Kavanaugh Drama Risks Driving Moderates, Women Away From GOP

  • Thread starter Thread starter robertmidwest
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
meltzerboy2 said:
Do we know for sure, according to her testimony, why Dr. Ford suddenly had a change of heart and came forward to testify against Kavanaugh? I recall she said it was her civic duty despite her fears. But what exactly does this mean? In other words, does this mean it was all right for her to see Kavanaugh continue his political career as a judge and remain a law professor and a coach so long as he did not gain access to the SCOTUS?
Click to expand...
That is as good as any reason for thinking her motives were political. The Dems show no qualms about legislating from the bench when they can’t move Congress and the Senate on legislation. That is the reason they are so adamant about retaining this one seat. The fact that Ford didn’t move against Kavanaugh before this strongly suggests political motivation.
 
Last edited:
dvdjs said:
40.png
HarryStotle:
Reviling job applicants In the media
Click to expand...
I am not a fanof the media circus. But in that regard it should be noted Kavanaugh hired an entrenched Republican media consulting firm to manage his candidacy. I think that information regarding a caniddate should be made public, so that Senators can be properly held accountable for their votes.
Click to expand...
As should all the consultation between Ford and all Dem affiliated organizations, lawyers and operatives be turned in, if you want to be completely fair.
 
pnewton said:
I am satisfied that this matter will be investigated (or the nomination not approved).
Click to expand...
I’ve rewatched his last appearance before Congress and I think his outbursts against the Democratic party during his testimony have permanently tainted his candidacy. He could have expressed his anger over the delay in allowing him to refute the allegations, calmly, but he crossed that line by also claiming this was all orchestrated by those upset with the 2016 election results. Given his comments, I find it impossible to believe that he could be impartial when dealing with politically volatile issues on SCOTUS. Perhaps he is innocent of the allegations, perhaps not. Unfortunately, as a result of the allegations, he outed himself as unabashedly partisan.
 
Sorry, that was meant tongue and cheek. The juxtaposition of anger and calm just made me smile. Which probably means I’m not a capable, mature adult.
 
gracepoole said:
It’s actually not that difficult. I assume any capable adult can calmly express anger. It’s a mark of maturity.
Click to expand...
I find that varies significantly by the observer.

Some may think you gave an appropriate emotional response to the situation while others disagree.

I work in a group home and there are times it really helps to express some emotion when you are communicating with kids. It’s a nebulous and fine line on how much to show.
 
Last edited:
Oh, I don’t know. I’m sooooo over the calm measured tones of people who advocate to keep abortion legal.

I’d much rather be called a whited sepulchre or chased out of a temple than have to put up with fake calm anger.
 
Unfortunately? As a result of the allegations? So because he chose to lash out at those playing a con game with his nomination, he is now tainted? How many years has he sat on a judicial bench handing out justice. He has every right to be angry at these allegations and the delay.
 
He had to come out swinging.

I’m surprised at those who are not as alarmed at the smears against a good man and harming his family. We will find out for sure in a few days.

Likewise, it looks like the acts of some Democrats are going to be investigated as to their legality.

Oh, someone accuses one of “train rape” to deny one a confirmation, no big deal, keep your composure. It appears, the FBI is already bringing up charges in this manner.

Death threats have been said and let’s make it clear, in this environment, they seem to come from both sides… and I hope anyone making threats, harassing at restaurants and so on are prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

But nothing to be too upset about (end sarcasm).

Ford’s lawyers apparently, are going to be investigated by the Washington DC Bar Association and may well be barred.

Unethical behavior, no, nothing to get upset about here.

Naturally, I’m not comparing Brett Kavanaugh to the persona of Jesus Christ, I’d say we all should not forget that Christ was upset and showed his anger at the money changers as well.

Oh, that Judge Kavanaugh claimed that the Democrats were orchestrating this to deny him being on the Supreme Court? Why, how could he ever come up with that?

I totally agree with him, this has been an orchestrated attack by the Democrats to deny a qualified nominee to the Supreme Court, through vicious accusations. Can it be so wrong to be angered with the truth?

More and more is falling apart with Ms. Ford’s statements.

This is the ugliest conduct I have ever seen in Washington DC and by a major modern party. It is evil that should be stood up to.

“The only thing needed for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing”.
 
Last edited:
gracepoole said:
40.png
humbleseeker:
40.png
gracepoole:
expressed his anger over the delay in allowing him to refute the allegations, calmly
Click to expand...
How is this possible🤨
Click to expand...
It’s actually not that difficult. I assume any capable adult can calmly express anger. It’s a mark of maturity.
Click to expand...
Or a mark of apathy, it all depends upon what is at stake. Anger unhinged is one thing, but righteous anger at injustice and evil is another thing altogether.

Jesus expressed anger at the money changers in the Temple by flipping over their tables and driving them out. Was that a sign of “immaturity” on his part? Of incapacity?

Here is a man who has seen his family threatened, his reputation shredded, and his character reviled.

USA Today suggested he should never coach girls basketball ever again because he shouldn’t be trusted around girls.

www.nationalreview.com

USA Today Amends Article Saying Kavanaugh Shouldn’t Coach Basketball | National Review

The paper wrote, “he should stay off basketball courts for now when kids are around.”
www.nationalreview.com www.nationalreview.com

Bill Maher attacked Kavanaugh through his daughter, effectively calling them both liars.

http://conservativeangle.com/bill-m...d-his-daughter-in-the-most-vile-way-possible/

Newspapers and websites have sided with a lawyer of known ill-repute and reported as credible, stories that are not only implausible but ridiculous on their face.

And you don’t suppose Kavanaugh should show just a little anger?

I would have questioned his sincerity if he hadn’t.

Notice he hasn’t even hinted at vindictiveness or “getting them back,” which would have put into question his sense of justice.

You could just as easily have speculated that had Kavanaugh remained stoic through it all that he was just “storing it up” so as to not reveal his hand when he attains the seat and causes his accusers mayhem. Damned if he does, damned if he don’t.

Again, I’m not believing it, because no matter what Kavanaugh does, someone somewhere will find find some pretext or angle to prognosticate what he will do in the future.

The chief priests used Jesus’ outburst in the Temple as evidence of sedition against Rome and their authority.

Just not finding your divining of Kavanaugh’s emotional brew to be very convincing. More like reading a tempest in a teacup, which pretty much sums up the entire Dem strategy here: find the smallest “lingering uncertainty” and turn it into moral outrage at what might “very likely” be the case no matter how vanishingly small that uncertainty remains.
 
gracepoole said:
Unfortunately, as a result of the allegations, he outed himself as unabashedly partisan.
Click to expand...
Unabashedly partisan on his own behalf, which he should and would be…

…if he is innocent.

Ergo, according to your assessment, he “outed himself” as innocent.
 
dvdjs said:
Not lawyers, but otherwise, I agree.
Click to expand...
There is, apparently, a crime fraud exception to attorney-client confidentiality.
While discussions about a client’s past crimes would typically be privileged, communications about a current or future crime involving a lawyer and client are not covered. There’s a similar exception for fraud, which more typically arises in civil rather than criminal contexts; together, these are referred to as the crime fraud exception.

Weisberg said the exception could be invoked at various stages: from the investigative phase, through a grand jury or at trial.
Click to expand...
Source: PolitiFact | A closer look at attorney-client privilege after raid of Donald Trump’s lawyer

Funny how progressive leftist moves seem to always come back to haunt them.
 
HarryStotle said:
There is, apparently, a crime fraud exception to attorney-client confidentiality.
Click to expand...
Sure. If there is a good prima facie case that there is criminal fraud involved with the lawyer as participants n the fraud, then the lawyers too.

Michael Cohen comes to mind.
 
Last edited:
dvdjs said:
40.png
HarryStotle:
There is, apparently, a crime fraud exception to attorney-client confidentiality.
Click to expand...
Sure. If there is a good prima facie case that there is criminal fraud involved with the lawyer as participants n the fraud, then the lawyers too.

Michael Cohen comes to mind.
Click to expand...
If the lawyers knew her story was contrived and still helped Ford to fabricate it along with the scant supporting evidence – the polygraph, for example – that would be a good case for fraud.

Glad to see you agree with my point that it all should be open to scrutiny by the FBI, including the possibility of criminal fraud by her lawyers if there is evidence for that.
 
Ford took a polygraph, so why not Kavanaugh? He’d been asked to. And why did Ford ask for an FBI investigation but Kavanaugh resisted?
 
Kavanaugh has had 6 FBI investigations so far. How many do we need? 100?

Ted Bundy passed a polygraph exam. Too, the circumstances of Dr. Ford’s polygraph are somewhat in question. It consists of something like 2 questions asked in a general way.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top