What's new

Supreme Court Justice Kennedy to Retire

Status
Not open for further replies.
She did specify the year, and before she was even asked to testify before Congress (it was in the original Washington Post article).

When you wonder why some people don't take your opinions seriously, it's because you say something factually wrong like this, have the error pointed out to you in a clear way, and then come back and make the same error again the next day.
She did not specify the year. She said she wasn't sure. In her sworn testimony she said maybe they could check Safeway's personnel records because it was the same summer that Mark Judge worked there. She knows that because she recalls an uncomfortable encounter when she ran into him there and he was no longer friendly like he used to be. She seemed to imply that he was embarrassed.

Don't give me a lecture when you don't know what you are talking about.
 
Yeah that's the point dip ****. You can't remember off the top of your head the date and time of an emotional experience. It doesn't mean it didn't happen. It means that most people don't check a clock and calendar in the midst of an emotional experience. That's not what sticks. Do you just play dumb or should I legitimately feel bad for you?
Calling people names doesn't make your argument more impressive. You seem to have misread what I wrote, anyway. There are reports that she was calling people up asking if they remembered if it was Brett who did this, because she couldn't remember whether it was him or not. Let that sink in. She brought an accusation of this weight out and was uncertain whether she was accusing the right guy.
https://dailycaller.com/2018/09/24/deborah-ramirez-kavanaugh-accuser/
 
Yeah that's the point dip ****. You can't remember off the top of your head the date and time of an emotional experience. It doesn't mean it didn't happen. It means that most people don't check a clock and calendar in the midst of an emotional experience. That's not what sticks. Do you just play dumb or should I legitimately feel bad for you?
Since you bunged up the quote on your reply it was difficult to tell which part of my quote you were responding to. If it was my last line then I'd like to know why you think this information has to come off the top of your head. Hasn't Dr. Ford had any time to think about/research the claim she is making? If I needed to tell the country about my grandparent's deaths the first thing I'd do is a little research to remind myself of the facts.
 
Calling people names doesn't make your argument more impressive. You seem to have misread what I wrote, anyway. There are reports that she was calling people up asking if they remembered if it was Brett who did this, because she couldn't remember whether it was him or not. Let that sink in. She brought an accusation of this weight out and was uncertain whether she was accusing the right guy.
https://dailycaller.com/2018/09/24/deborah-ramirez-kavanaugh-accuser/

Again you are dumb

RAMIREZ is a different person than FORD

Also a different circumstance. You are drunk somebody puts their penis in your face and walks away. It is likely you will need the help of your fellow party goers to identify that person. Honestly it speaks to her credibility. If she just wanted to destroy him she wouldn't have bothered to ask people "Remember that guy who forced his dick in my face when I was drunk, was that Brett or someone else?"
 
She did not specify the year. She said she wasn't sure. In her sworn testimony she said maybe they could check Safeway's personnel records because it was the same summer that Mark Judge worked there. She knows that because she recalls an uncomfortable encounter when she ran into him there and he was no longer friendly like he used to be. She seemed to imply that he was embarrassed.

Don't give me a lecture when you don't know what you are talking about.


C'mon man. This is from her opening statement.


In the summer of 1982, like most summers, I spent almost every day at the Columbia Country Club in Chevy Chase, Maryland swimming and practicing diving.

One evening that summer, after a day of swimming at the club, I attended a small gathering at a house in the Chevy Chase/Bethesda area.
 
Since you bunged up the quote on your reply it was difficult to tell which part of my quote you were responding to. If it was my last line then I'd like to know why you think this information has to come off the top of your head. Hasn't Dr. Ford had any time to think about/research the claim she is making? If I needed to tell the country about my grandparent's deaths the first thing I'd do is a little research to remind myself of the facts.

Bwahahaha see my last post above
 
Again you are dumb

RAMIREZ is a different person than FORD

Also a different circumstance. You are drunk somebody puts their penis in your face and walks away. It is likely you will need the help of your fellow party goers to identify that person. Honestly it speaks to her credibility. If she just wanted to destroy him she wouldn't have bothered to ask people "Remember that guy who forced his dick in my face when I was drunk, was that Brett or someone else?"
Honestly.

There was a conversation about Ramirez and a different one about Ford in that same post you quoted. I have now responded to both in separate posts. Regarding what you said above, it would be one thing for her to ask people who did that to her the morning after the party (she must have been crazy wasted not to know). It's an entirely different thing for her to call them up 35 years after the fact.
 
C'mon man. This is from her opening statement.


In the summer of 1982, like most summers, I spent almost every day at the Columbia Country Club in Chevy Chase, Maryland swimming and practicing diving.

One evening that summer, after a day of swimming at the club, I attended a small gathering at a house in the Chevy Chase/Bethesda area.
I overlooked that. My bad.

So why did she say that they might be able to better figure out the time by figuring out what year Judge worked at Safeway? Seems like an odd comment.
 
I overlooked that. My bad.

So why did she say that they might be able to better figure out the time by figuring out what year Judge worked at Safeway? Seems like an odd comment.
There was another part of her testimony where she mentioned seeing Judge at Safeway some weeks after the assault, and he reacted strangely to her. If she was able to look at his work schedule and work from there she may be able to get a better idea of what day the assault took place.
 
I overlooked that. My bad.

So why did she say that they might be able to better figure out the time by figuring out what year Judge worked at Safeway? Seems like an odd comment.

Well, she said she welcomed an FBI investigation. Maybe she just wanted to provide a lead that the FBI could followup up on to verify 1982 was the year it happened.
 
There was another part of her testimony where she mentioned seeing Judge at Safeway some weeks after the assault, and he reacted strangely to her. If she was able to look at his work schedule and work from there she may be able to get a better idea of what day the assault took place.

You're right. That's how she felt knowing the Safeway dates for Judge might help.
 
It’s over. Flake and Collins now have the cover they needed. Kavanaugh will be confirmed this weekend and the ramifications of having a mini-Trump on the Supreme Court will be felt for 20 to 30 years.



Sometimes I feel like I'm in some kinda Philip K. Dick alternate reality...
 
Honestly.

There was a conversation about Ramirez and a different one about Ford in that same post you quoted. I have now responded to both in separate posts. Regarding what you said above, it would be one thing for her to ask people who did that to her the morning after the party (she must have been crazy wasted not to know). It's an entirely different thing for her to call them up 35 years after the fact.

But that is exactly what Ford should have done? Some investigating?

You are grasping at straws to discredit these women. It is ridiculous.

Even if we forget all that sexual stuff and his temperament. He is clearly a liar of the under oath variety.

You or I can lie about our history and behavior because Joe you and I don't ****ing matter. Our integrity is not the lynchpin of American truth. The Supreme Court is! We cannot abide liars. We need 9 centrist (honestly conservative leaning) justices who have the respect of all the people. Their decisions must have legitimacy or else our American experiment will cease to be.
 
Last edited:
BTW if FDR(a Dem)had gotten away with stacking the SCOTUS, even if his intentions were good, republican government/liberal democracy would be all but dead globally.

That was a potwntial catalyst "1984" moment in American History and this is another.
 
It's very likely that, should the Democrats win the House in November, impeachment proceedings would soon begin for Kavanaugh. Conviction in the Senate would be unlikely, but this is one scenario in which anything that turns up could reflect poorly on the Republican senators who voted for him, so as political animals, the Democrats would almost surely do this, and the charge would most likely involve perjury. I think a clear perception by the Democrats that the FBI investigation was a sham would guarantee such a move. And if he lied under oath, as a judge he should be impeached regardless of what court he sits on.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ould-follow-heres-how/?utm_term=.c96f6a2de748

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/10/03/democratic-house-impeach-kavanaugh-220921
 
Up until abortion became a large issue, my father was a social Dem, fiscal Conservative. Voted both party many times. My mother on the other hand is very conservative.

Despite living in an incredibly conservative area (my family was thought of as the liberals of our group) we did manage to make family friends with Senator Max Baucus, and we’re pretty friendly with Senator Tester as well.

It’s funny. When you go to DC, or state events and talk to your representatives, they don’t disagree on much. But the parties don’t like it when they cross lines, so they don’t. Getting re-elected matters more than doing what they want.

Most politicians agree on almost everything and have good solutions, but we the people vote them out when they vote as representatives. We are a bunch of know-it-all idiots. They are sent there to study things out, have resources at their disposal, can be counselled by professionals, question authority figures and insiders, and get intelligence briefings. But they know nothing, right?

A good example of this was Utah voting longtime senator Bob Bennett out of office after the 2008 crash. "Bailout Bob" voted for TARP and got thrown out for it. The bill was absolutely necessary, so Republicans basically drew straws on who had to vote for it and accept the consequences and who got to vote against it and get re-elected.

There is a video out there of legislators getting interviewed in a private setting. They answered questions opposite of how they did in public, and mostly agreed on solutions.

We cant get out of our own way by letting them do their jobs. Then complain endlessly about them.
 
It's very likely that, should the Democrats win the House in November, impeachment proceedings would soon begin for Kavanaugh. Conviction in the Senate would be unlikely, but this is one scenario in which anything that turns up could reflect poorly on the Republican senators who voted for him, so as political animals, the Democrats would almost surely do this, and the charge would most likely involve perjury. I think a clear perception by the Democrats that the FBI investigation was a sham would guarantee such a move. And if he lied under oath, as a judge he should be impeached regardless of what court he sits on.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...ould-follow-heres-how/?utm_term=.c96f6a2de748

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/10/03/democratic-house-impeach-kavanaugh-220921

That would be as horrible an act as it gets. Using party control to load appointed positions with agenda driven people, and to invalidate the will of the people by removing previous appointees, does nothing but undermine our institutions and democracy itself.

The democrats started this under Obama and it wasn't taken well. Keep it up and you'll divide the American people away from your republic in name only.
 
That would be as horrible an act as it gets. Using party control to load appointed positions with agenda driven people, and to invalidate the will of the people by removing previous appointees, does nothing but undermine our institutions and democracy itself.

The democrats started this under Obama and it wasn't taken well. Keep it up and you'll divide the American people away from your republic in name only.
Right. Obama was the first person to make political appointments. But, you know, that was all part of his cunning plan to take away your guns and declare Shania law. And he would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling kids!
 
Right. Obama was the first person to make political appointments. But, you know, that was all part of his cunning plan to take away your guns and declare Shania law. And he would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling kids!

I always suspected that Obama was working in secret with Canada and Shania Twain to enact Shania law. Thank god we were able to prevent it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top