - literally every republican had made their mind up beforehand. Look at what Lindsey Graham's twitter picture is now (before any actual investigations have been done let alone concluded);
Edited by p1stonhead on Friday 28th September 12:29
p1stonhead said:
‘Women love me’
Their faces!
In fairness this was at a particularly emotional outpouring and the women behind him are friends including his wife who is looking particularly sad. Whether the emotional outpouring is by being an innocent victim or simply that his past has caught up with him and is ruining his and his family's life is another matter.Their faces!
One would think his priority would be to clear his name yet still pressing for the hearing to be enough to continue. He is playing being a political pawn in the efforts to delay the confirmation but still seems prepared to go along with the sham of the hearing ignoring an investigation into key witnesses. Looking at this it would be no surprise that people wouldn't come forward who could corroborate the event, yet they could be found and interviewed in a thorough investigation.
Edited by Tony33 on Friday 28th September 13:08
Tony33 said:
p1stonhead said:
‘Women love me’
Their faces!
In fairness this was at a particularly FAKE emotional outpouring and the women behind him are friends including his wife who is looking particularly sad. Whether the emotional outpouring is by being an innocent victim or simply that his past has caught up with him and is ruining his and his family's life is another matter.Their faces!
One would think his priority would be to clear his name yet still pressing for the hearing to be enough to continue. He is playing being a political pawn in the efforts to delay the confirmation but still seems prepared to go along with the sham of the hearing ignoring an investigation into key witnesses. Looking at this it would be no surprise that people wouldn't come forward who could corroborate the event, yet they could be found and interviewed in a thorough investigation.
Edited by Tony33 on Friday 28th September 13:08
No innocent person would wish to go through with the vote having not cleared their name properly, especially if there was an opportunity for the full weight of the FBI to do so.
He did everything he could to not say he wanted an FBI investigation. Becuase he would undoubtebly be found out. There is zero other explanation for a reasonable innocent person to want to avoid it so much.
Guilty as hell.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff