Zombie
Well-Known Member
That's weird because there have been a few Democratic politicians who have been accused of sexual misconduct recently and I don't remember crying about it being a Republican conspiracy. Huh.
Supreme Court Justice Kennedy to Retire
- Thread starter Zombie
- Start date
- Status
LogGrad98
Well-Known Member
Contributor
20-21 Award Winner
2022 Award Winner
2023 Award Winner
2024 Award Winner
I don't know, they didn't boot Clinton and the allegations were many, including rape. But they rallied around him.
Tbh Franken feels like a patsy so the dems can always invoke his name at times like this, conveniently ignoring a past of not taking women seriously about claims of sexual assault.
Zombie
Well-Known Member
Oh come on. What kind of logic is that? Something that happened 20 years ago is a better indicator of what the party believes in than what they are doing now? Makes no sense.
J
JAZZGASM
Guest
I would be too.
But the Intercept said nothing about Eschoo or other members of Congress. They also said they had multiple sources in their original article. Think all of Ford's friends called the Intercept?
From The Intercept: “Different sources provided different accounts of the contents of the letter, and some of the sources said they themselves had heard different versions, but the one consistent theme was that it describes an incident involving Kavanaugh and a woman while they were in high school.”
"The sources were not authorized to speak on the record, and said that no senators on the committee, other than Feinstein, have so far been able to view the letter."
I also heard Ford just told a few people about the letter but had not read it to them. These comments from the original news source sure make it sound like info came from Congress.
It also seems pretty clear that the sources were familiar enough with the letter and its import that they were likely either Democrat lawmakers or aides to those lawmakers.
Let's be honest. Who is the more likely source? Some mysterious friend of Ford, or a member of Congress who knows the political gain the leak of the letter would have.
Zombie
Well-Known Member
Well considering the editor of the intercept said it didn't come from her office I'm going to go with option one.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/intercept-editor-clarifies-feinsteins-staff-didnt-leak
J
JAZZGASM
Guest
Haha, okay.
Holy **** man, this has been covered in this thread ad nauseum.
At some point the word "Clinton" has to be stop being a catch-all boogeyman for conservatives. Neither is in office. Neither will ever be in office again. I can't tell you how ****ing happy I'd be if they both died tomorrow. What would conservatives even do with themselves? They'd have no idea how to excuse their own bad behavior.
Red
Well-Known Member
That's true, but Whitehouse then went on to ask Kavanaugh about another entry on the calendar. Instead, he could have attempted to use that time to press Kavanaugh to explain the so-called drinking game of Devil's Triangle in more detail. Since it's not a drinking game at all, Kavanaugh's answer would have been interesting. There would have been time, but Whitehouse switched to another entry. His aim was simply to get Kavanaugh to explain as many entries as time allowed. I would have preferred, in hindsight, that he go for the jugular on the Devil's Triangle entry.
BTW, yes, I posted Sen. Whitehouse's breakdown of the July 1st, 1982 entry on the calendar earlier in this thread, a fuller version of that particular segment(page 47).At the time, Whitehouse was trying to provide a compelling rationale, a possible clue, that an FBI investigation could look into. Whitehouse is sharp. He was the US Attorney for Rhode Island prior to being elected to the Senate. If the Democrats ever win the Senate again, Whitehouse has promised to press for a thorough investigation of all this, regardless if Kavanaugh is on the Supreme Court. I take him at his word on that score.
Douchebag K
Well-Known Member
context is everything
Next time I go to a party I'm going to suggest a "Devil's Triangle" tournament.
When asked for details I'll say "It's like quarters, except there are no quarters, no glasses of beer and we're not going to be wearing any clothes. But other than that, it's like quarters."
When asked for details I'll say "It's like quarters, except there are no quarters, no glasses of beer and we're not going to be wearing any clothes. But other than that, it's like quarters."
J
JAZZGASM
Guest
Make sure to post pics like most JF get-togethers.
Darkwing Duck
Well-Known Member
That is one I will avoid.
Unless, of course, you advertise it under false pretenses.
Now I'm not sure I can confidently show up to anything ever again...
20 years ago. I was a lot more sexist 20 years ago. People learn, priorities change.
Do you have a more recent example than Clinton for that?
J
JAZZGASM
Guest
Keith Ellison's alleged misconduct has been largely ignored by Dems. How about Gil Cisneros? He will likely lose, but I don't see the Dem party going after him. Claims that Hillary threatened Bill's accusers were also largely ignored during Hillary's campaigns.
Dems have been better about sexual harrassment type claims, but they are far from perfect.
If there was not photographic evidence, I am not sure Franken would have resigned.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
Lol. The Republicans were going crazy about the Clinton sex scandals. If you don't realize that the Dems "who cares?" reaction to his behavior played a large role in the Republicans not caring about Trump's you aren't paying attention. And Clinton is a much more recent example than you're willing to admit because, according to accusers, his wife made veiled threats to them that the Dems still didn't care about when she ran for president a couple years ago. Plus there's Keith Ellison. And Weinstein, who was getting away with awful behavior for years and years was a big Dem supporter who all of the Dems wanted to be photographed with until finally the dam broke and media were forced to publish accusations that they'd been actively suppressing for years. Taking the position that the Dems have the moral high ground on this subject is laughable. But predictably, that is their position.
Thee Idiotic Minivan K
Well-Known Member
Which is why I say eff both parties. Unless they somehow grow a decent set of ethics, I will never vote for either party again
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Douchebag K
Well-Known Member
sensible outlook from what i observe
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
So if the Dems had control of the presidency and both houses but were fearful of losing it soon, and they had the opportunity to seat a Supreme Court justice and were headed to the vote when suddenly Republicans claimed there was an anonymous claim that they said required investigation, you believe that the Dems would stop everything and say, "Gee, this sure sounds credible. Let's halt everything and risk losing our opportunity while we give control over to the minority and see how long they can tie this thing up?"
Even if you are not willing to admit which side of that argument you'd fall on, I've been around long enough to know exactly what would happen. The vast majority of people are choosing their side in these sqabbles not based on the facts, but based on politics.
This particular instance was a perfect storm for the Democrats. In my opinion they will come out the big winner because growing numbers of conservatives (myself included) now believe that Kavanaugh should not be confirmed, and that means a significant opportunity lost for the Republicans. Kavanaugh lied to us. People on both sides should be pissed.
Joe Bagadonuts
Well-Known Member
How old are you? I have a feeling your opinion on this matter will change by age 45 at the latest.
- Status