US Politics

A snap investigation at this moment would make a good movie, provided it uncovers something shocking of course. Who would play the SAC with conservative values that decides to follow his morals instead of what he was told to do? DeNiro is already reserved for Bob Mueller.
 
Pagh Wraith said:
What is the FBI supposed to find in one week? Isn't the most likely outcome that we'll be back to square one next week and the Republicans being in a much stronger position?
Click to expand...

Interview Mark Judge to ask if he was in the room with Kavanaugh. If the answer is yes then that's that.
 
Redplane said:
Is there any reason to believe this isn't another way the Republicans outsmart the Dems by swinging the narrative in their favor? Look how we reneged, look how bipartisan we re being, look how much we respect women, look how much we respect the FBI, I have no confidence the Rs won't win this PR battle - along with a now weaponized/rogue judge to be appointed to the SCOTUS after all.
Click to expand...

Have you been reading 4chan recently? :lol:
 
The Firestarter said:
A snap investigation at this moment would make a good movie, provided it uncovers something shocking of course. Who would play the SAC with conservative values that decides to follow his morals instead of what he was told to do? DeNiro is already reserved for Bob Mueller.
Click to expand...
We need Susan Boyle to play the prosecutor lady.
 
Ekkie Thump said:
It's obviously better for protesters and Dr Ford than just having the guy confirmed but it's up in the air as to whether the investigation will be persuasive (either way) in the long run. Should also bear in mind that a lot can happen in a week so even if the investigation is intended to be a bit of a sham the delay still provides Kavanaugh's opponents with more time to stop the nomination.
Click to expand...
Thank you for the insight. Appreciated
 
Assault or no assault - there seems to be no way that he didn't lie under oath. Let's hope the FBI is allowed to operate independently and the report is released.
 
ChaddyP said:
He really is. The similarities are frightening
Click to expand...

My brother is 18 and he tells me kids in his school use the expression "he's a Bryce" when talking about entitled white guys who behave like creeps around girls. I guess some stereotypes fit.
 
Just caught up with the news and the replies, so bottom I'll just say that an FBI investigation that'll be completed within 7 days is a fair result, imo.

unchanged_lineup said:
But only one side is asking for an FBI investigation to get to the truth.
Click to expand...
Correct me if I'm wrong, but when Clarence Thomas was nominated, the republicans - who were in minority, asked for an FBI investigation, and the democrats, declined. So I have a bit of an issue with duplicity.
I don't know the legal system in the US, or in the relevant state, but why not go to the police and ask them to investigate? (honest question)

SqueakyWeasel said:
Kavanagh was repeatedly asked yesterday in testimony if he would welcome an FBI investigation to clear his name. He repeatedly deflected the question with questions of his own (something he apparently never let go in his own courtroom) and the final time of asking he just sat red faced silently seething with his lips pursed.
Click to expand...
I think it's because agreeing to an FBI investigation, at this stage, would have meant no vote and no nomination until after the midterms. All when such investigation could have been asked for in late July, but the democrats chose not to bring it up then.

Cheesy said:
I mean it's clearly about much more than that.

If he's innocent then he'd be fine with an FBI investigation. There aren't really any benefits for Ford in bringing this story forward unless it's the truth, unless you believe she's involved in some detailed conspiracy where she's willing to essentially put herself in danger for a slightly improved chance of the Dems doing well in November. That doesn't automatically mean she has to be telling the truth but her story seems to check out and the unwillingness of the Republicans to do all they can to get to the bottom of this is embarrassing.
Click to expand...
An FBI investigation, would not yield a guilty/not-guilty verdict, but rather a summary of the testimonies. I'm not 100% sure about that, please correct me if I'm wrong.
The bolded bit is important to me. Not speaking specifically about Ford, but women do not speak the truth 100% of the time and men don't lie 100% of the time - and vice versa. Sometimes an accuser actually lies.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...of-rape/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7c882ab1783b

KirkDuyt said:
So he should agree to an FBI investigation.

Also, using "why didn't she come forward sooner" as a defense automatically disqualifies you from all jobs with any form of responsibility to anyone, ever imho. It shoes a lack of empathy bordering on that of a psychopath.

Also I'm not an American either, but I think this prep school rape culture shite transcends nationality. I'd say what I think humanity should do with people like Brett Kavanaugh, but I like the caf and I don't want to be banned.
Click to expand...
When you say 'you' do you mean me, or Kavanaugh? Anyway, I never said 'why did she not come forward sooner'. I said, why didn't the democrats come with their FBI demand sooner. Also, afaik, neither Kavanaugh, nor the republicans, questioned Ford's timing.
Regarding the second bit, it's nice to see that your morals are so high, higher above the rule of law, where a person is considered innocent until proven guilty, and where the burden of proof lies on the accuser. Your judge-jury-and-executioner approach is the exact thing that makes neutral people side with Kavanaugh. Btw, did you use the same words for Bill Clinton? And for the record, any sex offender deserves the harshest legal punishment, after they are found guilty in a court of law.

Ekkie Thump said:
Your initial position was the correct one. The bottom line is that a man with credible accusations of sexual assault levied against him is likely on the Supreme Court for life. Gorsuch had no such problems despite also being antithetical to liberal beliefs. Categorising this as 'just politics' does Ford, women and the position of Supreme Court Justice an enormous disservice.
Click to expand...
You could be right. I think the blame lies with both republicans and democrats, with the way this was handled.

nickm said:
I think the criticism of the political manoeuvring is valid but there were ways to properly vet Kavanaugh and the committee chose not to. They've rushed it through to suit themselves. The role is bigger than any individual, so if there's question marks about a candidate for the job, don't hurry to give it to him. And there certainly appear to be good reasons to want to be sure a member of the supreme court hadn't committed serious crimes in the past.
Click to expand...
I definitely agree with that. I think the end result today (as far as I managed to pick-up), fits that line. Let the FBI investigate, within a time-frame that will not bring things close to the midterms.

BTW, do you know where Senator Flake was born?
Snowflake, AZ
 
Am I wrong in the impression that Kavanaugh named 5 boys in answer to a question? More witnesses will surely emerge...?
 
maniak said:
My brother is 18 and he tells me kids in his school use the expression "he's a Bryce" when talking about entitled white guys who behave like creeps around girls. I guess some stereotypes fit.
Click to expand...
It's like season 1 of Mad men.
 
maniak said:
I've watched 3 or 4 episodes and it seemed a bit boring, but everyone keeps telling me to continue, I'll have to give it a go. Definitely some people nowadays share that mindset.
Click to expand...
You need to get to know the characters a little before you can enjoy it.
 
Dumbat12 said:
Seems to me you two have a hard time reading. I said when it comes to veterans (specifically)
Click to expand...
Dumbat12 said:
PTSD has nothing to do with this.
Click to expand...
General statement about PTSD having nothing to do with a woman not immediately reporting an instance of sexual assault.
PTSD in veterans is from combat, not from a specific person.
Click to expand...
Specific (incorrect) statement.

Who has a hard time reading?
 
SnowRoll said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but when Clarence Thomas was nominated, the republicans - who were in minority, asked for an FBI investigation, and the democrats, declined. So I have a bit of an issue with duplicity.
Click to expand...

Clarence Thomas was a Bush (Sr) nominee who was eventually confirmed 52 (41 Reps, 11 Dems) to 48 (2 Reps, 46 Dems). Joe Biden was head of the judiciary committee at the time. This was a Republican judge nominated by a Republican president and confirmed in the vast majority by Republicans. Under such circumstances it doesn't seem likely that it would be the Democrats refusing a Republican demand for an investigation and in fact an FBI investigation did take place (though it lasted only 3 days).
 
I'm a bit disappointed tbh. Part of me wanted the Republicans to jam this through. Expose them for who they are.
 
SnowRoll said:
When you say 'you' do you mean me, or Kavanaugh? Anyway, I never said 'why did she not come forward sooner'. I said, why didn't the democrats come with their FBI demand sooner. Also, afaik, neither Kavanaugh, nor the republicans, questioned Ford's timing.
Regarding the second bit, it's nice to see that your morals are so high, higher above the rule of law, where a person is considered innocent until proven guilty, and where the burden of proof lies on the accuser. Your judge-jury-and-executioner approach is the exact thing that makes neutral people side with Kavanaugh. Btw, did you use the same words for Bill Clinton? And for the record, any sex offender deserves the harshest legal punishment, after they are found guilty in a court of law.


Snowflake, AZ
Click to expand...
When I say you, I mean everyone that thinks the fact that she waited years with coming forward is an argument to discredit her.
 


Considering how transparent he is, it’s troubling that he’s taking it in his stride.

I’d bet my house he’s been told it’s all a formality and the investigation will be a neutered affair.
 
Ekkie Thump said:
Clarence Thomas was a Bush (Sr) nominee who was eventually confirmed 52 (41 Reps, 11 Dems) to 48 (2 Reps, 46 Dems). Joe Biden was head of the judiciary committee at the time. This was a Republican judge nominated by a Republican president and confirmed in the vast majority by Republicans. Under such circumstances it doesn't seem likely that it would be the Democrats refusing a Republican demand for an investigation and in fact an FBI investigation did take place (though it lasted only 3 days).
Click to expand...
I stand corrected!
I saw a clip of Joe Biden dismissing requests for an FBI investigation for a nomination, and assumed it had to to with Thomas. Got it a bit mixed up... soz.
But then again, why would Biden's (and hence the democrats'?) objection to an FBI investigation back then, be reversed now?
 
Adisa said:
I'm a bit disappointed tbh. Part of me wanted the Republicans to jam this through. Expose them for who they are.
Click to expand...

People expecting fireworks out of the FBI's involvement will be similarly disappointed.

Everyone involved is going to lawyer up (for the love of God if you are ever opportuned to speak with the FBI do so with a lawyer) and the FBI report won't be worth the paper it's typed on.
 
Adisa said:
I'm a bit disappointed tbh. Part of me wanted the Republicans to jam this through. Expose them for who they are.
Click to expand...
Anyone who knows anything can see Republicans for what they are. And it's not to say that we're completely out of the woods yet.
 
Adisa said:
Doesn't mean much when 100m eligible voters stay at home.
Click to expand...

Sure would be nice if Democrats didn't defund acorn, donate to the North Carolina GOP, do absolutely nothing to make voting easier (federal holiday, absentee ballots for all, expand early voting, add more polling stations, pass laws against Republican disenfranchisement tactics etc) when they had power.

Or if they didn't run such horrible candidates for the past 40 years or if they actually delivered on promises to their base instead of chasing corporate money.
 
Grinner said:
what the hell has happened? I've been out all morning. Can someone summarise as I catch up?
Click to expand...

  1. GOP recognised the optics of forcing it through.
  2. Agreed to allow a minimum scope investigation to go ahead for 7 whole days.
  3. Will claim nothing has come of it next week and confirm him anyway.
 
Pexbo said:
  1. GOP recognised the optics of forcing it through.
  2. Agreed to allow a minimum scope investigation to go ahead for 7 whole days.
  3. Will claim nothing has come of it next week and confirm him anyway.
Click to expand...


Or does the WH know something explosive and needs to cover it's arse?
 
Eboue said:
Sure would be nice if Democrats didn't defund acorn, donate to the North Carolina GOP, do absolutely nothing to make voting easier (federal holiday, absentee ballots for all, expand early voting, add more polling stations, pass laws against Republican disenfranchisement tactics etc) when they had power.

Or if they didn't run such horrible candidates for the past 40 years or if they actually delivered on promises to their base instead of chasing corporate money.
Click to expand...
Agree with all of that. Don't get why America can't so something sensible like voting on a Saturday or something.
 
Grinner said:
Or does the WH know something explosive and needs to cover it's arse?
Click to expand...

Time will tell.

My gut says Trump has been sated and told that it will go ahead after a heavily supervised and obstructed investigation.

If something big was coming, Trump would have come out fighting.
 
Grinner said:
Surely this means they don't have the votes. It's to appease the female repub senators.
Click to expand...

It means they’re worried pressing ahead with the vote could lead to consequences at the ballots.

Having a superficial investigation first will tone that down.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.