Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
Except that it wasn't just Kavanaugh/Ford...it was also (at least) Ramirez. As has been said about the Clintons over and over, where there's smoke, there's fire.
If a three day FBI investigation was done on the HRC's emails (with the WH limiting their access), I doubt anyone on the right would consider that an adequate investigation. Why was it anywhere close to conceivably adequate for these kinds of allegations....for a job of this kind of magnitude?
And I'm curious as well...what is it about Kavanaugh's qualifications and demonstrated judicial history that makes you believe he was the best fit for the job? Given his history as a judge, what decisions do you think he's going to make on the court that will likely benefit your life? (Reasonably specific examples would be appreciated.)
|
|
rottingjohnny
Sport climber
Sands Motel , Las Vegas
|
|
Dont forget Trump tasking his customized supreme court with getting rid of obamacare and net neutrality....Another big loss for consumers...The winning hasn't ended...MAGA
|
|
Trump
climber
|
|
What was the fire with HRC’s emails? Did that disqualify her in our eyes from believing that she was the best fit for being POTUS? Do we honestly believe that where there’s smoke there’s fire, or are we just using that as a way to justify delaying the Republican Supreme Court pick to ourselves?
Are we voting for judges now? I thought we did that in the last election. Sorry we lost. I personally find the guy to be something of a poopy head, but I’d prefer not to come right out and say it.
Susan Collins is a woman who has earned the right to vote on Supreme Court judges, and who voted to confirm Kavanaugh, and who said that she believes him.
She also voted to acquit Clinton in his impeachment trial, saying that she believed the charges but didn’t think they were grounds for removing him from office. She’s been considered the most liberal Republican, and the most bipartisan Senator. She formed a bipartisan agreement to allow but limit the use of the filibuster over judicial nominees. She sided with Obama 76% of the time.
She also opposed Trump’s election, after he became the Republican nominee, and said that he was unsuitable for office.
What do we think of her? Is she one of the hard line republicans? Is her support for Kavanaugh politically motivated and partisanly misguided? Me I think she was one of the few people to actually try to resist her gender and partisan party identities, and to honestly try to make an unbiased decision.
|
|
10b4me
Social climber
Lida Junction
|
|
From the start, the Repubs tried to thwart Garland's nomination by whatever means necessary. They played hard and dirty... and still won.
Fixed it for you
about 10 days ago, 538 had the Dems chance of getting control of the Senate at 31.7%. Now it's 21.1%.
TBH, I don't think really have a chance of retaking the Senate. There are too many of them up for reelection in states trump won.
|
|
divad
Trad climber
wmass
|
|
trump is calling the sexual abuse charges against Kavanaugh a "hoax" by the Democrats. I would expect a major investigation into something like that. Not gonna hold my breath, though.
|
|
EdwardT
Trad climber
Retired
|
|
Except that it wasn't just Kavanaugh/Ford...it was also (at least) Ramirez. As has been said about the Clintons over and over, where there's smoke, there's fire.
According to CBS, the FBI interviewed Ramirez. If their report indicated there was anything worth pursuing, Feinstein & Co would have gone public with that info.
And I'm curious as well...what is it about Kavanaugh's qualifications and demonstrated judicial history that makes you believe he was the best fit for the job? Given his history as a judge, what decisions do you think he's going to make on the court that will likely benefit your life? (Reasonably specific examples would be appreciated.)
I leave that info to the experts. He had endorsements from a number of liberal lawyers who practiced in his court. I don't recall any Democrat Senators claiming any of his actions/rulings disqualified him. Before the Ford kerfuffle, the ABA gave Kavanaugh a rating of “well qualified,” the highest of three possible ratings.
|
|
EdwardT
Trad climber
Retired
|
|
10b4me
From the start, the Repubs tried to thwart Garland's nomination by whatever means necessary. They played hard and dirty... and still won.
Fixed it for you
Funny how no one cared about the Garland block the entire time it was happening.
This whole process has concluded. The important thing is:
Trump has entered the Querencia Phase of his presidency!!!
|
|
blahblah
Gym climber
Boulder
|
|
Except that it wasn't just Kavanaugh/Ford...it was also (at least) Ramirez
The Ramirez thing was basically a joke, right? Remember she first said she was so drunk she didn't know if it was Kavanaugh or not, although somehow her memory seemed to get a little more clear more recently?!
I had lunch with two very successful female attorneys (one retired, both are/were partners at nationally prominent law firms), both quite liberal, and I asked their opinion of the Ramirez allegations--they both seemed to think it was quite ludicrous that a drunk guy publicly flashing at a college party would be regarded as that big a deal (one seemed to think it was a bigger deal than the other; I guess reasonable people can see that one differently).
And the evidence strongly suggests that Ramirez was just drunk off her ass and imagining things. Like Ford, she identified people who she thought/hoped would corroborate her story, but they basically said it didn't happen / they have no idea what she's talking about. About as much "corroboration" as you're going to get is the weird nerd roommate who hates Kav saying it's the type of thing he or his friends would do.
Changing the subject slightly: remember you were wishing you could know what the current members of SCOTUS think about Kav? Here's about as close as you can get: ask yourself what recently retired Justice Kennedy, now replaced by Kav, thinks about Kav. He loves the guy, it's possible he had an informal deal with Trump to make his retirement contingent on nominating Kav (or at least seriously considering him). If Kav is the first pick of the Kennedy, the great swing vote or our time, the author of the opinion legalizing gay marriage throughout the US, ask yourself is it really likely that Kav is this dark figure who's going to orchestrate the end of the US? Kav who voted the same way as Garland 93% of the time?
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
|
|
Anything you all say,.....lol.
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
Both of you (ET & blah) are speculating that Kavanaugh was not involved in either incident. No-one knows (and we may never know) for sure, but the point is that it's a high-stakes position, and allegations deserved a reasonable investigation. Three days...involving only 9 sources out of list of closer to 50...with the scope limited by the WH....this was not sufficient.
Flip it around, guys. If these were the conditions under which Hillary's emails were investigated...with Obama limiting access to certain sources...with a critical mid-term election barreling forward...Republicans would have a sh#t-fit about it.
I'm not in the camp of concluding Kavanaugh was guilty of any of this, but it deserved better investigation than it received. And to believe that it was short-shrifted for any other reason than the impending election is just plain naive &/or politically blind.
|
|
Trump
climber
|
|
I’m in the camp of believing it was short-shrifted because of the impending election too. That’s cool - I think we can forgive ourselves for having a sh#t-fit about that, the same way the Republicans would have a sh#t-fit if it happened to them.
But how long are we going to spend in our sh#t-fit? And when we’re done with our sh#t-fit, what do we do then?
Are we gonna start winning elections, and appointing judges that we approve of, rather than needing to have sh#t-fits about the alternative? Are we going to strive to operate in a holistic bipartisan manner, or are we going to sink deeper into our own divisive partisanship, as a counter to their divisive partisanship?
Is mom gonna have to tell us to “quit yer squabbling!”, or are we going to be able to tell ourselves?
Three of the Republican Senators insisted that they have an FBI investigation before voting, and they had an FBI investigation. That’s a good thing, right? Maybe it wasn’t exactly what we wanted, but can we say that was a good thing? And if we can’t, why do we expect it from the other side?
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
|
|
Until representation is addressed legitimately,we are sharpening our pitchforks.
|
|
Trump
climber
|
|
51% women 13% black and 44% Independents! I’m looking forward to that day, but I’m not sharpening any pitchforks over it.
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
The sham 'investigation' carries the strong likelihood that any decision that Kavanaugh makes will be seen through the eyes of an illegitimate confirmation process. That's going to be especially damaging in any kind of case that relates to women- such criticisms Kavanaugh may be able to shrug off personally, but it severely erodes the way the SCOTUS is seen as an objective final word as the judicial branch of government.
This is the legacy that will carry forward due to the politicization of the judiciary, which McConnelly has obsessively pursued.
|
|
Trump
climber
|
|
Agreed. People in the future will see it the way they see it, which will probably be through partisan lenses, same as us.
And in the midst of all the partisan bullshittery, and the collapse of the empire, there’s a little glimpse of these three republican senators demanding an FBI investigation, which we might be well served to not notice or approve of.
The guys on the other side do the same thing, for pretty much the same reasons.
|
|
EdwardT
Trad climber
Retired
|
|
Both of you (ET & blah) are speculating that Kavanaugh was not involved in either incident. No-one knows (and we may never know) for sure, but the point is that it's a high-stakes position, and allegations deserved a reasonable investigation. Three days...involving only 9 sources out of list of closer to 50...with the scope limited by the WH....this was not sufficient.
They interviewed all the "witnesses".
It was early 80s. No cell phones. No traffic/security cameras. I doubt any teenagers were using credit cards to buy beer, even if they had them.
What else was there to investigate?
|
|
apogee
climber
Technically expert, safe belayer, can lead if easy
|
|
If you take it at face value that this investigation was adequate, then why have you obsessed over HRC’s emails for years? Seems like pretty selective discrimination.
|
|
wilbeer
Mountain climber
Terence Wilson greeneck alleghenys,ny,
|
|
Also to mention ,the whole birther thing,really.
Oh I forgot,old white men.
|
|
EdwardT
Trad climber
Retired
|
|
If you take it at face value that this investigation was adequate, then why have you obsessed over HRC’s emails for years? Seems like pretty selective discrimination.
Also to mention ,the whole birther thing,really.
Oh I forgot,old white men.
These must be you're generic fallback positions.
See if anyone cares. Kinda like the Feinstein/Booker/Harris/Blumenthal turdfest.
She's making a white supremacy signal!!!!
I am Spartacus.
FBI, FBI, FBI
Credibility, credibility, credibility.... Let me tell you about my Vietnam service.
So many clowns in such a small car.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!