Supreme Court Justice Kennedy to Retire

[Zombie]

Good. Lest you continue to spout self righteous ********. I don’t even care anymore.

Y’all a bunch of circle jerking, self righteous assholes with a tendency to condemn any different.

**** this, **** that, **** them l, **** the president and ****, **** the tendency go shut down the free expression of discourse and ideas via fake and immensely exaggerated outrage.

I don't understand half of what you wrote here. Maybe take a second and collect your thoughts.

I haven't shut down anyone's freedom to express their ideas, what are you even talking about?

Oh and FWIW I haven't used any insulting language, or engaged in any name calling. Maybe the one calling others self righteous assholes should consider the damage they are doing to 'the discourse.'

 

[Stoked]

Demeaning others for anything short of trump condemnation on her has become the norm.

The man, a total ****, could cure AIDS and it could be presented as evil.

You unfairly took the quoted brunt but the point stands.

Also beer.

 

[fishonjazz]

And she was God’s gift to America on some circles.

Really? She lost to trump of all people. I think the majority of people that voted for her did so only cause trump was the other dude. Pretty sure the people that actually liked her were a very small cirlce.

 

[JAZZGASM]

Really? She lost to trump of all people. I think the majority of people that voted for her did so only cause trump was the other dude. Pretty sure the people that actually liked her were a very small cirlce.

Except they nominated her from within the party.

 

[fishonjazz]

The man, a total ****, could cure AIDS and it could be presented as evil.

I disagree. Im a never trump dude. I hate him with a passion. But when he does something right I acknowledge it. He just says and does so much dumb **** that its hard not to be extremely critical of him. He simply sucks so much more often than he does something right/good

 

[fishonjazz]

Except they nominated her from within the party.

Explain they

From what i understand hillary wasnt the voters choice, bernie was.

 

[JAZZGASM]

Explain they

From what i understand hillary wasnt the voters choice, bernie was.

There were a few states, like Utah, where Dems loved Bernie. As a whole, Hillary received over 55% of the votes.



Candidate Hillary Clinton Bernie Sanders
Home state New York Vermont
Delegate count 2,842 1,865
Contests won 34 23
Popular vote 16,914,722[a][1] 13,206,428[a][1]
Percentage 55.2%[a] 43.1%[a]

 

[Deleted member 365]

Explain they

From what i understand hillary wasnt the voters choice, bernie was.

After seeing how helpless the Republican Party was against Trump, doesn’t it make you wonder if having super delegates who generally favor the moderate and establishment candidate over the populist outsider isn’t a bad thing at all? Because the GOP didn’t have superdelegates who favored a much more moderate and establishment guy, like Jeb Bush, it made it much easier for Trump to win. Without superdelegates, party leaders are sacrificing their vetting power and giving it to voters.

Is that a good thing?

Normally, we’d all say yes, right?

But after seeing how easily voters are swayed by populist rhetoric, fake news, and racist dogma, is it a good thing for parties to give up their vetting power and give it to voters?

Again, look at what happened to the GOP. Had the GOP followed the DNC’s structure, Jeb Bush would’ve been their nominee. And that would’ve been a bad thing?

 

[Red]

Well, I for one, am partisan. I'm concerned that the guy about to be appointed to the Supreme Court has a very expansive view of executive branch power, and that that is one of the chief reasons Trump selected him in the first place. And since Trump has made no secret that he has an authoritarian mentality, and indeed seems to represent the culmination of authoritarian trends in the executive branch over the last several administrations, these trends, and the appointment of someone who seems to favor not placing limits on presidential power, worries me.

As for Kavanaugh specifically, he seemed to act like just another Republican member of the Judiciary Committee, attacked the Democrats, and made no effort to hide how partisan he was as well. To the point that he probably would be expected to recuse himself from any cases brought before the Supreme Court involving Democrats. Which seems ridiculous. In a climate characterized by political tribalism, the nominee basically said "I'm as tribal as the rest of you and, oh, BTW, opposition to my appointment is all about revenge by the Clinton's". Wonderful.

Reading the last few pages of this thread, hard to find anything about his qualifications based on his actual performance last Thursday. Instead it's been tribalism, and who leaked Ford's accusations. As to that actual performance, it seems clear he lied under oath. His answers on the yearbook entries suggest that was the case. And he could not say he supported an FBI investigation. And, as noted, his opening statement alone indicates that statement will be brought up any time a case involving Democrats is before the justices and he'll be asked to recuse himself every time. Establishing himself as conservative in ideology is to be expected, basically stating he's angry at Democrats and suspects a Clinton based conspiracy is not to be expected. I would think, but what do I know.

Anyway, is it true the FBI will only be allowed to interview 4 people? Sounds like it. And it seems like there are people out there who are upset by a less then truthful self portrait by Kavanaugh, and wish to speak to the FBI, and they are getting nowhere in those efforts:

https://www.newyorker.com/news/news...-renewed-investigation-of-brett-kavanaugh/amp

 

[LoPo]

This whole situation is an absolute travesty. Regardless of what may or may not have transpired between Kavanaugh and these accusations, the Democrats who had this information months ago should be banned from Washington forever for waiting to bring out this information. Whether he gets appointed or not, Kavanaugh should not be a judge if he truly did these acts. The Democrats holding this information in the hopes that it helps their party in upcoming elections is downright despicable.

Overall, I think Kavanaugh shouldn't be appointed. Scrap him as a way to even out the Garland situation a few years ago. When Trump nominates the next candidate, no games from either side please.

 

[One Brow]

Keith Ellison's alleged misconduct has been largely ignored by Dems.

There are differences. Ellison's misconduct is in the midst of domestic disputes, not predatory behavior. I believe Ellison has asked for an investigation (as Franken did). That said, I believe Ellison's accusers, and that he should be moved from his DNC post. The voters will decide to put him in office or not.

How about Gil Cisneros? He will likely lose, but I don't see the Dem party going after him.

I'm not sure what's going on there. He is apparently alibied at the time he supposedly propositioned Falzi.

https://www.politifact.com/california/article/2018/sep/19/gil-cisneros-california-sex-campaign-cash/

Claims that Hillary threatened Bill's accusers were also largely ignored during Hillary's campaigns.

I read Broaddick's account of the meeting with Hillary, and can understand why she thought Hillary might have been referring to Bill's attack, but Hillary also might not have been referring to that. Hillary seems to have believe Bill's protestations of innocence, otherwise. Love can leave you blinded.

Dems have been better about sexual harrassment type claims, but they are far from perfect.

Agreed.

If there was not photographic evidence, I am not sure Franken would have resigned.

Hard to say.

 

[One Brow]

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.

I recall how concerned all the Republicans were with Gingrich's affairs (to list one of many, many examples) until Bill Clinton came along.

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.

I think Broaddick misunderstood what Hillary said to her. Considering all the other false charges the Clintons were facing (Foster, Whitewater, etc.) and the effects of love, Hillary probably believed Bill's protestations of innocence for a long time.

Plus there's Keith Ellison.

Accused of domestic abuse, not predatory behavior, has asked for an investigation. I agree he should not have a DNC position.

And Weinstein, who was getting away with awful behavior for years and years

Not a politician, currently has no career at all.