It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Democrats win! Precedent set to unleash decades old allegations with no proof

page: 9
30
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 08:56 AM
link   
a reply to: Jusvistn

I am trying to understand how you got echo chamber and double standards from that post???

I linked to a post in another thread to prevent repeating (spamming) a thought on how Flake both got Kavanaugh out of committee and to the floor by demonstrating what Dems should have done. Pass the buck to the floor with an amendment (a caveat) which would have opened the door to indefinite stalling. But since there was no amendment, McConnell was free to schedule a vote without any conditions or delays. McConnell chose to request a one week FBI that Trump allowed and so ordered.

So despite not having to capitulate to demands, they did for both the optics and to get a better nose count on if Kavanaugh has the votes needed. Bonus is if the the FBI has nothing further to report and the Dems still vote party lines, it is proof of political stall tactics and any future requests on future tasks can be ignored.




posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 09:05 AM
link   
a reply to: Ahabstar




This place is insane. Remember when Republicans unleashed decades old allegations about Bill Clinton? The double-standards on display on ATS since it turned into an alt-right echo chamber are off the charts.


This is what i was replying to . I can't figure out how you got linked....

I can't even figure out what your post was that the reply is linked to..... so confused
edit on 29-9-2018 by Jusvistn because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 09:30 AM
link   
a reply to: Jusvistn

It happens. I was just trying to figure out your post.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 10:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grambler
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

And there we have it.

Ok with the politiciaztion of sex assault claims

good job!


Is that what I said?

:-)



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 10:41 AM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6




In a nation with a Republican President, House, Senate, and Supreme Court? Yeah, I'll say you're not wrong about that at all.


Thank you - for proving my point :-)

Are you on purpose trying to avoid a real conversation?



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 10:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Grambler




Well the democrats have won.


It's still 90% certain that brett will be a scotus.

I predict that he will.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 02:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: theantediluvian


In your opinion, why didn't Diane Feinstein say anthing about this letter/allegation when she interviewed Kavanaugh in her office for an hour on August 20th?


Well that's the question isn't it? Many/most Republicans allege that she sat on it until the very last moment to delay. It's at least possible but it's the end of September and this Congress is in session until January — there's no way this lingers that long. I suppose there could be a plan to delay long enough that Trump pulls the plug on Kavanaugh and nominates somebody else with the hope that there won't be enough time to confirm a second nominee.

That's risky imo because, of the names that were floated on the short list, at least two of them seemed to be more hardline than Kavanaugh and only one really seemed more moderate.

Now according to Feinstein, she was respecting the terms of Ford's desire for confidentiality. Everyone is in agreement that Ford did not want to go on the record through the end of August.

This is why it's important to know if Feinstein or her staff, operating at her direction, leaked the existence of the allegation and letter to The Intercept's Ryan Grim a couple weeks ago, igniting a media frenzy that pressured Ford into going on the record. That's what has been insinuated which is how we ended up with Feinstein being asked about it at the hearing by Cornyn and denying it.

If she did it, not only did she lie about it — she manipulated Ford — which would be pretty disgusting. It would also poke all sorts of holes in her explanation about why she sat on it.

In my opinion? I'd give it about 70/30 that Feinstein wasn't behind the leak.

For:

- She definitely had the opportunity.
- She had a plausible motive.

Against:

- Nobody has claimed any evidence that she did it.
- Ryan Grim says that she/her staff were not the leakers.
- A number of other potential sources of the leak with their own plausible motives.

She also seemed sincere in her denial but people rarely confess and she's been in politics longer than I've been alive so she's no doubt an adept liar — so I don't think I can give that too much weight.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 02:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

Why are you ashamed? They are doing the right thing.

What are you referring too? This woman went on National television and made up a story about a man she never even met. (Prove they met, if you are arguing even this simple fact).
You want a special counsel appointed against this man based on unsubstantiated facts just like you did on Trump?
I dont know how many times you libtards have to do this to make it beyond obvious but I beg you to keep it up, it makes you look as crazy as "Dr" Ford...🐽



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 03:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: theantediluvian

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: theantediluvian


In your opinion, why didn't Diane Feinstein say anthing about this letter/allegation when she interviewed Kavanaugh in her office for an hour on August 20th?


Well that's the question isn't it? Many/most Republicans allege that she sat on it until the very last moment to delay. It's at least possible but it's the end of September and this Congress is in session until January — there's no way this lingers that long. I suppose there could be a plan to delay long enough that Trump pulls the plug on Kavanaugh and nominates somebody else with the hope that there won't be enough time to confirm a second nominee.

That's risky imo because, of the names that were floated on the short list, at least two of them seemed to be more hardline than Kavanaugh and only one really seemed more moderate.

Now according to Feinstein, she was respecting the terms of Ford's desire for confidentiality. Everyone is in agreement that Ford did not want to go on the record through the end of August.

This is why it's important to know if Feinstein or her staff, operating at her direction, leaked the existence of the allegation and letter to The Intercept's Ryan Grim a couple weeks ago, igniting a media frenzy that pressured Ford into going on the record. That's what has been insinuated which is how we ended up with Feinstein being asked about it at the hearing by Cornyn and denying it.

If she did it, not only did she lie about it — she manipulated Ford — which would be pretty disgusting. It would also poke all sorts of holes in her explanation about why she sat on it.

In my opinion? I'd give it about 70/30 that Feinstein wasn't behind the leak.

For:

- She definitely had the opportunity.
- She had a plausible motive.

Against:

- Nobody has claimed any evidence that she did it.
- Ryan Grim says that she/her staff were not the leakers.
- A number of other potential sources of the leak with their own plausible motives.

She also seemed sincere in her denial but people rarely confess and she's been in politics longer than I've been alive so she's no doubt an adept liar — so I don't think I can give that too much weight.

So Feinstein is a career libtard so she is undoubtedly a liar according to anti! We are finally getting to see these ATS spinsters for what they truly are is 1 positive outcome of this confirmation hearing!🐖
edit on 29/9/18 by xxspockyxx because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 03:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: burdman30ott6




In a nation with a Republican President, House, Senate, and Supreme Court? Yeah, I'll say you're not wrong about that at all.


Thank you - for proving my point :-)

Are you on purpose trying to avoid a real conversation?


I am having a real conversation. I'm just not permitting you to lead it or dictate it as you seem to be adamantly trying to do.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 03:04 PM
link   
I don't think the Democrats won anything at all. If anything they've angered the Independents with this circus. They've ensured a huge Red turnout for the midterms.

Did anyone have ANY doubt the Flake would flake out? Seriously. I knew from the start he would do something to grandstand.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Is there one person on ATS that would make an appointment to go see "Dr" Ford?
Shouldn't the answer to this question be enough to discredit what this senile nut bag is claiming?
🐷



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 03:30 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6


I am having a real conversation. I'm just not permitting you to lead it or dictate it as you seem to be adamantly trying to do.


oh for Christ's sake:


This is a man that's been nominated for a lifetime position on our supreme court. He wants to be a Justice? Then let him support due process. If he wants to make laws that affect all of us, then let him show he's willing to live by the system he claims he wants to uphold

Quoting myself

You were correcting me - I believe? I suggested you understood me full well :-)

It would be interesting if for once you could just talk - and not try to bully your way through a conversation

I'm not sure what you're afraid of?


edit on 9/29/2018 by Spiramirabilis because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 03:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Spiramirabilis

The issue is you and I have dramatically different visions of what said "system" is and what it is supposed to be. What you're supporting here is a public witch hunt, court of public opinion, entertainment of allegations sans any evidence, let alone any proof, that this investigation is even warranted. That's not due process, it's acceptance of making an agenda driven mockery out of the legal system.

This man had ZERO complaints about his behavior, zero red flags, zero character concerns for 3 decades of very high profile public life... now suddenly, when his ideological detractors needed it most desperately, claims of behavior 36 years ago with zero supporting evidence aside from she said/he said comes forward? That's not due process, that's a god damned mockery.

Failure to kiss your ass and pander to your opinion isn't bullying, by the way... it's thinking for one's self. You should try it sometime, it's quite liberating.

ETA; The post where you quoted me above, allow me to explain it to you since the idea behind my post seems to have escaped your understanding. Witch hunts, mob rule, public tantrums, sideshows, political circus, inability to lose gracefully, misplaced activism... these are the reason the GOP holds all 3 branches of government right now. The majority of voters in the United States have had their fill of the Democrat's horses__t brand of politicking. These PT Barnum inspired antics such as we've seen here, destroying a good man in the name of the Dem's kampf, are effectively devastating your party's credibility, popularity, and sooner or later your party's ability to even remain relevant in national politics... all that's currently missing is a viable moderate left alternative and once that arises, the Democratic party will become a fringe party of radicals only... basically the left's version of the National Rennesaince Party.
edit on 29-9-2018 by burdman30ott6 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 03:54 PM
link   
a reply to: UKTruth


I do, however, believe that Democrats played the situation, appointing the lawyer, organising and paying for the polygraph and planning the delays to the hearing to buy more time in order to proactively try to find other women that could lend weight to the initial accusation. I think they persuaded the second victim and perhaps even coerced her into 'remembering' it was Kavanaugh.
Avenetti then just jumped on the bandwagon because he was losing the spotlight.


It's a plausible theory. In no small part because we can all think of numerous situations where people have come out of the woodwork, made allegations with serious political implications and received support provided by political interests (legal, PR, etc) which always smells bad.

And yes, I found Avenatti's client's allegation to be the least credible on its face.

But we all have our theories. Maybe the FBI report will shed additional light on some of this.



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 04:12 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6



The issue is you and I have dramatically different visions of what said "system" is and what it is supposed to be.


Maybe. Maybe you assume too much about what I think - and how. But then - two thoughts on that:

Clearly - having spent any time here at ATS at all most would assume that you and I have (ahem) a different perspective on most things

Then (like most people - which is what I think) we’re probably closer than we seem superficially - it just gets filtered differently

Enough of the touchy feely liberal crap (for now):


What you're supporting here is a public witch hunt, court of public opinion, entertainment of allegations sans any evidence, let alone any proof, that this investigation is even warranted. That's not due process, it's acceptance of making an agenda driven mockery out of the legal system.


This isn’t happening in a courtroom. He’s not on trial (yet). None of this is normal - I’ll grant you that. None of this is doing us any good. I said just the other day that it turns my stomach - the entire thing

I’ve got mixed views on the whole me too thing. I refuse to accept (even from women) that men should be accused and found guilty automatically. That is not how things are supposed to work - no matter which side of this political circus you’re on. I’ve lost a lot of respect for certain women because of this. You can’t expect justice if you aren’t just - no matter how hurt and angry you are. No matter if you’re right. We have a system that often fails women - but to abandon it will help nobody in the end

Women - are not always honest. Same as men. But, that's not what's happening here. Being accused isn't the same as being found guilty. Too bad it happened this way, but now that it has, there's nothing we can do but investigate it

I also believe we’re looking at a revolution. Your personal opinion here might veer away from mine - but women often enough are violated in ways that are completely ignored until they either march or prostrate themselves - begging to be heard

An entire divided country is watching a man stand before the senate on his way to being nominated for a postion on the Supreme Court - and you want to assume there should be no roadblocks? Well - here’s his roadblock

She’s either lying, confused - or she’s telling the truth. It’s not a done deal. There is no reason why this can’t be investigated. None




This man had ZERO complaints about his behavior, zero red flags, zero character concerns for 3 decades of very high profile public life... now suddenly, when his ideological detractors needed it most desperately, claims of behavior 36 years ago with zero supporting evidence aside from she said/he said comes forward? That's not due process, that's a god damned mockery.


That’s one way of looking at it. Do you have any idea how many women I’ve known that were either married to or daughters of pillars of the community? Nobody knew what was happening in their homes. So - I’m not impressed

I’ll tell you what - if a man had attempted to rape me and I found out years later he was about to be nominated to one of the most important positions in the country - a position where he could affect the way women are seen by the law - I would have done the same thing. Too bad about the inconvenience everybody



Failure to kiss your ass and pander to your opinion isn't bullying, by the way... it's thinking for one's self. You should try it sometime, it's quite liberating.


Kiss my ass? You’re kind of a fraidy cat Burd - as it turns out. Like most bullies, little bit like Mr. Kavanaugh. We’ll see how it works out for him

:-)

P.S. I forgot to thank you - for a non cowardly response. Means the world to me - seriously

edit on 9/29/2018 by Spiramirabilis because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 04:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
You’re kind of a fraidy cat Burd - as it turns out.


You divined this from what, exactly?



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 04:31 PM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

:-)

Going on the offensive
edit on 9/29/2018 by Spiramirabilis because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 04:32 PM
link   
When can we start speculating on democrats being pedophiles and wife beaters and rapists?

Just looking at my calendar and wanted to plan ahead.




posted on Sep, 29 2018 @ 04:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spiramirabilis
a reply to: burdman30ott6

:-)

Going on the offensive


You're mistaken, I'm always offensive... it's a character trait. Please don't think you received any special treatment.

ETA: I have a low tolerance for bullsnip.
edit on 29-9-2018 by burdman30ott6 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
30
<< 6  7  8    10 >>

log in

join