Political Roundtable Part XXII

Post #1401 » by **Ruzious** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:06 pm

stilldropin20 wrote::nod:

lyndsey phuckin graham!!!!! bad mofo!!!

Nah, the Steve Winwood song that fits the best for Cavanaugh is "The Low Spark of High-Heeled Boys". :nod:

dckingsfan · Post #1402 » by **dckingsfan** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:10 pm

gtn130 wrote:
dckingsfan wrote:
Pointgod wrote:Because you see he's a completely non bias guy from Belarus. Certainly not an alt account.....

And the faux English gives it away. When I do that in other countries I use google translate - I don't intentionally hack the language like SD is doing.

The fake broken English is hilarious. Like that can't possibly be fooling anyone, right?

And now wait for the indignation...

dckingsfan · Post #1403 » by **dckingsfan** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:10 pm

Ruzious wrote:Nah, the Steve Winwood song that fits the best for Cavanaugh is "The Low Spark of High-Heeled Boys".

Ouch...

Post #1404 » by **Ruzious** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:13 pm

GhostofChenier wrote:
montestewart wrote:
GhostofChenier wrote:He neeez trial by combat lol

A Supreme Court nominee walks into a bar and yells, "I can pin any 15-year-old girl in here!" That kind of tough!

Convenient pussy joke.

To Ruziois is I am Belarusian jew. Maybe family. Nothing to respond. As a Jew shame on you.

Mr Stewart you are false argument Ming. No debate. Piece of **** puppet. Why no argue only bark like dumb dog

Ghost, in your next post, sprinkle in some Yiddish with the English.

Post #1405 » by **Zonkerbl** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 3:03 pm

montestewart wrote:
stilldropin20 wrote:

Read on Twitter
?s=21

Lindsey Graham was black?

A whiny tantrum throwing little bitch?

I_Like_Dirt · Post #1406 » by **I_Like_Dirt** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 3:16 pm

Zonkerbl wrote:
montestewart wrote:
stilldropin20 wrote:

Read on Twitter
?s=21

Lindsey Graham was black?

A whiny tantrum throwing little bitch?

I'm assuming they must have some insight into Booker thinking quite negatively of himself if his opinion of himself matches whatever it was that Graham was today.

I_Like_Dirt · Post #1407 » by **I_Like_Dirt** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 3:57 pm

So I'm legitimately curious why there isn't much talk about the elephant in the room regarding Kavanaugh. The only reason for this particular rush and needing to drive Kavanaugh specifically has to do with the potential for use of presidential pardons, right? Am I missing something here?

dckingsfan · Post #1408 » by **dckingsfan** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 4:16 pm

I think they are legitimately worried about not retaining the senate and then not being able to drive their candidate onto the court.

Post #1409 » by **nate33** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 4:29 pm

dckingsfan wrote:I think they are legitimately worried about not retaining the senate and then not being able to drive their candidate onto the court.

Yes. This whole demand for an FBI investigation is nothing but a stall tactic in the hopes that a Democrat-controlled Senate can stop the nomination after the midterms.

If the Democrats had a good faith interest in these allegations, they would have had the FBI privately investigate the matter 67 days ago when it first came to Feinstein's attention. But they chose to sit on the allegations until the eve of the vote and then leak it so that a spectacle would ensue.

dckingsfan · Post #1410 » by **dckingsfan** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 4:38 pm

nate33 wrote:
dckingsfan wrote:I think they are legitimately worried about not retaining the senate and then not being able to drive their candidate onto the court.

Yes. This whole demand for an FBI investigation is nothing but a stall tactic in the hopes that a Democrat-controlled Senate can stop the nomination after the midterms.

If the Democrats had a good faith interest in these allegations, they would have had the FBI privately investigate the matter 67 days ago when it first came to Feinstein's attention. But they chose to sit on the allegations until the eve of the vote and then leak it so that a spectacle would ensue.

Agreed that the Ds are trying to delay the process.

Feinstein does not equal all Ds however. I do believe that you accurately define what Feinstein was trying to accomplish - and I think she was successful.

Post #1411 » by **Zonkerbl** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 4:42 pm

nate33 wrote:
dckingsfan wrote:I think they are legitimately worried about not retaining the senate and then not being able to drive their candidate onto the court.

Yes. This whole demand for an FBI investigation is nothing but a stall tactic in the hopes that a Democrat-controlled Senate can stop the nomination after the midterms.

If the Democrats had a good faith interest in these allegations, they would have had the FBI privately investigate the matter 67 days ago when it first came to Feinstein's attention. But they chose to sit on the allegations until the eve of the vote and then leak it so that a spectacle would ensue.

But this is BS. They had, when the FBI investigation was called for the first time, plenty of time to ask for an FBI investigation (the Anita Hill one took three days, although that is too short). They *still* have time to do an investigation and, if he's guilty, push some other evil bastard through against our will, or force this lying, evil little turd on us if he's innocent. There is literally *no* good reason not to go ahead and send the FBI around to ask questions of everybody related to the case, map out the various answers - who denies being where, who remembers seeing whom, blahblahblah, and provide more useful information than just "wah wah wah my diapers are dirty and the mean old lady is being mean to me boo hoo" which is literally his entire defense because he refuses to allow any potentially disculpatory evidence to be provided to the committee. This is a blatant traveshamockery of an investigation and anyone with half a brain can see it.

gtn130 · Post #1412 » by **gtn130** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 4:43 pm

nate33 wrote:
dckingsfan wrote:I think they are legitimately worried about not retaining the senate and then not being able to drive their candidate onto the court.

Yes. This whole demand for an FBI investigation is nothing but a stall tactic in the hopes that a Democrat-controlled Senate can stop the nomination after the midterms.

If the Democrats had a good faith interest in these allegations, they would have had the FBI privately investigate the matter 67 days ago when it first came to Feinstein's attention. But they chose to sit on the allegations until the eve of the vote and then leak it so that a spectacle would ensue.

Remember Merrick Garland tho

Mitch McConnell introduced some next level power politics and that's the game now

Edit: and yeah what Zonk said

I_Like_Dirt · Post #1413 » by **I_Like_Dirt** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 4:48 pm

nate33 wrote:Yes. This whole demand for an FBI investigation is nothing but a stall tactic in the hopes that a Democrat-controlled Senate can stop the nomination after the midterms.

If the Democrats had a good faith interest in these allegations, they would have had the FBI privately investigate the matter 67 days ago when it first came to Feinstein's attention. But they chose to sit on the allegations until the eve of the vote and then leak it so that a spectacle would ensue.

Well, it's absolutely a stall tactic, but it's clearly more than a stall tactic. The fact is, Trump could have very easily chosen a candidate that wasn't someone who could be so easily targeted. There were quite a few rumblings that a lot of people within the Party were concerned about Kavanaugh as a candidate before this process and there's no way their concerns weren't because of the issues that were going to be dredged up against him. Kavanaugh is basically a bull's eye target for the Dems. And there is a lot of evidence out there already that Trump thrives on that kind of thing, but also leaves a lot of Republican bodies in his wake every time he does because nobody else seems to have tapped into that particular brand of political success despite many other attempts.

Post #1414 » by **Zonkerbl** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 4:49 pm

The GOP wants to get the nomination raped through the process in time for the hubbub about it to die down before the midterms. That's literally the only reason they are in such a hurry.

Post #1415 » by **Zonkerbl** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 4:52 pm

"FBI privately investigate the matter"? wtf Nate you know the FBI works for Trump right? It's not a private detective agency.

I_Like_Dirt · Post #1416 » by **I_Like_Dirt** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 5:19 pm

Zonkerbl wrote:The GOP wants to get the nomination raped through the process in time for the hubbub about it to die down before the midterms. That's literally the only reason they are in such a hurry.

I mean, it's clearly an assault to the senses to suggest that there is even close to as much to consider where Kavanaugh is considered as there was about Merrick Garland.

Post #1417 » by **nate33** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 5:21 pm

gtn130 wrote:
nate33 wrote:
dckingsfan wrote:I think they are legitimately worried about not retaining the senate and then not being able to drive their candidate onto the court.

Yes. This whole demand for an FBI investigation is nothing but a stall tactic in the hopes that a Democrat-controlled Senate can stop the nomination after the midterms.

If the Democrats had a good faith interest in these allegations, they would have had the FBI privately investigate the matter 67 days ago when it first came to Feinstein's attention. But they chose to sit on the allegations until the eve of the vote and then leak it so that a spectacle would ensue.

Remember Merrick Garland tho

Mitch McConnell introduced some next level power politics and that's the game now

Edit: and yeah what Zonk said

I can buy that the Democrats are righteously outraged about Merrick Garland and that this is political payback. I can even see why Democrats would consider it justifiable.

All I'm saying is that this has very little to do with concern over Ford or Cavanaugh. It's merely a game of hardball over the direction of the Supreme Court.

Post #1418 » by **nate33** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 5:23 pm

I_Like_Dirt wrote:The fact is, Trump could have very easily chosen a candidate that wasn't someone who could be so easily targeted. There were quite a few rumblings that a lot of people within the Party were concerned about Kavanaugh as a candidate before this process.

I hadn't heard any such thing. Certainly Kavanaugh was more in the Scalia/Gorsuch range rather than an Anthony Kennedy, and there were arguments that it would be harder to confirm someone that ideological, but I hadn't heard anything about Kavanaugh being morally suspect. Do you have a link?

Post #1419 » by **nate33** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 5:24 pm

Zonkerbl wrote:"FBI privately investigate the matter"? wtf Nate you know the FBI works for Trump right? It's not a private detective agency.

They do it all the time. They could have quietly listened to Ford's story, and then went to interview all the players - all without media attention.

I_Like_Dirt · Post #1420 » by **I_Like_Dirt** » Fri Sep 28, 2018 6:01 pm

nate33 wrote:I hadn't heard any such thing. Certainly Kavanaugh was more in the Scalia/Gorsuch range rather than an Anthony Kennedy, and there were arguments that it would be harder to confirm someone that ideological, but I hadn't heard anything about Kavanaugh being morally suspect. Do you have a link?

A lot of it is buried on the internet now that we have a landslide of new stuff, but Mitch McConnell, for example, was keenly aware that this was a possibility with Kavanaugh beforehand, and made it clear to trump, too. It doesn't say anything about Ford specifically; that much I'm sure was a surprise. But a LOT of what has come up isn't surprising Republicans whatsoever. A lot of this information is coming from friends and co-workers and such.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/07/us/politics/trump-mcconnell-supreme-court.html