Time To Smear Kavanaugh's Good Name...

[Terraceth]

So, Democrats are saying, "ok, it's good that we're having the FBI investigation, so this would be a good time for Republicans to withdraw Kavanaugh's name and offer up somebody more agreeable....."

wow

I mean, I expect the Republicans would have an easier time getting someone else confirmed, particularly if they pick a woman like Amy Barrett or Joan Larsen. Probably would have been better if Trump had picked someone else, but we can't really turn back the clock.

Though I do wonder if it would be more beneficial politically for the Republicans if Kavanaugh loses the vote and doesn't get confirmed, and then they nominate someone else who gets through.

MM - you like to try to reverse to arrow, but you are the one acting as if you know Ford is a liar, and you simply don't have a leg to stand on. There is not enough evidence to determine she is lying. In point of fact, it does appear the sex crimes prosecutor the GOP brought in, based on her experience and later lack of forcefulness, may well have determined she was telling the truth.

What is this claim based on? If it's the fact the prosecutor didn't do a great job putting doubt on Ford's testimony, I'm going to guess that she was probably told to try to take a light touch. Even ignoring that, there's only so much you can do in cross-examining a witness when you're getting interrupted every 5 minutes by someone who takes the opportunity to laud said witness. I've seen a lot of people criticizing Harris for not doing a good job, but I'm not sure how good a job someone could have done under those circumstances.

[rogue06]

Senator Tom Cotton gets it:

"If FBI investigation is limited to 'current credible allegations' against Kavanaugh, then it should be over now, because there are no credible allegations against him.

"And only a fool would think this will change Senate Democrats’ shameful treatment of Kavanaugh. Mark my words."

https://mobile.twitter.com/TomCotton...-nomination%2F

00000000000000arc2abbf.jpg

[Cow Poke]

I mean, I expect the Republicans would have an easier time getting someone else confirmed, particularly if they pick a woman like Amy Barrett or Joan Larsen. Probably would have been better if Trump had picked someone else, but we can't really turn back the clock.

Though I do wonder if it would be more beneficial politically for the Republicans if Kavanaugh loses the vote and doesn't get confirmed, and then they nominate someone else who gets through.

I think the Dems are convinced there will be this Blue Wave, after which they can nominate a liberal, and get her confirmed.

[seer]

I mean, I expect the Republicans would have an easier time getting someone else confirmed, particularly if they pick a woman like Amy Barrett or Joan Larsen. Probably would have been better if Trump had picked someone else, but we can't really turn back the clock.

Amy Barrett was my first choice, but the Dems would hate her even more given what she went through on her last confirmation.

Though I do wonder if it would be more beneficial politically for the Republicans if Kavanaugh loses the vote and doesn't get confirmed, and then they nominate someone else who gets through.

No...

[NorrinRadd]

... under this president, and in the current 'the other guys are demons' mindset on all sides, decency and fairness are mostly simply lost causes. Hatred and arrogance and nastiness are the rule of the day.


Jim

Personally, I believe the "under this president" part is the result, not the cause, of the other things.

[NorrinRadd]

We're going to have to disagree. Quite honestly, I don't think she's "all there". She's a grown woman with a PhD, yet she presents as a scared little girl. Even when she was being sworn in, her attorney had to motion to her how to do it. I think she's been coached and pushed, and I believe she became convinced she's "doing the right thing".

I emphatically agree with this. She comes across as deeply troubled, with the overall demeanor of a scared 10-year-old who happens to have advanced knowledge in a few particular areas. I'm still just SMH at her easy use of "episodically" and "indellible in the hippocampus," juxtaposed with not knowing "exculpatory," and her use, in a letter, of "me" as a nominative.

[Terraceth]

Personally, I believe the "under this president" part is the result, not the cause, of the other things.

I think it's both, honestly.

[NorrinRadd]

It would not surprise me if they discovered that Kavanaugh was downplaying his drinking.

And his boofing.

[NorrinRadd]

Amy Barrett was my first choice, but the Dems would hate her even more given what she went through on her last confirmation.

...

My first choice also. I'd still love to see her nominated, just for the fact that, given DiFi's bigoted remarks, it would put the war against Christianity front and center.

[seer]

My first choice also. I'd still love to see her nominated, just for the fact that, given DiFi's bigoted remarks, it would put the war against Christianity front and center.

Yes, the force is strong in that Barrett woman...

[JimL]

There's always the possibility that she sincerely believed what she was saying, which is what I'm inclined to believe, and somehow, Kavanaugh's name got attached to her story.

It's also possible, most probable really, that Dr. Ford not only believes, but that she, just like she testified to, is 100% certain that it was Kavanaugh and his friend M. Judge. You guys are, as usual, in denial. She knows who Kavanaugh and Judge are. And if Kavanaugh is innocent then he would have been clamoring for an FBI investigation from the get go, not evading one. Part of his testimony was that "I called for a hearing as soon as this accusation came out." And he wanted the reps to take that as proof of his innocence. What it was actually evidence of was that he didn't want an FBI investigation and a quick hearing would get around that. I'll bet he had you all fooled with that one, eh? Mistaken identity indeed! Sheesh, the stuff you guys will conjure up in order to hold to your beliefs.

[Cow Poke]

It's also possible, most probable really, that Dr. Ford not only believes, but that she, just like she testified to, is 100% certain that it was Kavanaugh and his friend M. Judge. You guys are, as usual, in denial. She knows who Kavanaugh and Judge are. And if Kavanaugh is innocent then he would have been clamoring for an FBI investigation from the get go, not evading one. Part of his testimony was that "I called for a hearing as soon as this accusation came out." And he wanted the reps to take that as proof of his innocence. What it was actually evidence of was that he didn't want an FBI investigation and a quick hearing would get around that. I'll bet he had you all fooled with that one, eh? Mistaken identity indeed! Sheesh, the stuff you guys will conjure up in order to hold to your beliefs.

If you should ever decide to engage in civil discourse, please let me know.

[oxmixmudd]

I only ask this because you direct this at more people than MM, but does thinking that the Democrats mishandled this, even egregiously, equate to "partisan hatred?"

And, by that standard, when somebody criticizes Trump and the Republicans for not reining him in, is that "partisan hatred?"

No - that's not the sort of thing I'm talking about. I'm talking about his unwillingness to afford both sides of the he said/she said humanity. That unwillingness is bound up in his partisan hatred of the Democrats. Democrats are not people, they are 'the enemy'. And since Ford's beliefs about what happened 35 years ago are a threat to his class, the Republicans, she's not a person anymore either. Just one of 'them'.

Look at the quotes I give. I'm not talking about just feeling that the members of congress that are Democrats mishandled this. I'm not talking about complaining that the Republican members of congress follow Trump around like sheep. MM is generalizing his statements to far more than just the leaders in congress. He is creating classes of people. And the classes he doesn't like are just hardly even human anymore.

And it's not just him. It's a good portion of the people in our country.

But it is not what Christ calls is to.


Jim

[Zymologist]

No - that's not the sort of thing I'm talking about. I'm talking about his unwillingness to afford both sides of the he said/she said humanity. That unwillingness is bound up in his partisan hatred of the Democrats. Democrats are not people, they are 'the enemy'. And since Ford's beliefs about what happened 35 years ago are a threat to his class, the Republicans, she's not a person anymore either. Just one of 'them'.

Look at the quotes I give. I'm not talking about just feeling that the members of congress that are Democrats mishandled this. I'm not talking about complaining that the Republican members of congress follow Trump around like sheep. MM is generalizing his statements to far more than just the leaders in congress. He is creating classes of people. And the classes he doesn't like are just hardly even human anymore.

And it's not just him. It's a good portion of the people in our country.

But it is not what Christ calls is to.

Jim

Ok, but you yourself seem to be generalizing about some other people too (“and others,” etc.). I guess I’m not sure who all you’re including in these apparent blanket condemnations, since, as far as I can tell, most of the Christians posting in here seem to be trying to be fair-minded.

[oxmixmudd]

No, I'm saying that BASED ON THE EVIDENCE, Ford is either lying, or she's irrational to continue believing her claims after her own friends refuted them.


Partisan, yes, but not in the extreme sense of the word; hatred, absolutely not, not in ANY sense of the word.

Got anything else for us, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hypocrite? Maybe you should ask me again if I'm really a Christian. That's a sure-fire winner.

Again? Now you are making things up. Have I questioned if you are really a Christian MM? I have questioned whether your actions/words are consistent with what Christ taught. When have asked you if you 'really' are a Christian?

But I do believe that in the old TWEB you called me an Apostate as we discussed ideas about how to reconcile evolution with the scripture - did you not? Or am I confusing you with someone else?


Jim