Poor Kavanaugh wants to run for SC judge

afraid to fly refuse to fly

I am going to shock you all with my ability to read minds and predict the future.

After the testimony today of Dr. Ford and Mr. Kavanaugh...

1. EhBeth, Izzy, Region Philbus, Neptune, and Sturgis all think that Dr. Ford was completely credible.

2. Izzy has something insulting to say about people who doubt Dr. Ford. EhBeth will be in righteous approval (but won't say so herself).

3. Neptune agrees with Izzy, and has some broad statements about men in general. She will post a couple of articles about it from liberal blogs.

4. Finn and Mysteryman will notice inconsistencies in Dr. Ford;s testimony and will talk about due process.

5. And I will point out what a disgusting partisan spectacle this is and smugly point out that both sides are putting ideology above facts.

6. Not a single person will change their mind in any way... although everyone will point out how the testimony of today made their certainty even more certain, and the stupidity and deplorableness of the other side more clear.

Those are my predictions.... now let's see how I do.

You have no idea how I think. Shut the **** up.

There were more than inconsistencies, she is flat out lying.
After listening to her and watching her, I don't believe a word she said.

Also, what did Sheila Jackson-Lee pass to one of Dr Fords lawyers?

I predict that you found Dr. Ford completely credible. I think I know exactly how think. Am I wrong?

I am giving myself one point for MysteryMan.

Even this late in the game, I'm having trouble believing either of them.

I should mention I haven't seen any part of the hearing.

In Kavanaugh's opening statement he not only proclaimed his innocence, he also appeared to be bucking for sainthood.

When pressed to answer whether he would request an FBI investigation into the matter he grew extremely flustered almost breaking down into tears, and then was rescued by Grassley, but he never did answer the question directly.

Nobody yet has asked Kavanaugh whether he would submit to a polygraph.

So you can 'predict' the past? Wow!



Would you repeat this in something which resembles English?




In other words, slow down max.

I have not reached a conclusion. For the most part she seemed credible; but, how am I to know?

Inconsistencies may have seemed to arise; however, more than 30 years after a traumatic incident it can be difficult to be precise on each and every point. Especially when it's matter of sexual assault and grossly inappropriate behaviors which one would rather forget. (Yes, I know of which I write)



Really?! Well gosh golly Jean Dixon I knew that would be happening at some time here.


How?
A)You do the smug thing whenever you begin to get miffed.

B)You get a kick out of using and attributing everything to your old standby, ideology.


I am surprised though max, you failed to mention two things about me.

1)that I would toss a sarcastic comment at you (then again, it is me, so no surprise I suppose)

2)while traveling in your Mr.Peabody Wayback machine you didn't notice or mention how supportive I was towards Robert Bork several years back.

He is one angry ass, because he is getting caught in his bullshit.

I love how every time someone asks about the yearbook and references to him drinking he goes into a litany of being at the top of his class and in the football and basketball teams. I wonder if that works when you get pulled over and the cop asks if you’ve been drinking?

“Officer I was number one in my high school class.”

The thought crossed my mind (as they occasionally do), if back in '87 Bob Bork had been approved for the SC, this Kavanaugh mess might well have been avoided.

How so? After Bork was refused, Anthony Kennedy was brought in and that's the spot Kavanaugh is pushing for.

It is indeed highly improbable that the Senate would convict Trump if for no other reason than neither party wants to be the only one with a President who has been kicked out of office, and barring Trump actually being seen on TV shooting someone on 5th Avenue, all Republicans will rally around him to prevent it.

Right now the score is roughly tied: Two impeachments for the Dems and one resignation for the GOP.

However, as much as the Dems would do well to heed your advice, considering how far left their party is being driven by its base, if they should take back both the Senate and the House, I can very easily imagine them tilting at that particular windmill.

If they win back the House (very possible and some think probable) I believe it's a foregone conclusion that they will impeach Trump. First of all their base will expect and demand it, and secondly they are looking for payback after Clinton.

Conventional wisdom is that the House is where the tempestuous children hang out causing tumult; while the Senate is where the adults in Congress tend to the nation's longer range interests. The Kavanaugh hearings, at least in terms of the Democratic Senators, certainly belie this notion. I think however that the distinction is driven more by the length of a Representative's term and the size and nature of their voting districts than any material difference in temperments. Afterall, a great many Senators began their careers in the House.

With districts drawn by gerrymandering to favor one party or the other, Representatives are even more motivated by the partisan desires of the respective bases of their parties. It's hardly a stunning insight to recognize that Senators must attract a broader pool of voters. At the same time two years is a very short time for a politician to make a name for him or herself, and the re-election campaign begins the next day after an election victory. There is every reason to believe that The Resistance will be going strong for the next two years and the Dems Reps up for re-election in 2020 cannot afford to be seen as missing the tide if they hope to come back for another 2 years. If given the opportunity to impeach Trump they will have to take it and they will likely take it quite happily.

Senators with their 6 year terms can more easily afford a wait-and-see approach, however 2020 brings a presidential election too and right now there are at least 5 Dem Senators (including Sanders) who are already running for their party's nomination. If a Democrat House impeaches Trump in 2019 these five will want to be seen as the champion of The Resistance. We have already seen this with the hyper-aggressive antics of Harris and Booker on the Senate Judicial Committee and Gillibrand's attempt to attach herself to the anti-Kavanaugh attack squad. Senators Coons, Hirono and Bluementhal have been vying with Harris & Booker to be seen as the Lead Assassin and may have up their sleeves a notion of running themselves. Should Trump be impeached in 2019 any Democrat Senator with an eye on 2020 will be motivated to lead an effort for conviction in the Senate. Should the effort pick up any momentum it's hard to imagine a Democrate Senator willing to stand up to the Resistance Mob's bloodlust ( Manchin, Donnelly, McCaskill and Heitkamp will all either be gone or in place with 5 years of breathing room in 2019)

Again, you are almost certainly correct that barring a totally unforseen Red Tidal Wave in November, any attempt to convict Trump in the Senate will fail, but the short term motivation and possible reward for enough Dem Senators might drive an effort that is doomed to failure in its ostensible goal, but could nevertheless provide, even in defeat, essential Resistance bonafides for 2020 hopefuls.

Corey Booker might have another chance for a "I am Spartacus" moment.

It is quite telling that Democrats are willing to embrace this slimeball of a man and his client's preposterous and vile accusations. It's almost as if Avenatti said to his client and himself: "The only way we can get anyone to believe this outrageous claim is to load on as much salacious and insane nonsense that people will assume it must be true because no one would make up such a crazy story."

If we believe his client's claim we must believe that for a 3 year (81,82 & 83) period a college-aged woman attended at least 10 parties held by High School students who didn't attend her High School, AND....

Although she witnessed, in 1981, boys lining up to take their place on a rape-train assaulting one or more doped girls she and other girls continued to attend at least nine more parties, AND...

Although she, herself, was a victim of the rape-train in 1982, she and either the same or a fresh crop of HS girls continued to attend at least eight more parties, AND...

During this three year period, not one victim or witness ever reported this heinous activity to their parents, their teachers, their pastors, or the police. Not one, AND...

During this three year period, the heinous activity was kept secret from all of the other kids at the High School attended by all the partygoers except for Avenatti's client who was an adult.

If you believe this claim you are either an ignorant and gullible fool, or are so desperate to see Kavanaugh defeated and ruined you will embrace the most vile and insane of lies.

Either way it doesn't speak well of you.

Just what is the reprehensible conduct on the Kavanaugh Side?

What are you talking about?

The FBI has conducted six background investigations of Kavanaugh over the years and never came up with a whiff of this claim. You trust them now to find something?

You are crazy if you don't think that the Media and Democrats have been investigating the hell out of the claim

What witness is not being allowed to testify?

I suspect you mean Judge. He hasn't asked to testify and he has already given a sworn statement on the claim. Do you really think he wants to appear before a wolfpack of Democrat Senators bound and determined to destroy him in the mission to destroy Kavanaugh, but Grassley won't allow him to?

Do you really think they’re looking for revenge because of the Clinton impeachment?

How many of those in the house were even considering being in politics 20 years ago?

I don’t think Clinton has anything to do with current plans.

My scoring in this grand partisan game...

- The Democrats landed blows with the question of why Kavanaugh isn't calling for an FBI investigation.

- The Republicans landed blows by pointing out Diane Feinstein's apparent political ploy of withholding the letter. And, showing that Democrats were dead set to stop the nomination by any means possible before the Dr. Ford accusations surfaced.

- The American people lost by both sides playing political games. The Senate is supposed to be a respectable institution.

Juanita Broadrick, the woman who says that Clinton raped her and has a credible story, was in the room.

It looks like Collins and Manchin are going to vote for Kavanaugh (Murkowski is still unknown). I think this is a done deal.

You think Collins has made up her mind?