They are doing it again. Nothing is taking place in Florida but finishing the vote count. CNN is now reporting Trump and Scott (like Kemp) have no actual evidence to back up these claims. At the moment, Rick Scott is still in the lead, yet for some reason believes all ballot counting should be suspended. This is unreal, but predictable.
I predicted this would happen after the mid-terms over a year ago. That Trump would claim the results were illegitimate. Here, he and Scott are doing so before we even have a result. Kemp did it before the votes even took place. All they have to do is SAY it, and all of a sudden it is taken seriously. Law enforcement does not agree:
Trump continues to insist the election is being stolen, even though both Republican candidates are still in the lead. This is dangerous stuff, and EXACTLY what I said would happen if Democrats had a big night in 2018.
Good faith during the Kavanaugh hearings is not jumping to conclusions based on absolutely nothing because it fits your politics to do so. It is waiting for proper evidence as befits any accusation made to anybody.
I really can't respect any democrat politicians after they made it perfectly clear they will ruin the lives of anyone in their way based on lies, rumors, and hearsay.
@WarChiefZeke I would give Kavanaugh the benefit of the doubt, but HIS OWN ACTIONS AND CONDUCT are what convinced me of his guilt. Refusing to answer questions at the hearing, his blatant perjury, and its been pointed out that his rage filled reaction is TEXTBOOK how assaulters react when confronted by their victims. In addition to this, witnesses were REFUSED from testifying, and an investigation was likewise refused (pretty odd for someone who is innocent to not want something that would prove his innocence), and when an investigation was finally greenlighted (because one of the judges refused to vote without one), again WITNESSESS WERE NOT ALLOWED OT TESTIFY. To reduce all of this down to "conclusions based on nothing" as well as "lies, rumors, and hearsay" smakcs of blind partisanship.
Good faith during the Kavanaugh hearings is not jumping to conclusions based on absolutely nothing because it fits your politics to do so. It is waiting for proper evidence as befits any accusation made to anybody.
I really can't respect any democrat politicians after they made it perfectly clear they will ruin the lives of anyone in their way based on lies, rumors, and hearsay.
"Anyone in their way" in regards to the Supreme Court would certainly apply to Roberts, Alito, and Gorsuch. No sexual assault allegations were made against any of them. No allegations were made against them at all aside from a brief, inconsequential story about Alito belonging to an all-white fraternity. If your hypothesis is correct, why did the previous 3 Republican nominees not face similar allegations??
@WarChiefZeke I would give Kavanaugh the benefit of the doubt, but HIS OWN ACTIONS AND CONDUCT are what convinced me of his guilt. Refusing to answer questions at the hearing, his blatant perjury, and its been pointed out that his rage filled reaction is TEXTBOOK how assaulters react when confronted by their victims. In addition to this, witnesses were REFUSED from testifying, and an investigation was likewise refused (pretty odd for someone who is innocent to not want something that would prove his innocence), and when an investigation was finally greenlighted (because one of the judges refused to vote without one), again WITNESSESS WERE NOT ALLOWED OT TESTIFY. To reduce all of this down to "conclusions based on nothing" as well as "lies, rumors, and hearsay" smakcs of blind partisanship.
"Rage filled reactions" is subjective rhetoric, devoid of meaning. His reaction to an accusation of evidence of guilt of the accusation seems like confirmation bias and proves not one single thing about the event. All witnesses gave their sworn statements. If that is incorrect by all means correct me. No clear perjury occurred. Some of the people involved in the perjury claims who would know for sure deny that interpretation and defend his character.
None of this is evidence of his guilt, at all. None that a reasonable person would convict on, especially given the hyper partisan ulterior motives of those who have sensationalized it.
Good faith during the Kavanaugh hearings is not jumping to conclusions based on absolutely nothing because it fits your politics to do so. It is waiting for proper evidence as befits any accusation made to anybody.
I really can't respect any democrat politicians after they made it perfectly clear they will ruin the lives of anyone in their way based on lies, rumors, and hearsay.
"Anyone in their way" in regards to the Supreme Court would certainly apply to Roberts, Alito, and Gorsuch. No sexual assault allegations were made against any of them. No allegations were made against them at all aside from a brief, inconsequential story about Alito belonging to an all-white fraternity. If your hypothesis is correct, why did the previous 3 Republican nominees not face similar allegations??
Gorusch is the only one occurring post-Democrats feeling cheated and was not close enough to the midterms for a possible long term Senate confirmation block if they got lucky in the midterms. The context is obvious.
For the record, hearsay is not "unverified testimony" or "he said, she said." Hearsay refers specifically to second-hand testimony. An example of hearsay would be David saying, "My cousin Bill said he saw John commit the crime." Bill can testify against John, since Bill claimed to be a witness, but since David only heard that second-hand, David's claim constitutes hearsay and therefore inadmissible in court.
Regarding Democratic conduct during the Kavanaugh hearings: if you actually go back and watch the hearings, you will not find a single Democratic politician throwing out accusations, harassing Kavanaugh, or even raising their voice. Contrast this with Kavanaugh and Lindsey Graham, both of which spent many minutes accusing Democrats of persecuting him, while constantly raising their voices. Watch the Democrats speaking at that hearing and you will find every single one of them speaking in calm tones throughout, using polite language.
I'd like good faith answers to these valid questions. But I don't think we'll get them. Partisan blindness.
Could Kavanaugh have done these things? There seems to be more proof than not that he did engage in this type of behavior. Including years of documentation from Dr. Ford and his own calendar which he lied about in front of the boofing congresses devil's triangle.
This is the same argument we'll get once Whitaker cripples the Mueller probe and releases a report so narrowly focused that it ignores Trump's finances - which are where his main criminality is. It will say Trump was not guilty of speeding down the highway on May 4th, 2015. Trump will use that to declare himself innocent.
Then we will have all the ill informed and partisan viewpoints that "SEEE HE DID NOTHING WROOOONGG" arguments when clearly he HAS done things wrong - including firing Comey because of the Russia thing and firing Sessions because of the Russia thing. He is actively obstructing justice and rigging his investigation to ensure it can be used as propaganda to clear himself.
Good faith during the Kavanaugh hearings is not jumping to conclusions based on absolutely nothing because it fits your politics to do so. It is waiting for proper evidence as befits any accusation made to anybody.
I really can't respect any democrat politicians after they made it perfectly clear they will ruin the lives of anyone in their way based on lies, rumors, and hearsay.
Good faith would be not with holding evidence for everyone to make a informed decision. Something that didn't happen as countless documents were withheld from his time in office.
Good faith would be to make sure there are actual hearings for nominations that are being brought forward when a position is available on the Supreme Court.
Good faith during the Kavanaugh hearings is not jumping to conclusions based on absolutely nothing because it fits your politics to do so. It is waiting for proper evidence as befits any accusation made to anybody.
I really can't respect any democrat politicians after they made it perfectly clear they will ruin the lives of anyone in their way based on lies, rumors, and hearsay.
"Anyone in their way" in regards to the Supreme Court would certainly apply to Roberts, Alito, and Gorsuch. No sexual assault allegations were made against any of them. No allegations were made against them at all aside from a brief, inconsequential story about Alito belonging to an all-white fraternity. If your hypothesis is correct, why did the previous 3 Republican nominees not face similar allegations??
Gorusch is the only one occurring post-Democrats feeling cheated and was not close enough to the midterms for a possible long term Senate confirmation block if they got lucky in the midterms. The context is obvious.
So the theory is that the Democrats, sometime between the nomination of Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, decided to hatch an elaborate plot to accuse the next Supreme Court nominee of sexual assault?? And not only did they decide to put this plan into action, but they found a woman who both a.) had mentioned it to her therapist years beforehand and b.) was willing to testify under oath under threat of perjury and (if recent news accounts are any indication) completely destroy her own life to the point where she has had to move 4 times since the story broke for her own safety?? Just how dedicated to left-wing causes are we suggesting Christine Blassey Ford is?? Because what you are suggesting is the kind of self-sacrificing zealotry that would usually be found in someone like a suicide bomber.
Was she paid?? If so, who paid her?? If she wasn't paid, what is the motivation to completely uproot the lives of your husband and children?? To make a political point that in the end made no difference?? And that Ford herself feared would be the likely outcome (that she would not be believed and he would get confirmed anyway)?? Why would anyone ever do this?? What is her motive??
Good faith during the Kavanaugh hearings is not jumping to conclusions based on absolutely nothing because it fits your politics to do so. It is waiting for proper evidence as befits any accusation made to anybody.
I really can't respect any democrat politicians after they made it perfectly clear they will ruin the lives of anyone in their way based on lies, rumors, and hearsay.
"Anyone in their way" in regards to the Supreme Court would certainly apply to Roberts, Alito, and Gorsuch. No sexual assault allegations were made against any of them. No allegations were made against them at all aside from a brief, inconsequential story about Alito belonging to an all-white fraternity. If your hypothesis is correct, why did the previous 3 Republican nominees not face similar allegations??
Gorusch is the only one occurring post-Democrats feeling cheated and was not close enough to the midterms for a possible long term Senate confirmation block if they got lucky in the midterms. The context is obvious.
So the theory is that the Democrats, sometime between the nomination of Gorsuch and Kavanaugh, decided to hatch an elaborate plot to accuse the next Supreme Court nominee of sexual assault?? And not only did they decide to put this plan into action, but they found a woman who both a.) had mentioned it to her therapist years beforehand and b.) was willing to testify under oath under threat of perjury and (if recent news accounts are any indication) completely destroy her own life to the point where she has had to move 4 times since the story broke for her own safety?? Just how dedicated to left-wing causes are we suggesting Christine Blassey Ford is?? Because what you are suggesting is the kind of self-sacrificing zealotry that would usually be found in someone like a suicide bomber.
Was she paid?? If so, who paid her?? If she wasn't paid, what is the motivation to completely uproot the lives of your husband and children?? To make a political point that in the end made no difference in the first place?? And that Ford herself feared would be the likely outcome (that she would not be believed and he would get confirmed anyway)??
You don't need an elaborate plot. You just need unethical lawyers and unethical journalists.
Good faith during the Kavanaugh hearings is not jumping to conclusions based on absolutely nothing because it fits your politics to do so. It is waiting for proper evidence as befits any accusation made to anybody.
I really can't respect any democrat politicians after they made it perfectly clear they will ruin the lives of anyone in their way based on lies, rumors, and hearsay.
You claim that they acted that way, but then the Republicans said they'd do the same thing, which is tantamount to a tantrum by a three year old. How does that make them any better? And no, the Democrats didn't "jump to conclusions". They wanted to investigate the claims, to which the Republicans acted like they were being skinned alive. Kavanaugh acted like an entitled three year old, cried and screamed while providing no proof, and additionally, lied under oath, as was backed up by people who knew him, saying he had a drinking problem, drank to blackout and was aggressive and nasty when drunk. He flat-out didn't answer questions, answering with non-sequiturs like "I like Beer."
I can't respect any Republican who saw that little display of temper and unwillingness to answer questions posed to him and still vote to confirm his nomination.
you will not find a single Democratic politician throwing out accusations
I mean, if you ignore the fact that they are in all in agreement with the unfounded accusation that he is guilty of sexual assault then I guess this is true.
They would not be all in agreement with such an unfounded accusation if the political wings were reversed. This is also true of the Republicans. To deny this is to deny reality.
We all want due process to our friends. You should grant it to the people you don't like, too.
@WarChiefZeke I would give Kavanaugh the benefit of the doubt, but HIS OWN ACTIONS AND CONDUCT are what convinced me of his guilt. Refusing to answer questions at the hearing, his blatant perjury, and its been pointed out that his rage filled reaction is TEXTBOOK how assaulters react when confronted by their victims. In addition to this, witnesses were REFUSED from testifying, and an investigation was likewise refused (pretty odd for someone who is innocent to not want something that would prove his innocence), and when an investigation was finally greenlighted (because one of the judges refused to vote without one), again WITNESSESS WERE NOT ALLOWED OT TESTIFY. To reduce all of this down to "conclusions based on nothing" as well as "lies, rumors, and hearsay" smakcs of blind partisanship.
"Rage filled reactions" is subjective rhetoric, devoid of meaning. His reaction to an accusation of evidence of guilt of the accusation seems like confirmation bias and proves not one single thing about the event. All witnesses gave their sworn statements. If that is incorrect by all means correct me. No clear perjury occurred. Some of the people involved in the perjury claims who would know for sure deny that interpretation and defend his character.
"All witnesses"? What about Mark Judge? Did he testify? No. What about Deborah Ramirez? Did she testify? No. What about Brett Kavanaugh's college roommate? I didn't see him in the room. Did he testify? No. And, except for Mark Judge, who was unwilling to testify, all the others *wanted* to testify, but were not allowed to. How does this in any way count as "all witnesses"?
None of this is evidence of his guilt, at all. None that a reasonable person would convict on, especially given the hyper partisan ulterior motives of those who have sensationalized it.
The preponderance of the evidence is that Brett Kavanaugh perjured himself under oath. Reason enough to deny him the post.
you will not find a single Democratic politician throwing out accusations
I mean, if you ignore the fact that they are in all in agreement with the unfounded accusation that he is guilty of sexual assault then I guess this is true.
They would not be all in agreement with such an unfounded accusation if the political wings were reversed. This is also true of the Republicans. To deny this is to deny reality.
We all want due process to our friends. You should grant it to the people you don't like, too.
I would LOVE to see you try to explain how exactly the accusations are unfounded.
Normally I would say, it doesn't make them better and they aren't any better, but I just can't remember the last time Republicans went on a spree of false accusations in the attempt to finger an innocent person with monstrous crimes of the worst kind. I'm open to suggestions of course.
you will not find a single Democratic politician throwing out accusations
I mean, if you ignore the fact that they are in all in agreement with the unfounded accusation that he is guilty of sexual assault then I guess this is true.
They would not be all in agreement with such an unfounded accusation if the political wings were reversed. This is also true of the Republicans. To deny this is to deny reality.
We all want due process to our friends. You should grant it to the people you don't like, too.
I would LOVE to see you try to explain how exactly the accusations are unfounded.
Well I start from this premise.
Accusations are unfounded until there is evidence to support them, and not just because the left- or the right, or anybody- wants it to be true.
you will not find a single Democratic politician throwing out accusations
I mean, if you ignore the fact that they are in all in agreement with the unfounded accusation that he is guilty of sexual assault then I guess this is true.
They would not be all in agreement with such an unfounded accusation if the political wings were reversed. This is also true of the Republicans. To deny this is to deny reality.
We all want due process to our friends. You should grant it to the people you don't like, too.
Not one Democratic senator thought he was fit for office even before the Ford allegations came to light.
To state that the unfounded accusation caused it false. It might have cemented their claims as Thaco pointed out.
Normally I would say, it doesn't make them better and they aren't any better, but I just can't remember the last time Republicans went on a spree of false accusations in the attempt to finger an innocent person with monstrous crimes of the worst kind. I'm open to suggestions of course.
What, you don't remember Hillary Clinton and Benghazi?
10 investigations into Benghazi and all that came out of it was "The Obama administration's White House and State Department actions before, during, and after the Benghazi terrorist attack on September 11, 2012, ranged from incompetence to deplorable political manipulation in the midst of an election season." However, immediately upon release of the Committee's report on November 21, 2014, the Associated Press reported that the Committee did not conclude that any "government official acted in bad faith or intentionally misled the American people."
That's all. Republican excoriated Hillary Clinton, but while she and the government may have made bad decisions, literally nothing came of it.
And if Kavanaugh counts, so does Hillary Clinton. She had no charges filed against her. How about them e-mails? Also investigated tirelessly. Also concluded she had done nothing wrong. No matter how much Republicans love to vilify her, she was never charged.
And if you complain about Hillary's e-mails, why are you not equally hot under the collar about Trump blabbing on his iPhone where he can be tapped by the Russians and Chinese? Isn't that far worse than Hillary and her e-mail server?
Yeah Benghazi totally slipped my mind. Don't know how I missed that one.
And now I know you're not being honest. Because what about Trump and his iPhone? He's been blabbing state secrets to his friends on it, and China and Russia have transcripts of those calls. Do you hear a single peep about that from Republicans?
Trump continues to take calls from his iPhone even after American spy agencies have determined that China and Russia are listening
Somehow lost in all of this (despite it having been mentioned yesterday) is that this was *not* a criminal trial. You do *not* have the right to due process in a job interview. You are *not* "innocent until proven guilty" in a job interview, because a job interview cannot determine if you are innocent or guilty.
Every single attempt to frame the conversation as if this was held in a court of law is either misleading or disingenuous.
Somehow lost in all of this (despite it having been mentioned yesterday) is that this was *not* a criminal trial. You do *not* have the right to due process in a job interview. You are *not* "innocent until proven guilty" in a job interview, because a job interview cannot determine if you are innocent or guilty.
Every single attempt to frame the conversation as if this was held in a court of law is either misleading or disingenuous.
I'm not sure it qualifies as disingenuous, but I agree it isn't remotely the correct metric and that the job interview analogy is the correct one.
you will not find a single Democratic politician throwing out accusations
I mean, if you ignore the fact that they are in all in agreement with the unfounded accusation that he is guilty of sexual assault then I guess this is true.
They would not be all in agreement with such an unfounded accusation if the political wings were reversed. This is also true of the Republicans. To deny this is to deny reality.
We all want due process to our friends. You should grant it to the people you don't like, too.
I would LOVE to see you try to explain how exactly the accusations are unfounded.
Well I start from this premise.
Accusations are unfounded until there is evidence to support them, and not just because the left- or the right, or anybody- wants it to be true.
Yeah, no evidence whatsoever. You know, except for multiple witnesses, therapy documentation from years ago, Kavanaugh's own calendar, his buddy's autobiography, the testimony of multiple classmates. Yup, nothing here whatsoever to indicate something is rotten.
There are no witnesses. Not that implicate Kavanaugh anyway. Not one witness claims this. I wasn't aware his own calendar had a spot for "sexually assault Ford" or that his buddies autobiography did either. None of his classmates testified that he sexually assaulted anyone and dozens of his classmates testified to his character.
Her therapy documentation was the only possible evidence that could be credible in this manner, and she refused to turn it over to the Senate multiple times. Refusing to hand over evidence was a disqualifying factor to Ellison's accuser, and I accept that, and so I don't see why that shouldn't be any different here.
I imagine she ultimately did have to end up presenting this evidence to the FBI, but the fact that the public never got a chance to look at it and the FBI dismissed it tells me something is rotten there.
Comments
Trump Personally Facilitated Hush Money Payments To Stormy Daniels And Karen McDougal: WSJ
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-wsj-payments-stormy-daniels-karen-mcdougal_us_5be5d3a4e4b0769d24cce81c?section=politics&ncid=tweetlnkushpmg00000016&fbclid=IwAR1VgjU2ffx7wH0HtE_J8exh5cImgAgRknMu_AiDMZTFs8D6SsUjoqvLB4YThey are doing it again. Nothing is taking place in Florida but finishing the vote count. CNN is now reporting Trump and Scott (like Kemp) have no actual evidence to back up these claims. At the moment, Rick Scott is still in the lead, yet for some reason believes all ballot counting should be suspended. This is unreal, but predictable.
I predicted this would happen after the mid-terms over a year ago. That Trump would claim the results were illegitimate. Here, he and Scott are doing so before we even have a result. Kemp did it before the votes even took place. All they have to do is SAY it, and all of a sudden it is taken seriously. Law enforcement does not agree:
https://www.politico.com/states/florida/story/2018/11/09/after-scott-requested-investigation-law-enforcement-says-no-voter-fraud-allegations-found-690552
Trump continues to insist the election is being stolen, even though both Republican candidates are still in the lead. This is dangerous stuff, and EXACTLY what I said would happen if Democrats had a big night in 2018.
I really can't respect any democrat politicians after they made it perfectly clear they will ruin the lives of anyone in their way based on lies, rumors, and hearsay.
None of this is evidence of his guilt, at all. None that a reasonable person would convict on, especially given the hyper partisan ulterior motives of those who have sensationalized it.
Regarding Democratic conduct during the Kavanaugh hearings: if you actually go back and watch the hearings, you will not find a single Democratic politician throwing out accusations, harassing Kavanaugh, or even raising their voice. Contrast this with Kavanaugh and Lindsey Graham, both of which spent many minutes accusing Democrats of persecuting him, while constantly raising their voices. Watch the Democrats speaking at that hearing and you will find every single one of them speaking in calm tones throughout, using polite language.
Could Kavanaugh have done these things? There seems to be more proof than not that he did engage in this type of behavior. Including years of documentation from Dr. Ford and his own calendar which he lied about in front of the boofing congresses devil's triangle.
This is the same argument we'll get once Whitaker cripples the Mueller probe and releases a report so narrowly focused that it ignores Trump's finances - which are where his main criminality is. It will say Trump was not guilty of speeding down the highway on May 4th, 2015. Trump will use that to declare himself innocent.
Then we will have all the ill informed and partisan viewpoints that "SEEE HE DID NOTHING WROOOONGG" arguments when clearly he HAS done things wrong - including firing Comey because of the Russia thing and firing Sessions because of the Russia thing. He is actively obstructing justice and rigging his investigation to ensure it can be used as propaganda to clear himself.
Good faith would be to make sure there are actual hearings for nominations that are being brought forward when a position is available on the Supreme Court.
Was she paid?? If so, who paid her?? If she wasn't paid, what is the motivation to completely uproot the lives of your husband and children?? To make a political point that in the end made no difference?? And that Ford herself feared would be the likely outcome (that she would not be believed and he would get confirmed anyway)?? Why would anyone ever do this?? What is her motive??
https://www.miamiherald.com/opinion/op-ed/article220917425.html
I can't respect any Republican who saw that little display of temper and unwillingness to answer questions posed to him and still vote to confirm his nomination.
They would not be all in agreement with such an unfounded accusation if the political wings were reversed. This is also true of the Republicans. To deny this is to deny reality.
We all want due process to our friends. You should grant it to the people you don't like, too.
Normally I would say, it doesn't make them better and they aren't any better, but I just can't remember the last time Republicans went on a spree of false accusations in the attempt to finger an innocent person with monstrous crimes of the worst kind. I'm open to suggestions of course.
Accusations are unfounded until there is evidence to support them, and not just because the left- or the right, or anybody- wants it to be true.
To state that the unfounded accusation caused it false. It might have cemented their claims as Thaco pointed out.
10 investigations into Benghazi and all that came out of it was "The Obama administration's White House and State Department actions before, during, and after the Benghazi terrorist attack on September 11, 2012, ranged from incompetence to deplorable political manipulation in the midst of an election season." However, immediately upon release of the Committee's report on November 21, 2014, the Associated Press reported that the Committee did not conclude that any "government official acted in bad faith or intentionally misled the American people."
That's all. Republican excoriated Hillary Clinton, but while she and the government may have made bad decisions, literally nothing came of it.
And if Kavanaugh counts, so does Hillary Clinton. She had no charges filed against her. How about them e-mails? Also investigated tirelessly. Also concluded she had done nothing wrong. No matter how much Republicans love to vilify her, she was never charged.
And if you complain about Hillary's e-mails, why are you not equally hot under the collar about Trump blabbing on his iPhone where he can be tapped by the Russians and Chinese? Isn't that far worse than Hillary and her e-mail server?
Trump continues to take calls from his iPhone even after American spy agencies have determined that China and Russia are listening
https://www.businessinsider.com/president-trump-continues-to-take-calls-from-his-iphone-2018-10When Trump Phones Friends, the Chinese and the Russians Listen and Learn
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/24/us/politics/trump-phone-security.htmlGee, do you think the Republicans who vilified Hillary over her e-mails and are silent on this might be biased?
Every single attempt to frame the conversation as if this was held in a court of law is either misleading or disingenuous.
Her therapy documentation was the only possible evidence that could be credible in this manner, and she refused to turn it over to the Senate multiple times. Refusing to hand over evidence was a disqualifying factor to Ellison's accuser, and I accept that, and so I don't see why that shouldn't be any different here.
I imagine she ultimately did have to end up presenting this evidence to the FBI, but the fact that the public never got a chance to look at it and the FBI dismissed it tells me something is rotten there.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/christine-blasey-ford-refuses-to-turn-over-therapy-notes-until-fbi-interviews-her