- 43,425
- 42,998
***Official Political Discussion Thread***
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by rico x hood,
- Start date
Nike Jordan
Supporter
- 33,894
- 81,009
Jeff "Corn Flakes" Flake has been talking giving The Bigot™ a primary challenge in 2020.
- 11,997
- 3,286
The hired an outside counsel to question Dr. Ford. They stated that her testimony was compelling, and believable. You thought that was the wrong approach?
- 43,425
- 42,998
Don’t know why he even opened his mouth before everything is even over. His life is over
elpablo21
Supporter
- 106,138
- 194,942
lightweight champion
Banned
- 13,481
- 5,271
Law enforcement agencies (even the FBI) don’t come to conclusions, that’s the prosecutor’s job. Their job is to gather the facts then present them to prosecutors for them to come to the conclusion. Kavanaugh deliberately misled the senate judiciary committee and the millions watching at home how an investigation unfolds.
dacomeup
Supporter
- 26,488
- 37,285
Are you skipping over their tone deaf grandstanding with Kavanaugh on the stand? His lack of self-control, misleading statements, and some flat out lies?
lightweight champion
Banned
- 13,481
- 5,271
And yet when their own hired counsel was probing into Kav they immediately called for a break then when they resumed she was all of a sudden taken off the probing. In other words, she asked too many questions, the white men didn’t like it, so they got rid of her.
- 43,425
- 42,998
I have no idea what you guys are responding to but it sounds like the rape apologists are fighting to the death to make this ok
- 10,929
- 9,247
Check your Facebook feeds to find angry, frothing at the mouth baby boomers complaining about the loss of objectivity and common sense in this once great nation
- 64,964
- 196,092
Frylock is back to defend bigots and rapist, while telling everyone how seriously he takes the issue. Oh, and course, to say a ton of nonsense no lawyer would say.
Ignore the buffoonery
Ignore the buffoonery
elpablo21
Supporter
- 106,138
- 194,942
Damn can't blame Flake here...They look like they were threatening to revoke his white privilege right on the spot
- 8,613
- 17,160
i believe he was/is a pedophile (roy moore) apologist too. Hes just a misunderstood kid
- 69,621
- 106,166
Flake looks like he's trying to remember a time before he became a corrupt politician.
- 43,425
- 42,998
Yikes. I get there’s a lot of things to have “both sides” on but we don’t need to hear why rape is ok.
- 10,929
- 9,247
When someone uses the phrase "both sides" it typically means they're on the worse side
- 11,997
- 3,286
Exactly, they don't make conclusions... that was my point. I think you misunderstand how the process works. The FBI will take statements. No prosecutor would ever think of prosecuting this. Statements have already been taken. In a week, we will probably be in the same spot as it relates to these facts. It is a he said/she said. The alleged eyewitness said that he hasn't even seen Kav do the behavior described. And all of the other witnesses said they don't remember anything like this happening. This is from 35 years ago. Unless their memory magically changes in a week we are in the same spot. The fact that millions of women are sexually assaulted, does not make this accusation true as it relates to Kav. Nor does the fact the he drank or blacked out drinking. And the fact that he had a goofy calendar and tons of women who support him doesn't mean that he did not do it. But we simply don't know. And the burden is on the accuser.
- 11,997
- 3,286
I think both sides of the aisle were tone deaf. Citing passages from a yearbook... come on. I think it was political theater (on both sides). And like I stated earlier, those that don't fall on either side of the aisle are likely disgusted by the entire charade.
- 64,964
- 196,092
Maybe he took a look at his calendar from 1984 and he saw on one of the days it had down "Gym @ 10 am, party at Todd's @8pm, not helping bigots get ahead @ All Day"
aepps20
Supporter
- 42,490
- 90,537
"Allegedly famb"
- 43,425
- 42,998
The old “it’s ok to disagree” BS. No, it’s not OK to take the other side of rape being wrong
- 26,789
- 38,373
I think your analogy regarding search warrants is a bit flawed because Senate confirmations are bound by different rules and expectations.
It’s generally far from illegal to be (overtly) racist or write racist things on the internet but the Senate generally sees that as disqualifying. Jeff Sessions failed to get a federal judge position during the Reagan administration over allegations of racism, including testimony from his former deputy who was a black man.
Senators didn’t pass his nomination due to those allegations, which are obviously not illegal.
Sexual assault and rape cases are particularly tricky because a very significant number of them go unreported entirely or surface many years later.
In some cases beyond the statute of limitations. The catholic church is a great example of that.
Dr. Ford’s case is past the statute of limitations if I recall correctly but I have to verify.
Applying the same legal standard as a criminal trial to any Senate confirmation would do more harm than good in my view. If there is a statute of limitation, that person would be untouchable even if he did it. If it’s a he said/she said case, that person would also be largely untouchable even if he did it.
Rape cases are already often hard to prove in a criminal proceeding, let alone holding a Senate confirmation to the same standard.
In a criminal proceeding I would obviously never vote guilty for someone if I am not 100% certain the prosecution proved guilt beyond reasonable doubt. I might even be quite convinced that person is in fact guilty, but a vote would depend on whether the prosecution sufficiently proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. I have seen plenty of cases where I am convinced the defendant is guilty but agreed with a not guilty verdict because the case wasn't sufficiently proven.
Whereas if I was a senator, I can't see myself applying such a standard if there is no criminal proceeding to go by. If I am too concerned that a nominee in my view was highly likely to be guilty than I would vote no, period. Especially if it concerns a lifetime appointment position.
That’s why credibility is most important in my view, not so much fulfilling the burden of proof standard of a criminal court trial.
I think the point of an FBI investigation would be not to draw conclusions but to get other witnesses under penalty of perjury and corroborate or refute testimony. Then the Senate can make a more informed decision on credibility.
Under penalty of felony for lying to Congress is near useless when the number of convictions for lying to Congress is almost non-existant.
Even the arguably most significant case, a Reagan administration official associated with Iran/Contra, had his convictions overturned.
In the case of Mark Judge for example, the questioning was conducted by Grassley’s chief counsel Mike Davis, who previously tweeted (and deleted) "Unfazed and determined. We will confirm Judge Kavanaugh. #ConfirmKavanaugh," before hearing Dr. Ford's testimony. That’s not a good look.
If Mark Judge would say the same under penalty of perjury to an impartial FBI interview it would provide significantly more credibility.
Last edited:
- 8,613
- 17,160
How could he be a pedo when him and the girls were all just kids?
- 43,425
- 42,998
I believe “doesn’t change how well he can work” was the argument
