If they remember me, 35 years from now and press a complaint, it will probably for being a pencil dick.
I swear you are ken jeong.
I know, how racist of me.
Kavanaugh
- Thread starter twenty02
- Start date
I swear you are ken jeong.
I know, how racist of me.
It's received some polarized reviews from Civ fans, but I like it. I skipped 5 altogether, but I definitely think 6 is an improvement over 4 in many ways.
I swear you are ken jeong.
I know, how racist of me.
I am miles better looking than Ken -- unless you think all Chinese/North Asian folks all look the same if then I am Ken!
A source who said they were briefed on the contents of the letter said it described an incident involving Kavanaugh and a woman that took place when both were 17 years old and at a party. According to the source, Kavanaugh and a male friend had locked her in a room against her will, making her feel threatened, but she was able to get out of the room. The Guardian has not verified the apparent claims in the letter. It is not yet clear who wrote it.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/sep/13/brett-kavanaugh-dianne-feinstein-confidential-letter
If this is all this is about, then what a damn waste of time. Seriously, I think Kavanaugh was a teenager in the 1980's, this is the type of thing that would be seen as a prank when I was a teenager in the 90's. If all they did was lock a girl in a room at a party (which you would think would mean even more people there) by herself, then Kavanaugh committed the egregious sin of being a 17 year old boy who did not think things through.
Don’t faint, but if that’s all it is, that’s definitely stupid.
I bet he's saving Barrett to replace Ginsberg-if she leaves the Court during his term.
If that is all it is Feinstein should be censured.
I'd say I'm surprised to see such adamant opinions based on vague and fragmentary news reports, but I'm not.
https://downtrend.com/71superb/dian...vanaugh-letter-turns-out-to-be-a-serious-dud/
This is such stupid sh!t. I actually thought Feinstein had some sense. It appears she’s let the looney left cause her to do this stupid sh!t.
Last edited:
It was the right thing to hand it to the FBI but if that's was what it all about then, it's petty.
My link is only part of the Ginsburg interview. I am not sure but I think it was this interview I watched in its entirety. She said her White House handlers peppered her with questions about her 12 years with the ACLU. They were worried some cases would be a real problem. She said she didn’t get one question about her ACLU days. She was confirmed 96-3.
She is right.
I think the problem goes back to what Benjamin Sasse said last week. These Supreme Court decisions have become so politicized because Congress has abdicated their responsibility in governing this country. They go the easy route and let these issues fester until the Court has to take them up. And why? Because taking a stand one way or the other could be detrimental to their ability to get reelected. And that is what is most important to most members of Congress.
So we have taken a body that was supposed to he apolitical and forced it to be political because the House and Senate are so dysfunctional.
I do not see much certitude. The word "if" has been used quite frequently in the thread.
Everyone said “if.” That being said, it’s hard to imagine many things that a person does as a minor that would be very relevant to confirming a 50+ year old to a judicial position. It’s also not hard to remember something embarrassing (or several such things) that we did as minors, but aren’t very relevant to who we are now. When I said the next step in the increasing partisanship surrounding confirmation proceedings would be looking into everything a nominee has done, said or written from kindergarten on, I was kidding, but maybe I was right.
IF that’s all it is, why was it the right thing to do? IF that’s all it is, I can imagine people at the FBI breaking into uncontrollable laughter and then wondering why Feinstein is wasting their time. IF that’s all it is, they don’t even have a crime to investigate.
I agree with you and Sasse. However, coming from Sasse it’s more than a little limp. Both parties have ceded entirely too much power to the executive branch. Now with Trump we see how an unchecked executive branch can operate. But Sasse, a member of the legislature, moaning about how the legislature won’t do its job rings hollow.
And yes they do want to be re-elected. That goes without saying. But you have to delve into the how to get at the issue. You get re-elected by accumulating cash. You accumulate cash by pleasing the donor class. That’s why the GOP legislators, like Sasse, don’t do anything. The donors wanted a tax cut and they want regulations slashed. They do not care about anything else. And Sasse wants their cash because he wants to be re-elected.
So if legislators want to do their job, I’m all for it.
BS. The FBI has enough to do without investigating 35-year-old high school juvie cases. Especially when the alleged victim reveals in the midst of a political firestorm. This is a local law enforcement deal. The Democrats have managed to make politics more disgusting than Trump ever could. RBG is correct. Feinstein indeed should be censured.
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
And I assume you were all up in arms when the Garland nomination was never brought up to the Senate?
No. I didn't think so.
Spare me your fake outrage, please CoH. You are better than that or at least I hope so. Otherwise its just disappointing.
Last edited:
Here’s where I’m at. The new normal for SCOTUS nominations stinks, but was exactly as expected. What did anyone think the result would be after Garland? The rules were changed and now we have a different game entirely.
It changed with Bork. Let’s get the timeline right and who started it. And don’t forget Biden’s little speech.
Edit: And high tech lynching of Thomas.
Lol. Oh are we still censuring? Cause that’s def the worst thing that’s happened in the last two years.
Whataboutgarland!
As usual you have your head up your rump. I consistently said here that the senate should have voted on Garland.
You can also stop with that condescending baloney.
You are familiar with Bork’s past right? Give the Biden remark a rest. When you can name the SCOTUS nominee that Democrats refused to schedule for hearing, I’ll apologize to you.
So it’s MConnell’s fault that Harris is dishonest, Spartacus Booker behaves like a juvenile, and a gaggle of Democrat senators orchestrate a disruption of the hearing.
Okaaaay.
I didn’t ask for an apology. You’re wrong about Bork. Biden said what he said so own it.
Edit Are you proud of drown his GF Edward Kenndy’s Speech on Bork?
https://www.newyorker.com/news/news...ugh-stirs-tension-among-democrats-in-congress
Ronan Farrow got the actual details
Ronan Farrow got the actual details
The FBI is responsible for performing the background check, and that's my understanding as to why the FBI was informed. I'm of the opinion that allegations of rape, regardless of when it occurred and if indeed that is the allegation, should be brought to the attention of those performing the background check. You're free to disagree, of course.
I want the Trump nightmare to end and am not thrilled with Kavanaugh, but this anonymous sourcing of a non-crime, from 35 years ago, is lame and desperate. In our society a person accused of something has a right to face the accuser. Yes, it might be painful or embarrassing for the accuser, and history shows us that rarely are those accusations false, but "rarely" does not mean "never". There would be a strong motivation to concoct something here. Proof is required.
Last edited:
He’s probably a serial rapist and 20 additional letters with anonymous writers will show up in democratic senators mailboxes by Monday.
Maybe this accuser can do like you and change her name multiple times with the same accusation.
Similar threads
