Kavanaugh SCOTUS hearings

[Belsnickel]

(09-28-2018, 02:35 PM)fredtoast Wrote: What difference does it make if it was a trial or a job interview?

Don't you want the best questions that would get to the truth in either situation?

They pulled her because she wasn't giving them what they wanted, which was to slobber over Kavanaugh. From the outset, neither side in the Senate had any real interest in the truth. Kavanaugh has said so many demonstrably false things we know he has no interest in the truth. So really Ford was just victimized again.

[*michaelsean*]

(09-28-2018, 02:38 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: They pulled her because she wasn't giving them what they wanted, which was to slobber over Kavanaugh. From the outset, neither side in the Senate had any real interest in the truth. Kavanaugh has said so many demonstrably false things we know he has no interest in the truth. So really Ford was just victimized again.

Someone's decided.

And she should give them what they wanted. Unless I misunderstood her role, she was representing the Republicans.

[fredtoast]

(09-28-2018, 02:20 PM)bfine32 Wrote: First off in our current warped society Kavs is having to prove his innocence over an assumption of guilty.

That is the way it works at a job interview.

If you were accused of raping a child there would be no "presumption of innocence" when interviewing for a job as a babysitter.  Nothing "warped" about that.

[Stonyhands]

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2018/09/ford-caught-in-major-lie-city-remodeling-permits-show-project-she-linked-to-kavanaugh-was-in-2008-not-2012/

The second front door was more likely put in to accommodate the google interns they were renting the rooms to.

House made of cards is coming down. Dems know that a FBI investigation will prove Kavenaugh is innocent and Ford fabricated the story that she was assaulted by Kavenaugh. I as have others believe that she was assaulted just not by Kavenaugh. Their goal was clearly to stall the vote past midterms and swing the senate. Any part of Ford’s story regarding Kavenaugh as the assailant was already paper thin.

https://www.westernjournal.com/ct/ford-polygraph-results-released-just-blow-huge-hole-story/?utm_source=Twitter&utm_medium=MobileFloatingSharingButtons&utm_content=2018-09-27&utm_campaign=websitesharingbuttons

Polygraph test evidently didn’t contain Kavenaughs name anywhere. This supports the theory that she was assaulted by someone. It certainly does not corroborate that it was Kavenaugh. Dr. Ford is the perfect character assassin for the Dems. A leftist Pyscho therapist with a PHD that can pass a polygraph when asked if she was assaulted in general without saying any names.

They clearly lied about her fear of flying to stall, how can anyone seriously believe that asking for an FBI investigation isn’t further stall tactics.

[Bengalzona]

(09-28-2018, 02:28 PM)Mike M (the other one) Wrote: Uhm because he's not on Trial? it would've been highly in-appropriate.
Reminder, this is a Job interview, not a trial.

It was the GOP members choice to have her there and to do questioning... but only for Ford. They didn't want Kavanaugh questioned by a professional on this at all.

I wonder why?

And, yes, it is a job interview. Hence the basic assumption that you are unqualified for the job until you prove your qualifications. Kavanaugh's work history and schooling looked good, Unfortunately, there are questions about his personal background that need to be clarified. they aren't clarified by just tossing them under the table and ignoring them. Additionally, now there are questions about his temperament and possibly his honesty.

[Belsnickel]

(09-28-2018, 02:39 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Someone's decided.

Decided what? I believe Ford was sexually assaulted.

[*michaelsean*]

(09-28-2018, 02:40 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: It was the GOP members choice to have her there and to do questioning... but only for Ford. They didn't want Kavanaugh questioned by a professional on this at all.

I wonder why?

And, yes, it is a job interview. Hence the basic assumption that you are unqualified for the job until you prove your qualifications. Kavanaugh's work history and schooling looked good, Unfortunately, there are questions about his personal background that need to be clarified. they aren't clarified by just tossing them under the table and ignoring them. Additionally, now there are questions about his temperament and possibly his honesty.

OK someone help me out.  I thought Republicans had her do the questioning because everyone was saying, 'There are no women."  And unless I've lost my mind I could swear she questioned him at least in the beginning part I saw.  I didn't think she would be retained to question him at all.  

[*michaelsean*]

(09-28-2018, 02:40 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: Decided what? I believe Ford was sexually assaulted.

Alright my bad.

[fredtoast]

(09-28-2018, 02:39 PM)michaelsean Wrote: And she should give them what they wanted.  Unless I misunderstood her role, she was representing the Republicans.

So are you admitting that the Republicans did not want the truth?

[Stonyhands]

(09-28-2018, 02:38 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: They pulled her because she wasn't giving them what they wanted, which was to slobber over Kavanaugh. From the outset, neither side in the Senate had any real interest in the truth. Kavanaugh has said so many demonstrably false things we know he has no interest in the truth. So really Ford was just victimized again.

What false things did Kavenaugh say?

That he has a fear of flying? After an extensive history of flying?

Did he name witnesses that refute his claim...all of them.

Did he remember the exact details of what allegedly transpired in the bedroom but conveniently forget how or who drove him back home immediately after?

[fredtoast]

(09-28-2018, 02:13 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: About those other witnesses...

https://www.yahoo.com/news/ap-fact-check-kavanaughs-claim-exoneration-224022076.html

Not to mention her friend was married to a Fox News commentator.

[GMDino]

(09-28-2018, 02:44 PM)michaelsean Wrote: OK someone help me out.  I thought Republicans had her do the questioning because everyone was saying, 'There are no women."  And unless I've lost my mind I could swear she questioned him at least in the beginning part I saw.  I didn't think she would be retained to question him at all.  

She asked one question I believe and that was it.

(09-28-2018, 02:46 PM)Stonyhands Wrote: What false things did Kavenaugh say?  

That he has a fear of flying?  After an extensive history of flying?  

Did he name witnesses that refute his claim...all of them.  

Did he remember the exact details of what allegedly transpired in the bedroom but conveniently forget how or who drove him back home immediately after?

I have an irrational fear of flying.  I hate it.  I have flown three times in my life and was afraid every time.  I have driven to Florida and back, twice, because of my fear of flying.  It's really not that weird.

[*michaelsean*]

(09-28-2018, 02:45 PM)fredtoast Wrote: So are you admitting that the Republicans did not want the truth?

This is a show. They wanted stuff asked the  way they wanted them asked to put forth the best image.  And yes they would avoid things that could look bad whether he's innocent or not.  I wasn't aware this was such a revelation.  

[*michaelsean*]

(09-28-2018, 02:51 PM)GMDino Wrote: She asked one question I believe and that was it.



I have an irrational fear of flying.  I hate it.  I have flown three times in my life and was afraid every time.  I have driven to Florida and back, twice, because of my fear of flying.  It's really not that weird.

Oh. For some reason it seemed she asked more.  

[Stonyhands]

(09-28-2018, 02:40 PM)Bengalzona Wrote: It was the GOP members choice to have her there and to do questioning... but only for Ford. They didn't want Kavanaugh questioned by a professional on this at all.

I wonder why?

And, yes, it is a job interview. Hence the basic assumption that you are unqualified for the job until you prove your qualifications. Kavanaugh's work history and schooling looked good, Unfortunately, there are questions about his personal background that need to be clarified. they aren't clarified by just tossing them under the table and ignoring them. Additionally, now there are questions about his temperament and possibly his honesty.

You honestly think that these thing happened and weren’t found in any of his 6 background checks for any of the other positions he held including working under Bush and flying on Air Force One?

Haha...his temperament...something this guy’s worked for his entire life, dedicated his life...and he’s as close as one gets to achieving his life’s goals and somebody falsely accuses him of something like this. How the heck is the guy supposed to respond?

This entire process was a sham...Feinstein knew that had this been out earlier this paper thin accusation would have been proven false so quick to not even have any chance to stall the nomination. This is 100% a sham to stall the nomination.

Anybody who seriously defends the way Kavenaugh was treated is a terrible human being and I pray and hope for their sake they never have to endure what this man and his family had to.

[*michaelsean*]

So it seems Flake will vote to move it to the full senate, but with a delay in the vote in the Senate in order to have an FBI investigation.

[fredtoast]

(09-28-2018, 02:46 PM)Stonyhands Wrote: What false things did Kavenaugh say?  

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/09/five-times-brett-kavanaugh-appears-to-have-lied-to-congress-while-under-oath/

[SunsetBengal]

(09-28-2018, 02:55 PM)fredtoast Wrote: https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/09/five-times-brett-kavanaugh-appears-to-have-lied-to-congress-while-under-oath/

Mother Jones, really?    


Side question.  Was that guy in Tennessee;  The that broke out of the County Jail, only to get caught attempting to sneak back in a couple days later for the purpose of selling contraband to the other inmates.  Was he one of your clients??

[*bfine32*]

(09-28-2018, 02:40 PM)fredtoast Wrote: That is the way it works at a job interview.

If you were accused of raping a child there would be no "presumption of innocence" when interviewing for a job as a babysitter.  Nothing "warped" about that.

Well, given as you couldn't think of any follow up questions to call into question the character of a woman who at the age of 15 year admitted to drinking at a party; I'll take your assertion of guilty until proven innocent as not being warped with a grain of salt.    

[Stonyhands]

(09-28-2018, 02:51 PM)GMDino Wrote: She asked one question I believe and that was it.



I have an irrational fear of flying.  I hate it.  I have flown three times in my life and was afraid every time.  I have driven to Florida and back, twice, because of my fear of flying.  It's really not that weird.

My wife is claustrophobic as well and hates flying but she does it. I don’t refute the idea that she’s afraid of flying. My issue is that her reasoning for not attending earlier invitations to testify before the senate committee was refused because she needed time to drive across the country for fear of flying. She even went as far to say that she’s ok flying if it means flying to a vacation spot...and evidently flying to take a polygraph just weeks earlier.

She did eventually fly to DC...how can one seriously not view this as a stall tactic?

How can one defend Feinstein’s sitting on the information throughout the questioning and background check process?