Kavanaugh SCOTUS hearings

[Vlad]

From Rush today:


Suppose Ford went directly to an FBI field office instead of writing that letter..

What makes writing a letter to Feinstein about her claims of "sexual assault" more credible over going
directly to the FBI?

Nothing. You see lefties how inane this is?

FBI: “Well, Miss, were you raped or injured?”

Ford: “Uh, no, not really.”

FBI: “Did you report this or tell anyone at the time, 36, 35 years ago?”

Ford: “Uh, no.”

FBI: “What year was this, again, that this happened?”

Ford: “Uhhh, I’m not — I’m not sure. I think it was 1982.”

FBI “Where did this happen?”

Ford: “I don’t know! I don’t know. I was so traumatized; I don’t remember any of it. I just remember some guy jumping on me and I was drunk and — and I don’t know. But I want you to investigate it.”

FBI “Okay. Ma’am, were there any witnesses?”

Ford: “Just the one friend of his that pushed him off, and then they left before he could do anything.”

What would the FBI do with this, if that scenario happened in one of their field offices? I will tell you what they would do: Zip, zero, nada.

[GMDino]

(09-19-2018, 08:20 PM)Vlad Wrote: From Rush today:


Suppose Ford went directly to an FBI field office instead of writing that letter..

What makes writing a letter to Feinstein about her claims of "sexual assault" more credible over going
directly to the FBI?

Nothing. You see lefties how inane this is?

FBI: “Well, Miss, were you raped or injured?”

Ford: “Uh, no, not really.”

FBI: “Did you report this or tell anyone at the time, 36, 35 years ago?”

Ford: “Uh, no.”

FBI: “What year was this, again, that this happened?”

Ford: “Uhhh, I’m not — I’m not sure. I think it was 1982.”

FBI “Where did this happen?”

Ford: “I don’t know! I don’t know. I was so traumatized; I don’t remember any of it. I just remember some guy jumping on me and I was drunk and — and I don’t know. But I want you to investigate it.”

FBI “Okay. Ma’am, were there any witnesses?”

Ford: “Just the one friend of his that pushed him off, and then they left before he could do anything.”

What would the FBI do with this, if that scenario happened in one of their field offices? I will tell you what they would do: Zip, zero, nada.

[GMDino]

(09-19-2018, 08:17 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Yeah, but the dollar amount the whole point of the meme (look at all the other dollar amounts he "added"). So defending the meme because it's all 100%, completely, without question, hand on the bible true EXCEPT for the dollar amount is a stupid thing to say to try to defend the meme.

Of course I don't know what stupid it EXCEPT I know it when I see it.

Just because you and your brother don't know how quotes work is a shame.

They should put that in an oath. 

Any idea who paid off Kavanaugh's debts that fast?

[*bfine32*]

(09-19-2018, 06:47 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: I'm sorry, but I have to point this out.  Does anyone else find it cosmically ironic that the lawyer representing the accuser also defended Clinton against Paula Jones' allegations of sexual misconduct?

Kudos to Hills for being able to keep a straight face when answering this question:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/09/18/maddow_to_hillary_clinton_do_you_support_due_process_for_kavanaugh_after_bill_clinton_allegations.html

She seems very concerned about the accuser and not too much about the accused. 2funny.

[*michaelsean*]

(09-19-2018, 08:20 PM)Vlad Wrote: From Rush today:


Suppose Ford went directly to an FBI field office instead of writing that letter..

What makes writing a letter to Feinstein about her claims of "sexual assault" more credible over going
directly to the FBI?

Nothing. You see lefties how inane this is?

FBI: “Well, Miss, were you raped or injured?”

Ford: “Uh, no, not really.”

FBI: “Did you report this or tell anyone at the time, 36, 35 years ago?”

Ford: “Uh, no.”

FBI: “What year was this, again, that this happened?”

Ford: “Uhhh, I’m not — I’m not sure. I think it was 1982.”

FBI “Where did this happen?”

Ford: “I don’t know! I don’t know. I was so traumatized; I don’t remember any of it. I just remember some guy jumping on me and I was drunk and — and I don’t know. But I want you to investigate it.”

FBI “Okay. Ma’am, were there any witnesses?”

Ford: “Just the one friend of his that pushed him off, and then they left before he could do anything.”

What would the FBI do with this, if that scenario happened in one of their field offices? I will tell you what they would do: Zip, zero, nada.

Next time please don’t use partisans like Rush. Please post stories from impartial journalists like raw story.

[NATI BENGALS]

All i know is if im looking for a supreme court justice. At a time when all government agencies that could, have said something about foreign election interference. Im looking for a judge who without a doubt will not be party over country.

Ole kav the rapey weirdo was a lawyer for the republican president that gave us the great recession and the longest most expensive wars covering up some of the biggest bullshit ever, and in his younger years an attack dog assigned to take down a democrat president target. There is a lot of partisanship going on. But holy shit. Weird rapey kav is supposed to be non biased. Right? I dont see it

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-19-2018, 11:11 PM)NATI BENGALS Wrote: Ole kav the rapey weirdo

Kinda defeat any point you were trying to make before you made it here.  

[ballsofsteel]

A president being investigating for treason , on the verge of being impeached and possibly going to prison, should not be endorsing or have anything to do with picking a Supreme Court Justice. Just common sense.

Has Orin Hatch found his glasses yet? Their not on the top of his head.

[GMDino]

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/franklin-graham-brett-kavanaugh-christine-blasey-ford-sexual-assault_us_5ba28901e4b07c23ef379cf0

Quote:Franklin Graham, a son of the famed late preacher Billy Graham, has chimed in about the sexual assault allegation against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh.


And according to this Christian evangelist and humanitarian, the accusation is simply “not relevant.”


“It’s just a shame that a person like Judge Kavanaugh who has a stellar record — that somebody can bring something up that he did when he was a teenager close to 40 years ago,” Franklin Graham said in an interview Tuesday with the Christian Broadcasting Network. “That’s not relevant.”


Graham is a prominent figure in evangelical Christian circles, partly because of his respected lineage. He is the president of the Christian relief organization Samaritan’s Purse and of the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association ― and a staunch longtime defender of President Donald Trump.


He was asked on CBN to comment on the sexual assault accusation against Kavanaugh lodged by Christine Blasey Ford, a professor at Palo Alto University in California who goes by Christine Blasey professionally. She said that a drunken Kavanaugh pinned her down and groped her when the two were high school students, around 1982. 


Blasey sent a confidential letter to members of Congress in July containing her claims. She publicly identified herself in The Washington Post on Sunday. 

Kavanaugh said he “categorically and unequivocally” denies her claims.


Graham said the allegations are an attempt by Democrats to throw a wrench in the conservative judge’s confirmation proceedings. 


“They couldn’t find anything else in his record and so this is just an attempt to smear him and to smear his name and put a black dot on it,” Graham told CBN News’ Heather Sells. 


When Sells questioned him about the message his views send to sexual abuse victims, he said, “Well, there wasn’t a crime that was committed.” 


Graham then betrayed a lack of knowledge about Blasey’s allegation ― suggesting that even if the encounter did happen, “she said no and he respected it and walked away.”


Sells pushed back to clarify that this isn’t the story Blasey came forward with. In fact, Blasey said she feared for her life during the alleged assault and was able to escape only when another person interrupted Kavanaugh. 


In response, Graham suggested it’s not fair to hold people accountable for things they did as teenagers. 


“There’s a lot of things that I’ve done when I was a teenager that I certainly am ashamed of and not proud of,” he said. 
“People are up in arms over this like ‘oh, this is such a disaster.’ You’re talking about two teenagers 40 years ago. That has nothing to do with what we’re talking about today about this man being a judge on the Supreme court.” 

“And they call it sexual assault?” he added. “No, I don’t believe it.” 

POOL / GETTY IMAGESFranklin Graham with Trump at a ceremony honoring the late Billy Graham at the U.S. Capitol on Feb. 28. In an interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network, Franklin Graham said Blasey’s allegation is “not relevant.”

Although Graham is a celebrated figure in American evangelicalism, other evangelicals observing the fallout from Blasey’s accusations have come to a different conclusion about how to evaluate her claims. 


Rachael Denhollander, an evangelical Christian, was the first woman to speak out against former USA Gymnastics doctor Larry Nassar. In a tweet thread on Sunday, she said that part of the reason she waited so long to come forward was that she had watched friends and family members “eviscerate” victims who spoke out against much-loved candidates, pastors, teams or ministries.


“That showed me what they REALLY thought about abuse and what they REALLY thought about victims,” Denhollander wrote. 
“I knew it meant if faced with a choice between a survivor and their favorite ‘whatever,’ they’d attack the survivor.”


Amy Smith is an advocate for abuse survivors who runs Watch Keep, a blog that tracks reported incidents of sexual abuse in Christian communities. She called Graham’s comments “irresponsible and reckless” — and insensitive toward Blasey.


“The message he is conveying to anyone suffering from sexual abuse is clear: After a number of years, your pain is irrelevant and should be disregarded,” Smith told HuffPost.


She said Graham’s argument reflects a mentality she has commonly found among pastors ― that sexual assault is a sin to be handled quietly among the parties involved rather than a crime that should be reported to law enforcement. It’s no longer acceptable for people to wave off abuse allegations as irrelevant, she said, because the criminal nature of a sexual assault doesn’t change, no matter how much time has passed.


Christa Brown, a clergy sex abuse survivor who blogs about church cover-ups of abuse, said that Graham’s dismissive comments send a “dreadful” message to teenage boys and girls.


Sexual assault is not some ordinary “teenage” thing, Brown said. And it’s not appropriate for anyone to dismiss allegations of violent behavior.


“Kavanaugh is being considered for a lifetime appointment as one of the highest judicial officers of the land. His character matters, and the people of this country deserve to have full confidence in his character,” she said.


“These allegations must be fully vetted by people who are experts in dealing with allegations of sexual violence,” Brown added. 


“To do anything less than that is to be dismissive of sexual assault and sends a terrible message.”

[url=https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dark-money-disclosure-2018_us_5ba1691ce4b046313fc03baa][/url]

See?  It doesn't matter because:

A) Kavanaugh has a "stellar record" 
B) I don't understand what happened
C) Even when told what happened it was a long time ago
D) I don't believe it happened (See point A)
E) Did I mention it was a long time ago?
F) It wasn't sexual assault anyway (See point B)

And his millions of sheep will listen and behave accordingly so THEY don't go to hell.

Cults are amazing.

Fortunately there are those who can think.  

[Belsnickel]

(09-20-2018, 02:35 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Kinda defeat any point you were trying to make before you made it here.  

I have to agree. I've said before that Kavanaugh is a known partisan and that isn't something that typically gets nominated to SCOTUS. It's a sincere argument that could generate good discussion. But comments like that just defeat the purpose.

[Benton]

(09-20-2018, 06:25 AM)ballsofsteel Wrote: A president being investigating for treason , on the verge of being impeached and possibly going to prison, should not be endorsing or have anything to do with picking a Supreme Court Justice. Just common sense.

Has Orin Hatch found his glasses yet? Their not on the top of his head.

Trump, as far as I've read, isn't being investigated for treason or anything else. The extent of Russian involvement in our elections and — as a result of that — our executive branch, is. To the point where the AG recused himself and many people in the administration or the administration's campaign have been making deals or getting charges.

But the Russian question does make a fair point that we don't know how extensive it is. And it wouldn't hurt anything (other than party standing) to hold off a nomination until after Mueller is done investigating. 

[jj22]

(09-19-2018, 08:01 PM)GMDino Wrote: Are you Frick or Frack?

A Russian bot, who infiltrated the Bengals board around the time (late 2015) they overtook social media and American public forums to spread fake news and conspiracy theories to help Trump.

The key to dealing with these bots like Vladimir is to call them out on it and don't feed them. As long as they think they are influencing people, they will never leave. It's up to Americans regardless of party to let them know they aren't welcome and send them back to Russia where they belong.

If all else fails.
https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(09-20-2018, 10:56 AM)jj22 Wrote: A Russian bot, who infiltrated the Bengals board around the time (late 2015) they overtook social media and American public forums to spread fake news and conspiracy theories to help Trump.

The key to dealing with these bots like Vladimir is to call them out on it and don't feed them. As long as they think they are influencing people, they will never leave. It's up to Americans regardless of party to let them know they aren't welcome and send them back to Russia where they belong.

If all else fails.
https://www.fbi.gov/contact-us

The Russian bot accusation is the newest tool for far left types to dismiss a person's points and posts.  Vlad is hyper-partisan but he's no different in that regard to ballsofsteel, yourself and even GMDino at this point.  Even if he is a bot, which I doubt, and quite honestly don't care, we're all big boys here, we can research and make up our own minds without you needing to protect us from big bad Ivan.

[*PhilHos*]

(09-20-2018, 12:38 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: The Russian bot accusation is the newest tool for far left types to dismiss a person's points and posts.  Vlad is hyper-partisan but he's no different in that regard to ballsofsteel, yourself and even GMDino at this point.  Even if he is a bot, which I doubt, and quite honestly don't care, we're all big boys here, we can research and make up our own minds without you needing to protect us from big bad Ivan.

Part of the left's usual tactic of calling the opposition racist/sexist/prejudicie/a bot so they don't have to defend their ideology and/or policies.

[jj22]

Why defend a Russian bot? Russia attacked this great nation. No matter whose side you are on you are supposed to be American. Act like it. Attacking Americans for Vladimir (Putin) is lame. How can you claim to be pro America?

[jj22]

(09-20-2018, 12:47 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Part of the left's usual tactic of calling the opposition racist/sexist/prejudicie/a bot so they don't have to defend their ideology and/or policies.

Keep attacking Americans for people named Vladimir. And you wonder why Russian bots were/are so effective in influencing you guys.

Best way to deal with bots is to call them out on it. Vladimir (Putin. HELLO! Open your eyes people. He's throwing it in your face) clearly feels he is getting somewhere on this board, so you can't expect him to leave, but it's clear and obvious (he isn't even trying to hide it) he's a bot. If you cared about this nation you'd read up on how we were attacked and the tactics used by these Russians. But Trump supporters don't care about America. I think their full fledge defense of Putin, attacks on our Allies and siding with bots named Vladimir against fellow Americans proves that. A total disgrace.

If you cared anything about this country, you'd attack those who attacked us and not join them to attack fellow Americans who dare to stand up to them and for America.

[*PhilHos*]

(09-20-2018, 12:50 PM)jj22 Wrote: Keep attacking Americans for people named Vladimir.

You do realize that there are many Americans named Vladmir, right?

(09-20-2018, 12:50 PM)jj22 Wrote: And you wonder why Russian bots were/are so effective in influencing you guys.

You do realize that many of us didn't vote for Trump and/or weren't influenced by Russian bots, right?

(09-20-2018, 12:50 PM)jj22 Wrote: Best way to deal with bots is to call them out on it. Vladimir (Putin. HELLO! Open your eyes people. He's throwing it in your face) clearly feels he is getting somewhere on this board, so you can't expect him to leave, but it's clear and obvious (he isn't even trying to hide it) he's a bot. If you cared about this nation you'd read up on how we were attacked and the tactics used by these Russians. But Trump supporters don't care about America. I think their full fledge defense of Putin, attacks on our Allies and siding with bots named Vladimir against fellow Americans proves that. A total disgrace.

If you cared anything about this country, you'd attack those who attacked us and not join them to attack fellow Americans who dare to stand up to them and for America.

You sound exactly like a neo-Nazi, Klu Klux Klansmen, a chauvinist or anyone else that's tried to rationalize their hatred toward a person or a group of people simply because of a physical characteristic (in your case, nationality).

[*michaelsean*]

I can't tell if JJ is joking or if he really believes the Russians are infiltrating a relatively obscure message board.

[jj22]

If you read up on the attack they find any political public forum to infiltrate. Their reach extends further than Twitter/Facebook. I’ve called him out on it on numerous threads yet it’s Americans rushing to his defense. Not him. They don’t deny because they know you are on to them.

The fact Trunp supporters (even as they deny their support) will attack you before a bot is unfortunate if not surprising. But we know this Russian tactic works.

[*PhilHos*]

(09-20-2018, 01:37 PM)jj22 Wrote: If you read up on the attack they find any political public forum to infiltrate. Their reach extends further than Twitter/Facebook. I’ve called him out on it on numerous threads yet it’s Americans rushing to his defense. Not him. They don’t deny because  they know you are on to them.

The fact Trunp supporters (even as they deny their support) will attack you before a bot is unfortunate if not surprising. But we know this Russian tactic works.

Here's a thought: be more like Belsnickel, Dill, and others and attack the content of his posts, not who he is.