EPTInstead of assuming this is just some knee-jerk reaction by left leaning people, it is important to wonder why Gorsuch was so much easier and why even some democrats voted for Gorsuch.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 789
| 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 | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15725 Posts
Instead of assuming this is just some knee-jerk reaction by left leaning people, it is important to wonder why Gorsuch was so much easier and why even some democrats voted for Gorsuch. | ||
|
Mercy13
United States718 Posts
On October 03 2018 00:16 ShoCkeyy wrote: Source on him being a sexual abuser and rapist? Or you just spreading some more conspiracy shit? Yea, he got a blowjob in office, but you should also know what the word consensual means... Clinton is definitely an abuser and quite possibly a rapist. In a gripping account punctuated by sobs, the Arkansas woman told "Dateline NBC" that in her Little Rock hotel room, Clinton suddenly "turned me around and started kissing me, and that was a real shock. I first pushed him away. I just told him 'no.' . . . He tries to kiss me again. He starts biting on my lip. . . . And then he forced me down on the bed. I just was very frightened. I tried to get away from him. I told him 'no.' . . . He wouldn't listen to me. Source President Clinton reached an out-of-court settlement with Paula Jones yesterday, agreeing to pay her $850,000 to drop the sexual harassment lawsuit that led to the worst political crisis of his career and only the third presidential impeachment inquiry in American history. Source Also the infamous blow job is pretty problematic. The power imbalance between the POTUS and a low-level staffer is severe. A decent human being wouldn't have done that. Edit: This in no way excuses Kav, just wanted to correct the record. | ||
KwarK
United States43258 Posts
| ||
|
Nouar
France3270 Posts
On October 03 2018 00:24 Mohdoo wrote: I feel like people defending Kavanaugh by instinct aren't reflecting on what a slam dunk Gorsuch was. Collins, Murkowski and Flake had no reason to vote against Gorsuch. Gorsuch was voted in with 54 votes. Slam dunk. There are a lot of things that distinguish Gorsuch from Kavanaugh. There are other candidates that would be just as easy as Gorsuch was. Instead of assuming this is just some knee-jerk reaction by left leaning people, it is important to wonder why Gorsuch was so much easier and why even some democrats voted for Gorsuch. It is not a slam dunk when the bar for Supreme Court appointments had just been moved from 60 to 51 votes juste before that to retaliate against democrats and filibusters. But yes, it was a lot less painful since the candidate was at least qualified and behaved correctly. | ||
|
ShoCkeyy
7815 Posts
After more than 4 1/2 years of scorched-earth legal warfare, Clinton and Jones brought a sudden end to the case with a four-page deal in which he acknowledged no wrongdoing and offered no apology. Could of it been a false accusation? Like the Trumpsters tout now? Juanita Broaddrick, and Monica both if I recall sounded like they were leading Bill from the start, while also it can be that Bill was leading them, we'll never know 100% because both sides say a different story Just like now... | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 03 2018 00:44 Nouar wrote: It is not a slam dunk when the bar for Supreme Court appointments had just been moved from 60 to 51 votes juste before that to retaliate against democrats and filibusters. But yes, it was a lot less painful since the candidate was at least qualified and behaved correctly. That had little to do with the candidate and everything to do with the actions of McConnel holding the appointment hostage until after the election. | ||
|
ticklishmusic
United States15977 Posts
On October 03 2018 00:37 KwarK wrote: Bill wouldn’t be supported in the current political climate, and shouldn’t be. But fortunately nobody is trying to put Bill on the Supreme Court. It’s pure whataboutism. Conservatives are deciding there is a double standard over the Liberal actions in a straw man they’ve invented. “How dare they treat Kavanaugh this way after giving Bill a pass in my imagination”. And add on Kavanaugh being one of the driving forces in the Clinton investigation... But the example was to illustrate how those investigations were fishing expeditions that went far afield from the original issue being examined, rather than any particular parallel with regards to subject matter. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15725 Posts
On October 03 2018 00:44 Nouar wrote: It is not a slam dunk when the bar for Supreme Court appointments had just been moved from 60 to 51 votes juste before that to retaliate against democrats and filibusters. But yes, it was a lot less painful since the candidate was at least qualified and behaved correctly. Democrats voted for Gorsuch. There are republicans who won't vote for Kavanaugh. That right there says a great deal about Kavanaugh as a candidate. And they can still find another Gorsuch. No one is stuck with Kavanaugh. This isn't some irreversible process. Everything can change. Everyone should be asking themselves: Why Kavanaugh? | ||
|
Mercy13
United States718 Posts
On October 03 2018 00:44 ShoCkeyy wrote: I mean Mercy13, you can cut parts out, but that Paula Jones one also says: Could of it been a false accusation? Like the Trumpsters tout now? Juanita Broaddrick, and Monica both if I recall sounded like they were leading Bill from the start, while also it can be that Bill was leading them, we'll never know 100% because both sides say a different story Just like now... Of course the allegations could be false, but I believe they are credible given the number of women who accused Bill of sexual misconduct over the years. I don't want to re-litigate Bill's history of sexual misconduct because as Kwark pointed out it is not relevant to the current debate over Kavanaugh. For the record I also find the accusations against Kavanaugh credible and sufficient to make him an unsuitable pick. Someone who has a significant possibility of being an unrepentant sexual abuser should not be on SCOTUS. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
On October 03 2018 00:44 ShoCkeyy wrote: I mean Mercy13, you can cut parts out, but that Paula Jones one also says: Could of it been a false accusation? Like the Trumpsters tout now? Juanita Broaddrick, and Monica both if I recall sounded like they were leading Bill from the start, while also it can be that Bill was leading them, we'll never know 100% because both sides say a different story Just like now... Broaddrick is extremely credible, and had a contemporaneous witness. There was nothing to indicate she led him on. Bill Clinton is likely a rapist monster. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
LuckyFool
United States9015 Posts
On October 03 2018 00:55 Mohdoo wrote: Democrats voted for Gorsuch. There are republicans who won't vote for Kavanaugh. That right there says a great deal about Kavanaugh as a candidate. And they can still find another Gorsuch. No one is stuck with Kavanaugh. This isn't some irreversible process. Everything can change. Everyone should be asking themselves: Why Kavanaugh? Which republicans are going to vote against Kavanaugh? As it stands any R’s that vote against him is near suicide politically. I’m still betting that unless something major or new comes out of the FBI investigation all 51 republicans will vote for him. | ||
|
Doodsmack
United States7224 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 03 2018 01:09 LuckyFool wrote: Which republicans are going to vote against Kavanaugh? As it stands any R’s that vote against him is near suicide politically. I’m still betting that unless something major or new comes out of the FBI investigation all 51 republicans will vote for him. Because kind of a shitty frat boy political operative that got appointed to be a federal judge, but never stopped being a political operative. But there is a ton of money behind putting Kavanaugh on the bench because they believe he will gut the federal governments ability to regulate business. | ||
|
iamthedave
England2814 Posts
On October 03 2018 00:37 KwarK wrote: Bill wouldn’t be supported in the current political climate, Uh... *looks at who the President is* On October 03 2018 00:55 Mohdoo wrote: Democrats voted for Gorsuch. There are republicans who won't vote for Kavanaugh. That right there says a great deal about Kavanaugh as a candidate. And they can still find another Gorsuch. No one is stuck with Kavanaugh. This isn't some irreversible process. Everything can change. Everyone should be asking themselves: Why Kavanaugh? I've been trying this for pages and pages. As far as I can tell the answer is 'because'. | ||
|
Mohdoo
United States15725 Posts
On October 03 2018 01:09 LuckyFool wrote: Which republicans are going to vote against Kavanaugh? As it stands any R’s that vote against him is near suicide politically. I’m still betting that unless something major or new comes out of the FBI investigation all 51 republicans will vote for him. You think they'd have this FBI investigation if they had the votes secured? Where was the FBI investigation with Gorsuch? Gorsuch got democrat support because he was fine. Shitty, but fine. Think back to the Gorsuch drama. Was Flake talking about hesitance? Murkowski? Collins? There are other, much better candidates. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
On October 03 2018 01:08 JimmiC wrote: I might have missed it but anyone else think it was super disrespectful rude and just plain mean to tell the reporter that "you're not thinking. You never do." Like if a manager said that even to one of his employees at our office I would have to talk to him about it and have him apologize. Might even be a written. There is no reason to just be a jerk. Edit: Also the white house changing the transcript shows they also know this was not something proper to say in any circumstance let alone by the president to a reporter. I think it has to do with everyone being accustomed to Trump being a fucking idiot and asshat galore, to everyone. So even though it shouldn't not phase anyone, I guess that is what is happening. | ||
|
Logo
United States7542 Posts
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/mutual-friend-ramirez-kavanaugh-anxious-come-forward-evidence-n915566 In the days leading up to a public allegation that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh exposed himself to a college classmate, the judge and his team were communicating behind the scenes with friends to refute the claim, according to text messages obtained by NBC News. Kerry Berchem, who was at Yale with both Kavanaugh and his accuser, Deborah Ramirez, has tried to get those messages to the FBI for its newly reopened investigation into the matter but says she has yet to be contacted by the bureau. The texts between Berchem and Karen Yarasavage, both friends of Kavanaugh, suggest that the nominee was personally talking with former classmates about Ramirez’s story in advance of the New Yorker article that made her allegation public. In one message, Yarasavage said Kavanaugh asked her to go on the record in his defense. Two other messages show communication between Kavanaugh's team and former classmates in advance of the story. Are the primary documents readable anywhere? I guess I'm not surprised they wouldn't post the text messages, but it's hard to really make out what communication was happening without seeing it. User was warned for this post. | ||
|
OuchyDathurts
United States4588 Posts
On October 03 2018 00:55 Mohdoo wrote: Democrats voted for Gorsuch. There are republicans who won't vote for Kavanaugh. That right there says a great deal about Kavanaugh as a candidate. And they can still find another Gorsuch. No one is stuck with Kavanaugh. This isn't some irreversible process. Everything can change. Everyone should be asking themselves: Why Kavanaugh? If Republicans had any brains whatsoever they would have nominated a woman to the court. There's virtually no chance the person has done anything approaching sexual assault in their life. They would have sailed through comparatively unscathed. Like this is their shot, this is everything they've wanted for our entire lives, they could have taken the easiest chip shot of their lives and thrown a woman in there. | ||
|
KwarK
United States43258 Posts
By Democrats. I should have made that clear. | ||
| ||
