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.

 

The Republicans need to move on from Kavanaugh

page: 13
13
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 3 2018 @ 03:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Wayfarer

It's a fact that from day 1 they said they would oppose him by any means necessary with all the strength they have.


I'm not sure what you think that proves? Likely no Democrats will vote for him, so how is that against what the claim you cite?

As I've mentioned in other threads on the subject, the Democrats can't stop the Republicans from putting someone in Kennedy's vacant seat (FULL STOP). What they can do is fight tooth and nail to prevent someone not qualified (either from sexual abuse allegations being found valid, or by impropriety of lying on the record, or through the 'lame-duck' position he's made for himself that weakens his position for future rulings).

If what you are in fact suggesting is some Democrat forced Dr. Ford to make up this story to sink Kavanaugh, then I don't think theres any point in conversing further because you are beyond reach.




posted on Oct, 3 2018 @ 03:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

Who cares if they forced her. I am suggesting they don't actually care if they are valid or not they were going to cause problems as much as possible regardless of if they are valid.



posted on Oct, 3 2018 @ 03:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: NiNjABackflip

originally posted by: Wayfarer

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wayfarer

Well it is a good thing it was not rhetoric and just him addressing lies and accusations hurled at him.
I hope if I am falsely accused of sexual assault, and gang rape I have as much composure as he was able to maintain.


Uh, it is in fact his rhetoric during that hearing that I was discussing as an issue........

He can be genuinely upset, and say genuine things, and still have slipped up in his responsibility to remain (by outward appearances) an unbiased demeanor.


His “responsibility to remain an unbiased demeanour” applies only in when he’s operating in a legal context, in his capacity as a judge.



Would you be surprised to find out that judges on lower courts have been removed for espousing racist or extreme political views? This is not some new precedent I just pulled out of my ass.


If there was something racist or extreme about his views, you’d have a point, but his judicial record speaks more than how his tone of voice made you feel.


Sure, I've already brought up one of the more egregious (from an extremist angle) in my view (that presidents should be immune to criminal prosecution). He has other views he's written about and in fewer cases rulings he's made that make it clear why the Freedom Caucasus picked him as their man (primarily on invalidating Roe V Wade as paramount among them). However, in this case the damning extremism came directly from his own words during the hearing last week. By calling out Democrats as the architect of his misery, there is now doubt whether or not he can rule impartially on issues serving Democrats.



posted on Oct, 3 2018 @ 03:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Wayfarer

Who cares if they forced her. I am suggesting they don't actually care if they are valid or not they were going to cause problems as much as possible regardless of if they are valid.


But this argument falls apart when we try and answer why didn't the Dem's bring every 'fake' story out of the woodwork they could find to stop Gorsuch. He's every bit as despicable to Democrats as Kavanaugh is, it just so happens Gorsuch wasn't a partyboy drinker frat boy like Kavanaugh was in his youth, and surprisingly didn't have any allegations or dirt the Democrats could use against him.



posted on Oct, 3 2018 @ 03:28 PM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer




He doesn't KNOW that its Hillary and watchdog groups hounding after him (anymore than you or I KNOW conclusively).

He did not say what you posted.
Perhaps that is the issue.
Below is what he actually said and I linked the transcript earlier in this thread.
www.washingtonpost.com...


Revenge on behalf of the Clintons. and millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups.

Unless you source otherwise or can show he actually committed perjury I will take his word under oath as the truth.
His refuting facts and defending himself is much different than your so called right wing punditry.



posted on Oct, 3 2018 @ 03:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

Because Gorsuch was replacing someone every bit as despicable as he is in Democrat eyes. The balance of power on the court was therefore not in danger of shifting.

Gorsuch replacing Scalis was like Kagan replacing Souter or Breyer (whichever one it was she replaced). Her judicial beliefs and philosophy were exactly like his, so nothing on rulings was really going to change.

But with Kavanaugh, you have the so-called swing vote moderate in Kennedy being replaced by a perceived constitutional originalist more in the Scalia mold and *that* is why you see all the kicking and screaming. It means the left is afraid the court's ruling will no longer be 4-4-1, but perhaps 5-4.

Because don't stop and fool yourself for one second into thinking they wouldn't have done this to Gorsuch if Kavanaugh had been the one nominated first and Gorsuch was the one being considered now.

Look at what they did with Clarence Thomas.



posted on Oct, 3 2018 @ 03:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: Wayfarer




He doesn't KNOW that its Hillary and watchdog groups hounding after him (anymore than you or I KNOW conclusively).

He did not say what you posted.
Perhaps that is the issue.
Below is what he actually said and I linked the transcript earlier in this thread.
www.washingtonpost.com...


Revenge on behalf of the Clintons. and millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups.

Unless you source otherwise or can show he actually committed perjury I will take his word under oath as the truth.
His refuting facts and defending himself is much different than your so called right wing punditry.


I counted nine times he mentioned Democrats specifically (in addition to the lines I quoted above). Regardless of whether he was refuting the claims or not, it was clear he considered the sum total of his anguish to be directed at Democrats. How is someone that angry at an entire political party going to remain unbiased if a Democrat comes before them on an issue?



posted on Oct, 3 2018 @ 03:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Wayfarer

Because Gorsuch was replacing someone every bit as despicable as he is in Democrat eyes. The balance of power on the court was therefore not in danger of shifting.

Gorsuch replacing Scalis was like Kagan replacing Souter or Breyer (whichever one it was she replaced). Her judicial beliefs and philosophy were exactly like his, so nothing on rulings was really going to change.

But with Kavanaugh, you have the so-called swing vote moderate in Kennedy being replaced by a perceived constitutional originalist more in the Scalia mold and *that* is why you see all the kicking and screaming. It means the left is afraid the court's ruling will no longer be 4-4-1, but perhaps 5-4.

Because don't stop and fool yourself for one second into thinking they wouldn't have done this to Gorsuch if Kavanaugh had been the one nominated first and Gorsuch was the one being considered now.

Look at what they did with Clarence Thomas.


Don't stop and fool myself? You are mistaken, if there was ANYTHING like dirt on Gorsuch you can bet they would have thrown it all at him, regardless of how the balance of power shifted or not.

One of the uncounted aspects of the publicity surrounding this is depending on how you tally it all up can be seen as a benefit or a hindrance to either party for a variety of reasons. Democrats would have potentially gained intangible benefits from embarrassing the Republicans by showing Gorsuch to be a sex-pest or worse. The fact that they had no ammunition to throw at Gorsuch is indicative of the Republicans putting up someone who was properly vetted rather than someone that Trump personally wanted on account of his legal issues finding a new ally on the SC.



posted on Oct, 3 2018 @ 03:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

No they wouldn't have. There was no need to politically.

They can't pull this kind of thing too often or it gets very, very suspicious.

As it is, there are some major signs that they've overplayed their hand with this already, and this is just once.



posted on Oct, 3 2018 @ 04:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Agree2Disagree


Let me break this down.

Because Kavanaugh was accused and responded the way he did, regardless of guilt or innocence, he is now "unfit" for the SCOTUS.

Next candidate, whoever it is, takes the nomination instead of Kavanaugh. Allegations inevitably arise. That nominee is then "unfit" for the SCOTUS as well.

You see, there is NOBODY that can withstand a made up allegation that instantly tarnishes ones reputation. That's why evidence is important...to clear ones name and reputation...

A2D


While you and many others believe without any doubt that this is a made up allegation, the majority of the country is not so sure. Mrs. Ford presented herself as a credible witness and provided a credible allegation. This does not mean she is telling the truth but on the flip side, it also means there may be truth to her story.

As such, this is not some fly by night allegation that can be easily discarded. In order to properly exonerate oneself from an allegation such as this, a third-party investigation is needed. This is the reason why, Judge Kavanaugh himself should have demanded an FBI investigation.

However, if this is a conspiracy, it was executed flawlessly. Let's look into the details of this conspiracy to truly appreciate the grandeur of this plan.



  1. --Find someone from Judge Kavanaugh's past
  2. --Convince this person to make the allegation even though it is illegal and if found out the person would most definitely serve prison time.
  3. --Give this person the details of the alleged incident and come up with every possible line of questioning that could possibly arise from this allegation
  4. --Have this person so convinced of this lie they are able to pass a lie detector test.
  5. --Get this person to agree to the media circus and death threats they will undoubtedly endure.
  6. --Convince this person to testify before Congress and coach her to the point she is believable at it as well


Occam's Razor suggests it is much more likely that she was honestly sexually assaulted by someone.

I do believe this woman BELIEVES she was sexually assaulted. So, in my opinion, someone assaulted her and she thinks that someone is Judge Kavanaugh. Is that someone Judge Kavanaugh? I don't know but hopefully the FBI can provide some answers.

edit on 3-10-2018 by BlackJackal because: List formatting



posted on Oct, 3 2018 @ 04:11 PM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal

I stopped at the first sentence.

I dont think this is a made up allegation. I think this is a serious allegation and am awaiting further evidence and/or information to be released in order to establish an informed opinion.

When I said "made up allegation" I was simply saying they CAN make up an allegation, not that they did.

A2D


edit on 3-10-2018 by Agree2Disagree because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2018 @ 04:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

So the dems did him dirty and now him stating such disqualifys him?
That's crazy talk.
Since you have yet to show any bias in his previous work I will assume you believe there is none.

Shining a light on the dems filth does not make him biased. Stating his innocence does not make him biased.



posted on Oct, 3 2018 @ 04:49 PM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal

The problem is that all she has is her story and it has changed multiple times. She can't even figure out exactly when it was supposed to have happened.



She only pinned it down to this particular date after she got involved with the Democrats.



posted on Oct, 3 2018 @ 07:35 PM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal

You raise a valid point about demeanor. Non-partisanship is important as well. INTEGRITY is paramount.

Over 500 law professors from 90 different law schools agree.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Oct, 3 2018 @ 07:47 PM
link   
a reply to: FyreByrd

Liberal professors are biased.
They are just part of the weaponry.



posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 12:48 AM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal

"the majority of the country is not so sure"

Majority you say, not what I have seen. Go on Yahoo and check the comments section. Yahoo is one of the most blatantly far leftist sites on the net, and the majority are backing Kavanaugh in the comments of each article posted. Perhaps you should get out of your echo chamber.

Back on topic.

Democrats create a lose/lose situation with all their accusations. If Kavanaugh showed no emotions, then Dems would say he is cold and uncaring, and that must mean he is guilty. Since Kav, showed emotions, now he is unfit. This is extremely hypocritical as they put emotions above facts 99% of the time. Which is already a problem with this hearing, they are taking an accusers word with no facts. There is no winning. They will make up some excuse no matter what.

"damaged goods" Argument - Again, this is a lose/lose situations as the Democrats will turn any nominee into damaged goods by attacking them.

If anything, the Democrats are shooting themselves in the foot. If Kavanaugh or another Republican is nominated and confirmed as SCJ, and they can not be unbiased due to attacks by Democrats, then that is the Democrats own doing. Democrats will be responsible for any biased decisions that the future SCJ make make.

Perhaps, instead of character assassination, the Democrats should be debating his stances on things. You know a proper strategy. Try to win people over with something that isn't, cuz we hate Trump.

There are things Kavanaugh is for that I am not for. Democrats should be debating those topics and making a suggestion as to who they believe would be a good and fair Supreme Court Justice. Then maybe they could win someone like me over. Instead they choose lowest of the low petty tactics. It's pathetic.



posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 07:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Strate8
a reply to: BlackJackal

Honestly, I agree with you. After watching him I was thinking if he does get confirmed he is going to be democrats worst nightmare after what they did to him....

Then thinking objectively that should also not be the case. I feel like he is damaged goods now, a casualty of war. Think there has to be some sort of reconciliation process to ensure he is fit and "combat" ready after that.

Last, dang that guy sure likes his beer. I found that below what I would expect from a SCOTUS handling themselves.

I'll probably get flamed for that but just calling it like i saw it.


As a person with an incredible resume gets smeared in the worst way, as his family feels the pain as much or more then he does what do you want? Do you want some robotic non-emotional thing on the SC? Some person who has no clue of the real world outside of law books, at least he is human and by all accounts of 100s of people that have known him for decades he has the upmost integrity.

BTW I hope the first thing he does is push for the reversal of Roe vs Wade...not because I'm religious in anyway, but why not....lol


I agree with you. If he has any decency at all, what he has gone through should give him greater empathy for the plights of the common guy. He should have a greater awareness of what it is like to be falsely accused. He could use this experience for his personal growth, broadening his perspective.



posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 07:26 AM
link   
If Judge Kavanaugh had a history of constant emotional outbursts like he did on Thursday I would agree with you.

But we have no evidence that he is emotionally unstable. Everything points to him maintaining a calm and impartial demeanor when conducting his duties.

Thursday was an exceptional scenario, where he had been under continual character assassination for 10 days. His family received death threats. His livelihood was in question, detractors said they would chase him out of his current appointment. His reputation had been shredded, with no substantiated evidence of any wrong doing.

Everything he had worked to achieve for the last 30 years was in danger of being taken away, all based on the non-corroborated statement of a single woman who didn't have any details on a singular event besides drinking one beer.

He showed emotion, so his detractors called him a loose cannon. If he hadn't been emotional, those same detractors would have called him a sociopath. Either way, his detractors have constantly assumed his guilt.

And the constant pressure applied by those same detractors has been for him or Trump to withdraw the nomination.

Trump, Kavanaugh and the GOP are doing exactly what must be done. These tactics cannot be rewarded. The nomination will move forward.



posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 09:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Wayfarer

Did Gorsuch give them a majority?



posted on Oct, 4 2018 @ 09:19 AM
link   
a reply to: BlackJackal

Actually it appears the Republicans are making gains, so most are sure. Until Democrats got involved her story was mid to late 80s. Her story has changed countless times.







 
13
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join