EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 704
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
farvacola
United States18856 Posts
| ||
|
chocorush
694 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 17 2018 22:59 chocorush wrote: If the allegations are true, isn't him lying about it now still a big problem? You can't excuse that with the stupid teenager defense. None of it is excusable. But the endless attempts to create excuses is all too predictable. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
more broadly, there's a lot of people who did "one dumb thing" in high school and it screwed up the rest of their lives. and for most of them, it wasn't sexually assaulting someone. | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
On September 17 2018 23:06 ticklishmusic wrote: beyond that, teeing up a letter from a bunch of girls he knew in high school attesting to his character is weird as hell to me, but i guess gives some sort of insight into how these people think. more broadly, there's a lot of people who did "one dumb thing" in high school and it screwed up the rest of their lives. Especially given the amount of work it would take to do that considering he went to an all boys school. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18856 Posts
| ||
|
On_Slaught
United States12190 Posts
| ||
|
IyMoon
United States1249 Posts
On September 18 2018 00:20 On_Slaught wrote: Well it's looking more and more likely she will get the chance to testify to the Senate. Multiple Republican senators have called for his vote to be delayed in order to investigate this. She is willing to testify so let's see if Grassley cares about this pressure or just forces the vote I am not sure Flake votes yes if they don't hear her out. If flake votes no thats a HUGE defeat for trump, and just something Flake would do to piss off Trump | ||
|
brian
United States9639 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18856 Posts
 | ||
|
IyMoon
United States1249 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15742 Posts
On September 18 2018 01:14 Plansix wrote: Senator Collins appears to be on the side of delaying the process. So, on a side note, Anita Hill came forward two days before the full confirmation vote for a Thomas. It delayed the entire thing for some time and was treated like shit by the Democrats that controled the senate at the time. https://twitter.com/SenatorCollins/status/1041719261142679553 . So this is kinda the end for Kavanaugh then. The people asking for "a hearing first" are the people who can see the writing on the wall and want a better excuse for voting against Kavanaugh. The only way he was going to sneak in was if it was highly expedited. They knew time was not on their side. Once this whole thing turns into "but first we need to make sure he's not a sexual predator", the whole thing comes to a screeching halt. And as this drags on, it will get worse and worse. Time is STRONGLY against Kavanaugh. Collins/Flake/Murkowski taking the easy way out by saying "Well let's just have them testify first" is the polite way of saying "GTFO Kavanaugh". The only way this ends up ok for Kavanaugh is if Collins and all them are like "Well, I'd LIKE them to testify...but if not, oh well!", which could very well still happen x_x | ||
|
brian
United States9639 Posts
On September 18 2018 01:21 Mohdoo wrote: So this is kinda the end for Kavanaugh then. The people asking for "a hearing first" are the people who can see the writing on the wall and want a better excuse for voting against Kavanaugh. The only way he was going to sneak in was if it was highly expedited. They knew time was not on their side. Once this whole thing turns into "but first we need to make sure he's not a sexual predator", the whole thing comes to a screeching halt. And as this drags on, it will get worse and worse. Time is STRONGLY against Kavanaugh. Collins/Flake/Murkowski taking the easy way out by saying "Well let's just have them testify first" is the polite way of saying "GTFO Kavanaugh". iirc both Collins and Murkowski have both voted against their own statements of intention days prior within this year. Flake has as well, though i faintly recall him at least having some weak justification. ..wish i could remember the context.. DACA maybe? i think it was. i think they offered Flake some face saving meaningless concession that let him vote for something he vowed not to without looking like a total hypocrite. and McConnel promised to vote later on whatever Collins was holding out for, so she flipped for nothing. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
| ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15742 Posts
On September 18 2018 01:24 Plansix wrote: Thomas was confirmed, so don't count on it. But I doubt they will move forward with the vote to move it out of the judiciary committee. People care a lot more about sexual assault than they used to. To me, the only questions is whether or not they testify or not. If they do, I think Kavanaugh has really bad chances. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On September 18 2018 01:30 Mohdoo wrote: People care a lot more about sexual assault than they used to. To me, the only questions is whether or not they testify or not. If they do, I think Kavanaugh has really bad chances. You are correct on that part. Sexual harassment wasn't even a discussion until Anita Hill. The term was largely unknown until she testified in the early 1990s. We have come a long way and not that far at all in 25 years. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On September 18 2018 01:37 Plansix wrote: You are correct on that part. Sexual harassment wasn't even a discussion until Anita Hill. The term was largely unknown until she testified in the early 1990s. We have come a long way and not that far at all in 25 years. Interestingly Thomas picked up a second accuser in the midst of the metoo movement I believe. He is likely a serial sexual harasser. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
| ||
