|
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 |
On September 18 2018 01:47 Doodsmack wrote:
Would love to see flake or Sasse vote against the nominee purely to block trump from having th4 accomplishment for his legacy, which is probably why McCain blocked the Obamacare repeal.
I think McCain blocked that bill because he knew everyone knew it was shit and he was dying. He wasn't able to kill the tax bill in the same fashion sadly. If only Collins had flipped, he might have had two in a row.
Edit: I wonder how Roberts as head justice with this hot pile of trash slowly working its way towards his court.
|
Only 0 are choosing to recant. The way they can spin not getting in touch with people or not getting a statement into an attack is legendary ... but then again it’s Think Progress. They couldn’t even get a Kavanaugh headline right and were flagged by Facebook as fake news (hilariously, Slate seconded).
She’ll get a hearing under oath at this point. Feinstein has currently been reported by Chairman Grassley’s office as being uncooperative in setting up follow up calls with Dr Ford. It’s entirely consistent with Feinsteins choice to withhold the accusations from the committee, which she’s known for weeks, until the last minute.
|
On September 18 2018 01:47 Doodsmack wrote:
Would love to see flake or Sasse vote against the nominee purely to block trump from having th4 accomplishment for his legacy, which is probably why McCain blocked the Obamacare repeal.
I firmly believe McCain blocked the Obamacare repeal because it was a terrible idea to do without a robust replacement.
Not to spite Trump out of an accomplishment.
|
|
|
On September 18 2018 01:57 Danglars wrote:Only 0 are choosing to recant. The way they can spin not getting in touch with people or not getting a statement into an attack is legendary ... but then again it’s Think Progress. They couldn’t even get a Kavanaugh headline right and were flagged by Facebook as fake news (hilariously, Slate seconded). She’ll get a hearing under oath at this point. Feinstein has currently been reported by Chairman Grassley’s office as being uncooperative in setting up follow up calls with Dr Ford. It’s entirely consistent with Feinsteins choice to withhold the accusations from the committee, which she’s known for weeks, until the last minute.
As I said before, Anita Hill only came forward 2 days before the full vote before the Senate. Now that is last minute. Feinstein's decision respect the Professor Ford's wish for anonymity can be questioned, but her release of the information was promoted the press asking questions about it. There does not seem to be any evidence that her release of the documents was tactical. I also don't believe there is much merit to a last minute release anyways.
Agreed. Without full hearings, moving forward would present real problems for any Republican running for re-election. On top of that, some of them have to wonder if this is like Roy Moore and more women will come forward.
|
On September 18 2018 02:04 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2018 01:57 Danglars wrote:Only 0 are choosing to recant. The way they can spin not getting in touch with people or not getting a statement into an attack is legendary ... but then again it’s Think Progress. They couldn’t even get a Kavanaugh headline right and were flagged by Facebook as fake news (hilariously, Slate seconded). She’ll get a hearing under oath at this point. Feinstein has currently been reported by Chairman Grassley’s office as being uncooperative in setting up follow up calls with Dr Ford. It’s entirely consistent with Feinsteins choice to withhold the accusations from the committee, which she’s known for weeks, until the last minute. As I said before, Anita Hill only came forward 2 days before the full vote before the Senate. Now that is last minute. Feinstein's decision respect the Professor Ford's wish for anonymity can be questioned, but her release of the information was promoted the press asking questions about it. There does not seem to be any evidence that her release of the documents was tactical. I also don't believe there is much merit to a last minute release anyways.
I guess believe what you want about Feinstein. I find her decision to sit until last minute the very definition of planing to disrupt and delay. She’s a senior senator and knows the importance of sexual assault accusations, therefore is without excuse for concealing this from her committee partners ... while they had Kavanaugh in front of them in hearings asking him questions. Pick who you trust. These are weak rationalizations.
|
On September 18 2018 02:10 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2018 02:04 Plansix wrote:On September 18 2018 01:57 Danglars wrote:Only 0 are choosing to recant. The way they can spin not getting in touch with people or not getting a statement into an attack is legendary ... but then again it’s Think Progress. They couldn’t even get a Kavanaugh headline right and were flagged by Facebook as fake news (hilariously, Slate seconded). She’ll get a hearing under oath at this point. Feinstein has currently been reported by Chairman Grassley’s office as being uncooperative in setting up follow up calls with Dr Ford. It’s entirely consistent with Feinsteins choice to withhold the accusations from the committee, which she’s known for weeks, until the last minute. As I said before, Anita Hill only came forward 2 days before the full vote before the Senate. Now that is last minute. Feinstein's decision respect the Professor Ford's wish for anonymity can be questioned, but her release of the information was promoted the press asking questions about it. There does not seem to be any evidence that her release of the documents was tactical. I also don't believe there is much merit to a last minute release anyways. I guess believe what you want about Feinstein. I find her decision to sit until last minute the very definition of planing to disrupt and delay. She’s a senior senator and knows the importance of sexual assault accusations, therefore is without excuse for concealing this from her committee partners ... while they had Kavanaugh in front of them in hearings asking him questions. Pick who you trust. These are weak rationalizations. Yeah.... but what if she doesn't trust her Republican committee partners?
|
On September 18 2018 02:10 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2018 02:04 Plansix wrote:On September 18 2018 01:57 Danglars wrote:Only 0 are choosing to recant. The way they can spin not getting in touch with people or not getting a statement into an attack is legendary ... but then again it’s Think Progress. They couldn’t even get a Kavanaugh headline right and were flagged by Facebook as fake news (hilariously, Slate seconded). She’ll get a hearing under oath at this point. Feinstein has currently been reported by Chairman Grassley’s office as being uncooperative in setting up follow up calls with Dr Ford. It’s entirely consistent with Feinsteins choice to withhold the accusations from the committee, which she’s known for weeks, until the last minute. As I said before, Anita Hill only came forward 2 days before the full vote before the Senate. Now that is last minute. Feinstein's decision respect the Professor Ford's wish for anonymity can be questioned, but her release of the information was promoted the press asking questions about it. There does not seem to be any evidence that her release of the documents was tactical. I also don't believe there is much merit to a last minute release anyways. I guess believe what you want about Feinstein. I find her decision to sit until last minute the very definition of planing to disrupt and delay. She’s a senior senator and knows the importance of sexual assault accusations, therefore is without excuse for concealing this from her committee partners ... while they had Kavanaugh in front of them in hearings asking him questions. Pick who you trust. These are weak rationalizations.
What exactly is your point? That despite it having credibility, the timing was "disruptive"? Nice deflection.
|
|
|
On September 18 2018 02:10 Danglars wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2018 02:04 Plansix wrote:On September 18 2018 01:57 Danglars wrote:Only 0 are choosing to recant. The way they can spin not getting in touch with people or not getting a statement into an attack is legendary ... but then again it’s Think Progress. They couldn’t even get a Kavanaugh headline right and were flagged by Facebook as fake news (hilariously, Slate seconded). She’ll get a hearing under oath at this point. Feinstein has currently been reported by Chairman Grassley’s office as being uncooperative in setting up follow up calls with Dr Ford. It’s entirely consistent with Feinsteins choice to withhold the accusations from the committee, which she’s known for weeks, until the last minute. As I said before, Anita Hill only came forward 2 days before the full vote before the Senate. Now that is last minute. Feinstein's decision respect the Professor Ford's wish for anonymity can be questioned, but her release of the information was promoted the press asking questions about it. There does not seem to be any evidence that her release of the documents was tactical. I also don't believe there is much merit to a last minute release anyways. I guess believe what you want about Feinstein. I find her decision to sit until last minute the very definition of planing to disrupt and delay. She’s a senior senator and knows the importance of sexual assault accusations, therefore is without excuse for concealing this from her committee partners ... while they had Kavanaugh in front of them in hearings asking him questions. Pick who you trust. These are weak rationalizations.
Assuming I agreed with that assessment, which I do not, I still wouldn't care. Grassley and others have been charging forward in the middle of documents being released by the Bush White House's team and completely disregard the standard practice of a bipartisan agreement those documents. They have been more than happy to keep all this information until the Last Minute when it benefited them. So any complaints about Feinstein "tactics" are weak plays of faux outrage over rules that only started to matter now. Republicans are just getting as good as they give for once.
|
On September 18 2018 02:13 Acrofales wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2018 02:10 Danglars wrote:On September 18 2018 02:04 Plansix wrote:On September 18 2018 01:57 Danglars wrote:Only 0 are choosing to recant. The way they can spin not getting in touch with people or not getting a statement into an attack is legendary ... but then again it’s Think Progress. They couldn’t even get a Kavanaugh headline right and were flagged by Facebook as fake news (hilariously, Slate seconded). She’ll get a hearing under oath at this point. Feinstein has currently been reported by Chairman Grassley’s office as being uncooperative in setting up follow up calls with Dr Ford. It’s entirely consistent with Feinsteins choice to withhold the accusations from the committee, which she’s known for weeks, until the last minute. As I said before, Anita Hill only came forward 2 days before the full vote before the Senate. Now that is last minute. Feinstein's decision respect the Professor Ford's wish for anonymity can be questioned, but her release of the information was promoted the press asking questions about it. There does not seem to be any evidence that her release of the documents was tactical. I also don't believe there is much merit to a last minute release anyways. I guess believe what you want about Feinstein. I find her decision to sit until last minute the very definition of planing to disrupt and delay. She’s a senior senator and knows the importance of sexual assault accusations, therefore is without excuse for concealing this from her committee partners ... while they had Kavanaugh in front of them in hearings asking him questions. Pick who you trust. These are weak rationalizations. What exactly is your point? That despite it having credibility, the timing was "disruptive"? Nice deflection.
Waiting on releasing the accusation until after questions were asked and almost to the very end of the process brings implications at the very least.
In a world were everyone are good faith actors she would have brought it up during the hearing and when he was under oath. Now we're in a world were people just speculate and counter speculate about it.
So again its comparative to what the republicans are doing but at the same time you can't say that you're better then the republicans when what you do is comparative to what the republicans are doing.
|
To be clear, I don’t think withholding it would have been acceptable if Grassley and others were not also acting in bad faith. I would prefer everyone play by the rules.
|
On September 18 2018 02:24 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2018 02:13 Acrofales wrote:On September 18 2018 02:10 Danglars wrote:On September 18 2018 02:04 Plansix wrote:On September 18 2018 01:57 Danglars wrote:Only 0 are choosing to recant. The way they can spin not getting in touch with people or not getting a statement into an attack is legendary ... but then again it’s Think Progress. They couldn’t even get a Kavanaugh headline right and were flagged by Facebook as fake news (hilariously, Slate seconded). She’ll get a hearing under oath at this point. Feinstein has currently been reported by Chairman Grassley’s office as being uncooperative in setting up follow up calls with Dr Ford. It’s entirely consistent with Feinsteins choice to withhold the accusations from the committee, which she’s known for weeks, until the last minute. As I said before, Anita Hill only came forward 2 days before the full vote before the Senate. Now that is last minute. Feinstein's decision respect the Professor Ford's wish for anonymity can be questioned, but her release of the information was promoted the press asking questions about it. There does not seem to be any evidence that her release of the documents was tactical. I also don't believe there is much merit to a last minute release anyways. I guess believe what you want about Feinstein. I find her decision to sit until last minute the very definition of planing to disrupt and delay. She’s a senior senator and knows the importance of sexual assault accusations, therefore is without excuse for concealing this from her committee partners ... while they had Kavanaugh in front of them in hearings asking him questions. Pick who you trust. These are weak rationalizations. What exactly is your point? That despite it having credibility, the timing was "disruptive"? Nice deflection. Waiting on releasing the accusation until after questions were asked and almost to the very end of the process brings implications at the very least. In a world were everyone are good faith actors she would have brought it up during the hearing and when he was under oath. Now we're in a world were people just speculate and counter speculate about it. So again its comparative to what the republicans are doing but at the same time you can't say that you're better then the republicans when what you do is comparative to what the republicans are doing.
There is literally no benefit to following rules your opponents consistently do not. The political process is cheapened anyway, why should that only come at the cost of those one party represents?
Aside from the specifics here with Ford not wanting this out in the open, if Feinstein was playing tactics here, it's about time. From an outsiders perspective, the democrats are seriously mediocre party. But the republican party is like something out of a book of parody villains, every bit of their own medicine they taste might bring them a little closer to realising this isn't actually how they want the game to be played.
|
On September 18 2018 02:37 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2018 02:24 Sermokala wrote:On September 18 2018 02:13 Acrofales wrote:On September 18 2018 02:10 Danglars wrote:On September 18 2018 02:04 Plansix wrote:On September 18 2018 01:57 Danglars wrote:Only 0 are choosing to recant. The way they can spin not getting in touch with people or not getting a statement into an attack is legendary ... but then again it’s Think Progress. They couldn’t even get a Kavanaugh headline right and were flagged by Facebook as fake news (hilariously, Slate seconded). She’ll get a hearing under oath at this point. Feinstein has currently been reported by Chairman Grassley’s office as being uncooperative in setting up follow up calls with Dr Ford. It’s entirely consistent with Feinsteins choice to withhold the accusations from the committee, which she’s known for weeks, until the last minute. As I said before, Anita Hill only came forward 2 days before the full vote before the Senate. Now that is last minute. Feinstein's decision respect the Professor Ford's wish for anonymity can be questioned, but her release of the information was promoted the press asking questions about it. There does not seem to be any evidence that her release of the documents was tactical. I also don't believe there is much merit to a last minute release anyways. I guess believe what you want about Feinstein. I find her decision to sit until last minute the very definition of planing to disrupt and delay. She’s a senior senator and knows the importance of sexual assault accusations, therefore is without excuse for concealing this from her committee partners ... while they had Kavanaugh in front of them in hearings asking him questions. Pick who you trust. These are weak rationalizations. What exactly is your point? That despite it having credibility, the timing was "disruptive"? Nice deflection. Waiting on releasing the accusation until after questions were asked and almost to the very end of the process brings implications at the very least. In a world were everyone are good faith actors she would have brought it up during the hearing and when he was under oath. Now we're in a world were people just speculate and counter speculate about it. So again its comparative to what the republicans are doing but at the same time you can't say that you're better then the republicans when what you do is comparative to what the republicans are doing. There is literally no benefit to following rules your opponents consistently do not. The political process is cheapened anyway, why should that only come at the cost of those one party represents? Aside from the specifics here with Ford not wanting this out in the open, if Feinstein was playing tactics here, it's about time. From an outsiders perspective, the democrats are seriously mediocre party. But the republican party is like something out of a book of parody villains, every bit of their own medicine they taste might bring them a little closer to realising this isn't actually how they want the game to be played.
Well no there is. You get to say at the end of the day that you're the better party in congress and that you are the most respectable politicians. Its called creating a difference between you and the other guy where you are better then them. Its the most basic political strategy.
The democrats don't lose all the time because they refuse to do what republicans do. They lose beacuse they're filled with a culture of loseing. Republicans have been playing this game before the democrats decided to play it and thus have the advantage in it and will have the advantage as long as the democrats play it. You don't create advantages by following in the footsteps of your opponent.
|
On September 18 2018 02:15 JimmiC wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2018 01:57 Danglars wrote:Only 0 are choosing to recant. The way they can spin not getting in touch with people or not getting a statement into an attack is legendary ... but then again it’s Think Progress. They couldn’t even get a Kavanaugh headline right and were flagged by Facebook as fake news (hilariously, Slate seconded). She’ll get a hearing under oath at this point. Feinstein has currently been reported by Chairman Grassley’s office as being uncooperative in setting up follow up calls with Dr Ford. It’s entirely consistent with Feinsteins choice to withhold the accusations from the committee, which she’s known for weeks, until the last minute. More trying to point out how pointless this list of 65 was. Not only are they unwilling to stand behind their claims but than the other side can produce a list of their own. I hope she does testify. This is a lifetime appointment, he should be vetted in every way possible and above reproach. If he is not perfect, then I'm sure there are other conservative judges that are.
The news: Think Progress writer calls a third of the 65 character witnesses, only gets in contact with 4, and none of them retract their statement.
The fake news take: Wow, they’re unwilling to stand behind their claims!
Get it? There is no excuse for mind-reading declines to comment. It’s pretty hard to find a better single case of fake news this month than that vignette (or pair). It’s part of the reason why Trump is not the self-contained problem, because we still have articles like that one and ready believers sucking them up.
|
On September 18 2018 02:41 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2018 02:37 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:On September 18 2018 02:24 Sermokala wrote:On September 18 2018 02:13 Acrofales wrote:On September 18 2018 02:10 Danglars wrote:On September 18 2018 02:04 Plansix wrote:On September 18 2018 01:57 Danglars wrote:Only 0 are choosing to recant. The way they can spin not getting in touch with people or not getting a statement into an attack is legendary ... but then again it’s Think Progress. They couldn’t even get a Kavanaugh headline right and were flagged by Facebook as fake news (hilariously, Slate seconded). She’ll get a hearing under oath at this point. Feinstein has currently been reported by Chairman Grassley’s office as being uncooperative in setting up follow up calls with Dr Ford. It’s entirely consistent with Feinsteins choice to withhold the accusations from the committee, which she’s known for weeks, until the last minute. As I said before, Anita Hill only came forward 2 days before the full vote before the Senate. Now that is last minute. Feinstein's decision respect the Professor Ford's wish for anonymity can be questioned, but her release of the information was promoted the press asking questions about it. There does not seem to be any evidence that her release of the documents was tactical. I also don't believe there is much merit to a last minute release anyways. I guess believe what you want about Feinstein. I find her decision to sit until last minute the very definition of planing to disrupt and delay. She’s a senior senator and knows the importance of sexual assault accusations, therefore is without excuse for concealing this from her committee partners ... while they had Kavanaugh in front of them in hearings asking him questions. Pick who you trust. These are weak rationalizations. What exactly is your point? That despite it having credibility, the timing was "disruptive"? Nice deflection. Waiting on releasing the accusation until after questions were asked and almost to the very end of the process brings implications at the very least. In a world were everyone are good faith actors she would have brought it up during the hearing and when he was under oath. Now we're in a world were people just speculate and counter speculate about it. So again its comparative to what the republicans are doing but at the same time you can't say that you're better then the republicans when what you do is comparative to what the republicans are doing. There is literally no benefit to following rules your opponents consistently do not. The political process is cheapened anyway, why should that only come at the cost of those one party represents? Aside from the specifics here with Ford not wanting this out in the open, if Feinstein was playing tactics here, it's about time. From an outsiders perspective, the democrats are seriously mediocre party. But the republican party is like something out of a book of parody villains, every bit of their own medicine they taste might bring them a little closer to realising this isn't actually how they want the game to be played. Well no there is. You get to say at the end of the day that you're the better party in congress and that you are the most respectable politicians. Its called creating a difference between you and the other guy where you are better then them. Its the most basic political strategy. The democrats don't lose all the time because they refuse to do what republicans do. They lose beacuse they're filled with a culture of loseing. Republicans have been playing this game before the democrats decided to play it and thus have the advantage in it and will have the advantage as long as the democrats play it. You don't create advantages by following in the footsteps of your opponent.
So when Republicans do it it's because the other side did something bad and obviously deserved it, but when the Democrats start to volley back it's them stooping to the R's level in an unacceptable way.
|
On September 18 2018 02:24 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2018 02:13 Acrofales wrote:On September 18 2018 02:10 Danglars wrote:On September 18 2018 02:04 Plansix wrote:On September 18 2018 01:57 Danglars wrote:Only 0 are choosing to recant. The way they can spin not getting in touch with people or not getting a statement into an attack is legendary ... but then again it’s Think Progress. They couldn’t even get a Kavanaugh headline right and were flagged by Facebook as fake news (hilariously, Slate seconded). She’ll get a hearing under oath at this point. Feinstein has currently been reported by Chairman Grassley’s office as being uncooperative in setting up follow up calls with Dr Ford. It’s entirely consistent with Feinsteins choice to withhold the accusations from the committee, which she’s known for weeks, until the last minute. As I said before, Anita Hill only came forward 2 days before the full vote before the Senate. Now that is last minute. Feinstein's decision respect the Professor Ford's wish for anonymity can be questioned, but her release of the information was promoted the press asking questions about it. There does not seem to be any evidence that her release of the documents was tactical. I also don't believe there is much merit to a last minute release anyways. I guess believe what you want about Feinstein. I find her decision to sit until last minute the very definition of planing to disrupt and delay. She’s a senior senator and knows the importance of sexual assault accusations, therefore is without excuse for concealing this from her committee partners ... while they had Kavanaugh in front of them in hearings asking him questions. Pick who you trust. These are weak rationalizations. What exactly is your point? That despite it having credibility, the timing was "disruptive"? Nice deflection. Waiting on releasing the accusation until after questions were asked and almost to the very end of the process brings implications at the very least. In a world were everyone are good faith actors she would have brought it up during the hearing and when he was under oath. Now we're in a world were people just speculate and counter speculate about it. So again its comparative to what the republicans are doing but at the same time you can't say that you're better then the republicans when what you do is comparative to what the republicans are doing.
Do you have a citation to support your claims that the timing on this was somehow villainous? Here are the words and wishes of Dr. Ford.
As the story snowballed, Ford said, she heard people repeating inaccuracies about her and, with the visits from reporters, felt her privacy being chipped away. Her calculation changed.
“These are all the ills that I was trying to avoid,” she said, explaining her decision to come forward. “Now I feel like my civic responsibility is outweighing my anguish and terror about retaliation.”
Katz said she believes Feinstein honored Ford’s request to keep her allegation confidential, but “regrettably others did not.”
“Victims must have the right to decide whether to come forward, especially in a political environment that is as ruthless as this one,” Katz said. “She will now face vicious attacks by those who support this nominee.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/california-professor-writer-of-confidential-brett-kavanaugh-letter-speaks-out-about-her-allegation-of-sexual-assault/2018/09/16/46982194-b846-11e8-94eb-3bd52dfe917b_story.html?utm_term=.666938d005a7
Katz said she believes Feinstein honored Ford’s request to keep her allegation confidential, but “regrettably others did not.” . Do you have anything that contradicts this statement?
|
|
|
On September 18 2018 02:41 Sermokala wrote:Show nested quote +On September 18 2018 02:37 Ciaus_Dronu wrote:On September 18 2018 02:24 Sermokala wrote:On September 18 2018 02:13 Acrofales wrote:On September 18 2018 02:10 Danglars wrote:On September 18 2018 02:04 Plansix wrote:On September 18 2018 01:57 Danglars wrote:Only 0 are choosing to recant. The way they can spin not getting in touch with people or not getting a statement into an attack is legendary ... but then again it’s Think Progress. They couldn’t even get a Kavanaugh headline right and were flagged by Facebook as fake news (hilariously, Slate seconded). She’ll get a hearing under oath at this point. Feinstein has currently been reported by Chairman Grassley’s office as being uncooperative in setting up follow up calls with Dr Ford. It’s entirely consistent with Feinsteins choice to withhold the accusations from the committee, which she’s known for weeks, until the last minute. As I said before, Anita Hill only came forward 2 days before the full vote before the Senate. Now that is last minute. Feinstein's decision respect the Professor Ford's wish for anonymity can be questioned, but her release of the information was promoted the press asking questions about it. There does not seem to be any evidence that her release of the documents was tactical. I also don't believe there is much merit to a last minute release anyways. I guess believe what you want about Feinstein. I find her decision to sit until last minute the very definition of planing to disrupt and delay. She’s a senior senator and knows the importance of sexual assault accusations, therefore is without excuse for concealing this from her committee partners ... while they had Kavanaugh in front of them in hearings asking him questions. Pick who you trust. These are weak rationalizations. What exactly is your point? That despite it having credibility, the timing was "disruptive"? Nice deflection. Waiting on releasing the accusation until after questions were asked and almost to the very end of the process brings implications at the very least. In a world were everyone are good faith actors she would have brought it up during the hearing and when he was under oath. Now we're in a world were people just speculate and counter speculate about it. So again its comparative to what the republicans are doing but at the same time you can't say that you're better then the republicans when what you do is comparative to what the republicans are doing. There is literally no benefit to following rules your opponents consistently do not. The political process is cheapened anyway, why should that only come at the cost of those one party represents? Aside from the specifics here with Ford not wanting this out in the open, if Feinstein was playing tactics here, it's about time. From an outsiders perspective, the democrats are seriously mediocre party. But the republican party is like something out of a book of parody villains, every bit of their own medicine they taste might bring them a little closer to realising this isn't actually how they want the game to be played. Well no there is. You get to say at the end of the day that you're the better party in congress and that you are the most respectable politicians. Its called creating a difference between you and the other guy where you are better then them. Its the most basic political strategy. The democrats don't lose all the time because they refuse to do what republicans do. They lose beacuse they're filled with a culture of loseing. Republicans have been playing this game before the democrats decided to play it and thus have the advantage in it and will have the advantage as long as the democrats play it. You don't create advantages by following in the footsteps of your opponent.
The reason they lose is because of a “culture of losing”? This seems absolutely ridiculous at first glance but if you were willing to elaborate further on this I would be happy to engage with you.
|
Good news everyone, we can stop talking about any notions of "youthful indiscretions". DJT and Kavaunaugh are all in on the "I didn't do it, she is a lying Democrat manhater bitch" strategy. One of them is lying and DJT has decided to go with putting Ford and Kav back under oath.
Maggie Haberman @maggieNYT
The White House sees no good options on the table, per multiple people close to the process. They recognize a hearing is perilous. But at moment, pushing ahead with a hearing seems better than having Kavanaugh, who’s adamant he didn’t do it, withdraw, per those in discussions.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
