Octopus Overlords

Defiant wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 8:00 pm

Grifman wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 7:51 pm Because of this, the Republicans were able to ignore the real issue at hand (what K did or did not do) and instead make it about the Democrats

They were always going to do this, regardless of what the Democrats did or didn't do.

That makes no sense - they couldn’t if the Demcrsts had not handled it the way they did.

God, I hate social media.

It's already easy to forget that GOP senators hired a "female assistant" to challenge Ford's account, but they dismissed her without a word in their rush to deliver Kavanagh a slippery multiple bro-on-bro tongue bath.

Grifman wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 8:29 pm
That makes no sense - they couldn’t if the Demcrsts had not handled it the way they did.

Sure they can. Just like they can claim that using the FBI wouldn't serve any purpose, and that the committee did a thorough investigation of all the allegations.

Politicians can claim whatever they want*, as we've seen on multiple occasions.

*And twice as much on twitter.

It makes me sad to see the outrage here. Not because I don’t think it’s justified (of course it is). It’s just so futile. Nothing will stop this garbage person from being confirmed. There will be no consequences at the polls in Nov.

I’ve seen no evidence that anything matters. F this timeline.

RunningMn9 wrote: I’ve seen no evidence that anything matters. F this timeline.

It is the darkest timeline.

I'm not as cynical as you, and I thought I was pretty cynical.

FWIW:

I taught at an elite all-girls prep school for seven years. Our semi-partner elite all-boys prep was just up the road.

I was never very clued-in to the gossip from the boys' school, but even I was aware of at least one scandal that would disqualify the entire boys' (lacrosse, maybe?) team from public office if it ever came to light.

At the boys' school, one faculty member lost his job for attempting whistleblowing. He sued, and sort of won, but the settlement imposed a gag order. I was told by old hands that this is entirely routine.

This wasn't even the D.C. power climate, just suburban Philly.

Grifman wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 8:29 pm

Defiant wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 8:00 pm

Grifman wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 7:51 pm Because of this, the Republicans were able to ignore the real issue at hand (what K did or did not do) and instead make it about the Democrats

They were always going to do this, regardless of what the Democrats did or didn't do.

That makes no sense - they couldn’t if the Demcrsts had not handled it the way they did.

Make sense? It doesn't have to make sense. If it wasn't this the GOP would have found something to divert from the real issue at hand and blame the Democrats.

Kurth wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 2:51 pm

Alefroth wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 2:10 pm

Kurth wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 1:05 pm
Oh, come on. I agree with everything about the old white men of the GOP and reproductive rights, but that comment from Hatch is completely innocuous. Saying someone is an attractive witness is no different from my comment that she comes across as likeable. He's not saying "She's smoking hot!!!!!" That kind of thing is pure "gotchaism" (I think I made that up, but I'm sticking with it). But I'm sure it will be all over social media in no time.

Well, that says loads about you.

I don't want to further derail this thread, but if you care to elaborate, feel free to PM me. I'd be interested to know your thoughts.

I don't care to take it to PMs. I'll just say that in order to maintain impartiality, you're bending way over backward to give the benefit of the doubt to someone that neither needs it or deserves it.

Let's say that I was a "boys will be boys" sort, and gave him the benefit of the doubt.

How he comported himself throughout the nomination process (and not just this part of it) has clearly illustrated just how unworthy he is for SCOTUS. All the current SCOTUS members must be absolutely livid that this fool is about to join them. It diminishes the position, it diminishes the members and it diminishes future rulings.

As Rmn9 said, this is a garbage person. Electing one to the WH was bad enough. To nominate one to the SCOTUS is a low, low moment in history.

Good luck, America.

So the internets are reporting that the voting is still on for tomorrow, I guess. Looks like Corker is the first to lead the charge:

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) announced Thursday that he will vote for Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, after the judge testified in response to allegations of sexual assault.

Corker’s vote, along with Sens. Susan Collins (Maine), Lisa Murkowksi (Alaska) and Jeff Flake (Ariz.), has been uncertain throughout the confirmation process.

Corker is retiring from the Senate at the end of his term and has been one of the most vocal Republican critics of President Trump in the Senate.

...

Corker praised Ford for showing “courage” by testifying before the committee but he said Kavanaugh “deserves the presumption of innocence.”

“While both individuals provided compelling testimony, nothing that has been presented corroborates the allegation,” he said in his statement.

Republicans said they intend to move forward with a committee vote for Kavanaugh Friday. Corker is not a member of the committee but Flake, who is a member, has not indicated how he would vote.

The GOP is Sofa King gross.

So weird that there was no corroboration when no witnesses were called.

Smoove_B wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 9:27 pm So the internets are reporting that the voting is still on for tomorrow, I guess. Looks like Corker is the first to lead the charge:

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.) announced Thursday that he will vote for Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, after the judge testified in response to allegations of sexual assault.

Corker’s vote, along with Sens. Susan Collins (Maine), Lisa Murkowksi (Alaska) and Jeff Flake (Ariz.), has been uncertain throughout the confirmation process.

Corker is retiring from the Senate at the end of his term and has been one of the most vocal Republican critics of President Trump in the Senate.

...

Corker praised Ford for showing “courage” by testifying before the committee but he said Kavanaugh “deserves the presumption of innocence.”

“While both individuals provided compelling testimony, nothing that has been presented corroborates the allegation,” he said in his statement.

Republicans said they intend to move forward with a committee vote for Kavanaugh Friday. Corker is not a member of the committee but Flake, who is a member, has not indicated how he would vote.

The GOP is Sofa King gross.

It's kind of smart. They're making it so that only measure of whether this guy should be appointed is whether the Ford allegation is true or false. Nevermind that he demonstrated abundantly that he is not suitable for the job.

But now the GOP can just say, "Innocent until proven guilty" or "There wasn't significant evidence" to hide the fact that this guy is in no matter what.

The masses can armchair qurterback about the assault and rape allegations and no one will stop to ask if this guy is Supreme Court material or not. And if they do, our esteemed lawmakers can just fall back on the false dichotomy they have created. D's are kind of getting played.

Defiant wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 5:13 pm

Yeah, I’ve been reading about this and he definitely was lying about this. “Devil’s Triangle” is especially damning since it means two on one sex.

RunningMn9 wrote:

I’ve seen no evidence that anything matters. F this timeline.

I think you meant ffffffffffF this timeline

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

Defiant wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 8:39 pm

Grifman wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 8:29 pm
That makes no sense - they couldn’t if the Demcrsts had not handled it the way they did.

Sure they can. Just like they can claim that using the FBI wouldn't serve any purpose, and that the committee did a thorough investigation of all the allegations.

Politicians can claim whatever they want*, as we've seen on multiple occasions.

*And twice as much on twitter.

No, not really. If the Dems had come to the Republicans early with this it would have then been impossible to claim that it was hidden from them and that it was sprung on them late on the process. There are certain parts of reality that even the Republicans could not have denied.

You're new to the US in 2016-2018, eh, Grif?

Grifman wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 9:47 pm

Defiant wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 5:13 pm

Yeah, I’ve been reading about this and he definitely was lying about this. “Devil’s Triangle” is especially damning since it means two on one sex.

He said something like it was a drinking game with 3 cups and asked the questioner if he had ever played quarters. Such cringe-worthy evasion. But no one ever really has to answer for their shit in that spineless rat's nest.

I mean no one in that hearing had the stones (man or woman) to just call him on that bullshit. Who the hell ever called that game devil's triangle?And how is it that every single euphamism in that yearbook that for the rest of the world is a crass sexual one just happens, for that school and group of douchebros, to be some one-off about drinking or farting?

The ever loving fuck.

All over

per redstate

Even if you discount all the other things that are potentially disqualifying about Kavanaugh - the massive number of documents blocked from release, the strong likelihood that he's perjured himself on several occasions, multiple allegations of sexual assault, etc - I don't see how anyone could look at the opening rant he gave today and come to the conclusion that this dude is fit for the Supreme Court. That kind of reaction is...extreme, and speaks to someone who doesn't have the temperament befitting the position. It was nothing so much as someone mad as hell that he's maybe not going to get something that he deserves dammit.

Beyond that, the handling of the prosecutor the GOP senators brought in was ridiculous. They were happy to hide behind her so they didn't need to say a single word to Ford, and the prosecutor's job was to cross-examine Ford, which isn't really what's supposed to happen in these hearings. Then, instead of letting the prosecutor do the same questioning to Kavanaugh (which would have been the due process they kept yelling about), they cut her off as soon as it was apparent that she was planning on actually questioning him. They decided that they'd much rather spend their time yelling at the Democrats and telling Kavanaugh how great he is than actually asking questions.

And just so it doesn't go unnoticed, they wouldn't say anything to Ford, but every single one of the GOP Senators made very sure to apologize profusely to Kavanaugh about all this. They wouldn't talk to the victim, but apologized to the accused for all the bother. If that isn't today's GOP in a nutshell, I don't know what is.

Nothing matters. Literally everything about this Administration is a fucking disgrace and none of it matters.

Yeah. The double standards and institutional...everything that have always been there, consolidating power for itself, refusing to allow anyone else to have any, is being laid bare for everyone to see, and there's frighteningly little we can do about it except vote every two years, and hope that there's enough democracy left for that to mean something.

Praise MAGA! If today’s shitshow didn’t prove how much we’re winning, and what to expect for the next 6 years plus, I don’t know what would.

Our return to greatness on display, truly. America’s never been greater. Praise MAGA.

RunningMn9 wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 10:22 pm Nothing matters. Literally everything about this Administration is a fucking disgrace and none of it matters.

Except we have to live - forever - with the results.

Thankfully, I don't plan to live forever. I couldn't take that.

RunningMn9 wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 10:22 pm Nothing matters. Literally everything about this Administration is a fucking disgrace and none of it matters.

I tend to agree but....with cautious optimism I'll note that a recent poll shows the GOP has dropped in its favorability rating wth women by 18%. Maybe there's hope for the future? Maybe?

Zaxxon wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 9:54 pm You're new to the US in 2016-2018, eh, Grif?

No, not really.

Just naive, then.

GungHo wrote:I tend to agree but....with cautious optimism I'll note that a recent poll shows the GOP has dropped in its favorability rating wth women by 18%. Maybe there's hope for the future? Maybe?

We will talk in November as we are trying to figure out how the Republicans gained seats in the House and Senate despite this utter insanity.

RunningMn9 wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 11:31 pm

GungHo wrote:I tend to agree but....with cautious optimism I'll note that a recent poll shows the GOP has dropped in its favorability rating wth women by 18%. Maybe there's hope for the future? Maybe?

We will talk in November as we are trying to figure out how the Republicans gained seats in the House and Senate despite this utter insanity.

It's the economy, stupid. Only a small minority of voters care about anything but pocketbook issues. If the Blue Ripple doesn't reach the shore, that will be why.

GreenGoo wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 9:22 pm Let's say that I was a "boys will be boys" sort, and gave him the benefit of the doubt.

How he comported himself throughout the nomination process (and not just this part of it) has clearly illustrated just how unworthy he is for SCOTUS. All the current SCOTUS members must be absolutely livid that this fool is about to join them. It diminishes the position, it diminishes the members and it diminishes future rulings.

As Rmn9 said, this is a garbage person. Electing one to the WH was bad enough. To nominate one to the SCOTUS is a low, low moment in history.

Good luck, America.

That's what it comes down to for me, how he presented himself. I didn't want to judge either of them until I had a chance to hear them speak and see how they spoke. She was believable, he wasn't. Considering he wants to be on the Supreme Court, that was not much to ask of him and he couldn't deliver even that.

Yeah. While I leaned towards believing her because of the polygraph and openness to an investigation (which I still want), in the absence of any likelihood of definitive evidence that completely convinced me that she was telling the truth (or is an Academy-Award eligible actress) and that he is a complete and total prick.

I've been less than impressed by the New York Times, as late, but here's the editorial board's opinion piece:

Where Christine Blasey Ford was calm and dignified, Brett Kavanaugh was volatile and belligerent; where she was eager to respond fully to every questioner, and kept worrying whether she was being “helpful” enough, he was openly contemptuous of several senators; most important, where she was credible and unshakable at every point in her testimony, he was at some points evasive, and some of his answers strained credulity.

Judge Kavanaugh’s defiant fury might be understandable coming from someone who believes himself innocent of the grotesque charges he’s facing. Yet it was also evidence of an unsettling temperament in a man trying to persuade the nation of his judicial demeanor.

His open contempt for the Democrats on the committee also raised further questions about his own fair-mindedness, and it served as a reminder of his decades as a Republican warrior who would take no prisoners.

Pressed over and over by Democratic senators, Judge Kavanaugh never could come up with a clear answer for why he wouldn’t also want a fair, neutral F.B.I. investigation into the allegations against him — the kind of investigation the agency routinely performs, and that Dr. Blasey has called for.

There is no reason the committee needs to hold this vote before the F.B.I. can do a proper investigation, and Mr. Judge and possibly other witnesses can be called to testify under oath. The Senate, and the American people, need to know the truth, or as close an approximation as possible, before deciding whether Judge Kavanaugh should get a lifetime seat on the nation’s highest court. If the committee will not make a more serious effort, the only choice for senators seeking to protect the credibility of the Supreme Court will be to vote no.

Zaxxon wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 11:30 pm Just naive, then.

Seriously? Did you really need to denigrate me because we disagree on a point? Was that really necessary? Ok, let’s play that game. I’m Feinstein and you are Grassley. I’ve come to you and we have had emails and discussions about how to handle this anonymous tip.

Now, you are Grassley. Make argument as to how I, Feinstein have abused the process when I have been open and above board from the beginning. After which I make public our email exchanges and staff discussions on the topic. Go ahead.

I guess anythimg is possible but I don’t see some one claiming something that can easily be disproven by documentary evidence.

Grifman wrote: Fri Sep 28, 2018 6:37 am

Zaxxon wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 11:30 pm Just naive, then.

Seriously? Ok, let’s play that game. I’m Feinstein and you are Grassley. I’ve come to you and we have had emails and discussions about how to handle this anonymous tip.

Now, you are Grassley. Make argument as to how I, Feinstein have abused the process when I have been open and above board from the beginning. After which I make public our email exchanges and staff discussions on the topic. Go ahead.

I guess anythimg is possible but I don’t see some one claiming something that can easily be disproven by documentary evidence.

I'm not sure why you are giving Grassley and the Republicans so much credit here, in light of everything else they have pulled in the past twoten years.

It also seems like you're ignoring Dr. Ford's wishes that the letter be kept private. She specifically asked that her privacy be kept, and that was honored until the letter was leaked to the media. It was only when it was clear her name was out there that Dr. Ford let Feinstein move forward, which she immediately did.

Grifman wrote: Fri Sep 28, 2018 6:37 amI guess anythimg is possible but I don’t see some one claiming something that can easily be disproven by documentary evidence.

Climate change, inauguration attendance, death panels... they do it all the damn time.

I'm sure it's moot now, but an NBC News article outlines the atmosphere in the area with many people confirming and corroborating it.

Its sounds like Kavanaugh's school was the focal point of some seriously nasty behavior - with even the men reporting...

“The entire school was beer-driven,” said William Barbot, who was a freshman at Georgetown Prep when Kavanaugh was a senior. “We took pride in heavy drinking. The central vibe was, ‘Where am I going to get drunk?’”

Grifman wrote:

Zaxxon wrote: Thu Sep 27, 2018 11:30 pm Just naive, then.

Seriously? Did you really need to denigrate me because we disagree on a point?

...

I guess anythimg is possible but I don’t see some one claiming something that can easily be disproven by documentary evidence.

Apologies--I'm not trying to be insulting. But you really are being naive. Claiming things that can easily be disproven by evidence is literally something the Republicans do on a daily basis, and have been doing routinely since 2016 (well, before that, but my initial comment referred to the point where Trump got the nomination, at which point it became far more overt). Their base eats it up, daily.

Had Feinstein come to Grassley earlier, in betrayal of Ford's wishes, there is zero chance that the Rs would have had any trouble whatsoever spinning the situation in a way that still allowed them to blame the Ds. None. And their base would back then on it.

Facts are no longer mandatory, or even appreciated, by the R base.