All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!(Part II)

[worstblogever]

And, Amanda Litman, the co-founder of "Run for Something" an advocacy group aimed at helping progressives running for office that notes on the day of and day after the Kavanaugh hearings, they had twenty times the number of people call in and sign up to volunteer for phone banking and canvassing for Democratic candidates around the country in 2018.

"The GOP has no idea what they have done."

[Raiders]

Let’s cornered all the GOP senators in an elevator and talk some sense into them.

[zinderel]

Let’s cornered all the GOP senators in an elevator and talk some sense into them.

Careful there...some right wing commentaters might take that as calling for assault, like they did when Auntie Maxine called on her constituents to keep making politicians publicly uncomfortable by confronting them in restaurants and demanding accountability.

[InformationGeek]

Look at that man do a hard right turn.

Reporter: “Do you #BelieveHer?”

@LindseyGrahamSC: runs away

[Mister Mets]

Yes. Kavanaugh is completely full of s*** about that. Because Dr. Ford didn't start telling people about her assault YEARS ago as part of any sort of "revenge scheme" about what happened YEARS after she started seeking counseling about it.

It's even more stupid to claim "left-wing opposition groups" are spending millions of dollars to slander him. Do you know how many times I've seen anti-Kavanaugh ads? ZERO. Do you know how many ads I've seen attacking Ford, defending Kavanaugh, and calling for him to be confirmed? Dozens. How many Supreme Court nominees went on Fox News during their process to get to misrepresent themselves in an interview and to only contradict their testimony in the Senate days later? But it's the LEFT doing all the conspiracy stuff, eh, Mets?



You can almost hear a flushing noise to signify the last vestiges of credibility going down the toilet.

Kavanaugh has not claimed that Ford is making things up, or lying.

At the hearing, he said he believed that someone may have sexually assaulted her, but it wasn't him.

This onslaught of last-minute allegations does not ring true. I’m not questioning that Dr. Ford may have been sexually assaulted by some person in some place at some time. But I have never done this. To her or to anyone. That’s not who I am. It is not who I was. I am innocent of this charge.

I intend no ill will to Dr. Ford and her family. The other night, Ashley and my daughter, Liza, said their prayers. And little Liza — all of 10 years old — said to Ashley, “We should pray for the woman.” It’s a lot of wisdom from a 10-year old. We mean — we mean no ill will.

On the topic of ad spending, the group Demand Justice did promise to spend $700,000 in spending on ads based on Christine Blasey Ford's accusation. It was part of what the group said was a five million dollar effort.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.10654e6a8ff9

Your anecdotal evidence isn't proof of lies.

Yes. The only people who think that asking for a full investigation into allegations of rape made by credible claimants and witnesses is a result of "pent-up anger about President Trump and the 2016 election" or "revenge on behalf of the Clintons. and millions of dollars in money from outside left-wing opposition groups" are right wing conspiracists.

Literally no one who isn't in that bubble, or it's orbit, thinks those are reasonable theories. I mean...'revenge on behalf of the Clintons'...why do you people always seem to think we regard the Clintons - who are, in these fantasies, almost always and without any proof, portrayed as being some Game of Thrones style manipulative masterminds of Lannisterian proportions - with the same reverence and your party holds Trump? The left hold our people accountable when they fuck up. The right does not. Your party openly plots and schemes to change rules and break them if necessary, to get what they want, no matter who gets hurt.

Democrats had the information on the allegation in late July, so if providing time for an investigation was a priority they had over a month before the scheduled vote. They could have gotten the accusation to the FBI when they did their first background check.

I don't think it's outrageous to suggest that Democrats may be responding differently to this than they otherwise would, because they're upset about facets of the 2016 election.

Here is the thing - at this point, Kavanaugh is tainted. Even if he is found 100% percent, unimpeachably innocent of all charges, which is highly unlikely, given what we know both of his specific past and mindset, and the general ongoing history of 'conservative' men being caught literally with their pants down because laws only apply to the poor, he BOTCHED his job interview, perjured himself both before this hearing, and at this hearing. Lost all sense of decorum (while his accuser calmly, but emotionally, remained on topic and answered questions clearly, honestly, and without bluster under the hateful glares of a BUNCH of old white men who make no bones about the fact that they think she's a lying whore in the employ of the Clintons - and probably space Jews, if any of them are Alex Jones fans... - trying to get in the way of their Great Work...), and acted EXACTLY like a guilty man would, going through the stages of anger, rage, denial, blubbering, denial, deflection, stubborn refusal to answer questions, and conspiracy theorizing. He's burnt.

If Republicans want a conservative on the court, so be it. I don't care, if they nominate an actual conservative. They could at least do the bare minimum to pick a qualified candidate who doesn't have bugaboos like 'attempted rape and possible forced gang bangs and roofie cocktails' in his closet. But they won't, because a genuine conservative won't rabidly, blindly defend wannabe God Emperor Trump against impeachment. Nor will he be a guaranteed vote against Roe. Those are the reasons your party were pushing so hard for Kavanaugh, and we ALL know it, including you. Not to 'get a conservative on the court', not to get the most qualified candidate to fill the seat (they proved they don't care about qualifications with their 400 day obstruction of Merrick Garland), but to show their base how they 'stick it to liberal cucks', and deny 'sluts who won't keep their knees together' access to birth control and bodily autonomy, and prevent God's Chosen One from facing prosecution for his actions during the campaign and during his presidency so far. All because us bloodthirsty lie-berals didn't stop the Clintons from killing Frank Rich while they ran a child sex ring out of a pizza joint basement and plotted to install a Kenyan Muslim as the Antichrist and working with Obama Bin Obama to plot Benghazi and 9/11, probably....

News flash: 'sticking it to liberals', stripping rights away from people, perjuring yourself in a hearing about accusations as heinous as those we've heard and ranting about conspiracy theories so insane even Glenn Beck is like, 'woah, come on, guys...' are not conservative traits, by any measure. They are extremist, and reactionary, and vile, sure, but...not conservative.

How would you expect an innocent man to act when accused of attempted rape, and gang rape as a high school student, or when the New Yorker posts a story about an allegation of wrongdoing in college by someone who wasn't sure about the memory, and didn't actually see him do it?

While there are crazy rightwing conspiracy theories, the uncorroborated gang bang and roofie cocktails accusation is on that level. It reflects poorly on anyone who takes it seriously, and considers it a valid complaint against Kavanaugh.

[WestPhillyPunisher]

Here is the thing - at this point, Kavanaugh is tainted. Even if he is found 100% percent, unimpeachably innocent of all charges, which is highly unlikely, given what we know both of his specific past and mindset, and the general ongoing history of 'conservative' men being caught literally with their pants down because laws only apply to the poor, he BOTCHED his job interview, perjured himself both before this hearing, and at this hearing. Lost all sense of decorum (while his accuser calmly, but emotionally, remained on topic and answered questions clearly, honestly, and without bluster under the hateful glares of a BUNCH of old white men who make no bones about the fact that they think she's a lying whore in the employ of the Clintons - and probably space Jews, if any of them are Alex Jones fans... - trying to get in the way of their Great Work...), and acted EXACTLY like a guilty man would, going through the stages of anger, rage, denial, blubbering, denial, deflection, stubborn refusal to answer questions, and conspiracy theorizing. He's burnt.

If Republicans want a conservative on the court, so be it. I don't care, if they nominate an actual conservative. They could at least do the bare minimum to pick a qualified candidate who doesn't have bugaboos like 'attempted rape and possible forced gang bangs and roofie cocktails' in his closet. But they won't, because a genuine conservative won't rabidly, blindly defend wannabe God Emperor Trump against impeachment. Nor will he be a guaranteed vote against Roe. Those are the reasons your party were pushing so hard for Kavanaugh, and we ALL know it, including you. Not to 'get a conservative on the court', not to get the most qualified candidate to fill the seat (they proved they don't care about qualifications with their 400 day obstruction of Merrick Garland), but to show their base how they 'stick it to liberal cucks', and deny 'sluts who won't keep their knees together' access to birth control and bodily autonomy, and prevent God's Chosen One from facing prosecution for his actions during the campaign and during his presidency so far. All because us bloodthirsty lie-berals didn't stop the Clintons from killing Frank Rich while they ran a child sex ring out of a pizza joint basement and plotted to install a Kenyan Muslim as the Antichrist and working with Obama Bin Obama to plot Benghazi and 9/11, probably....

News flash: 'sticking it to liberals', stripping rights away from people, perjuring yourself in a hearing about accusations as heinous as those we've heard and ranting about conspiracy theories so insane even Glenn Beck is like, 'woah, come on, guys...' are not conservative traits, by any measure. They are extremist, and reactionary, and vile, sure, but...not conservative.

Dammit! An eloquent, powerful post like that deserves a “like”! Times ten! Well said!

[worstblogever]

Kavanaugh has not claimed that Ford is making things up, or lying.

At the hearing, he said he believed that someone may have sexually assaulted her, but it wasn't him.

You're defending an accused rapist whose excuse is:



And you find that to be believable? When he's a demonstrated liar, and numerous sources, including Republican ones have come forward to say he's lying about being a blackout drunk.

Remind me to sell you a bridge in New York, if you're this much of a sucker.

[Mister Mets]

You're defending an accused rapist whose excuse is:



And you find that to be believable? When he's a demonstrated liar, and numerous sources, including Republican ones have come forward to say he's lying about being a blackout drunk.

Remind me to sell you a bridge in New York, if you're this much of a sucker.

No one's been able to demonstrate that he's been blackout drunk, or has a statement from him saying he was ever blackout drunk.

As for him being an alleged rapist, that allegation comes from someone whose claims seem pretty unlikely.

12 - I also witnessed efforts by Mark Judge, Brett Kavanaugh and others to cause girls to become inebriated and disoriented so they could then be "gang raped" in a side room or bedroom by a "train" of numerous boys. I have a firm recollection of seeing boys lined up outside rooms at many of these parties waiting for their "turn" with a girl inside the room. These boys included Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh.

13 - In approximately 1982, I became the victim of one of these "gang" or "train" rapes where Mark Judge and Brett Kavanaugh were present. Shortly after the incident, I shared what had transpired with at least two other people. During the incident, I was incapacitated without my consent and unable to fight off the boys raping me. I believe I was drugged using Quaaludes or something similar placed in what I was drinking.

An uncorroborated allegation of a group of high school kids committing open and habitual gang rape, made by someone who lacks any new information isn't proof of anything.

You made the claim that Kavanaugh suggested that Dr. Ford was lying, and knew that she wasn't telling the truth.

If you wish to suggest it's impossible for the victim of a crime to be mistaken on the identity of the assailant, that's a hard sell, and contrary to the arguments of the criminal justice reform movement.

[worstblogever]

You made the claim that Kavanaugh suggested that Dr. Ford was lying, and knew that she wasn't telling the truth.

If you wish to suggest it's impossible for the victim of a crime to be mistaken on the identity of the assailant, that's a hard sell, and contrary to the arguments of the criminal justice reform movement.

Dr. Ford says with "100% certainty" it was Kavanaugh.

He says it wasn't him.

That WOULD be calling her statements false, therefore he's calling her a liar.

You're going to slip a vertebrae twisting yourself in knots over your party's new poster-child for sexual assault, Mets.

[numberthirty]

You're defending an accused rapist whose excuse is:



And you find that to be believable? When he's a demonstrated liar, and numerous sources, including Republican ones have come forward to say he's lying about being a blackout drunk.

Remind me to sell you a bridge in New York, if you're this much of a sucker.

Serious question...

Have you ever heard of DNA evidence exonerating men who have been found guilty of rape and imprisoned?

While each case is it's own thing, the idea that "It wasn't me." hasn't actually wound up being the case many times is odd.

Which isn't to say it is not the case here. Just that it has indeed been the case many times.

[zinderel]

Democrats had the information on the allegation in late July, so if providing time for an investigation was a priority they had over a month before the scheduled vote. They could have gotten the accusation to the FBI when they did their first background check.

I don't think it's outrageous to suggest that Democrats may be responding differently to this than they otherwise would, because they're upset about facets of the 2016 election.

I think it is. They knew about the accusation back in July, you say. OK. So, should they have leapt on it and released the information before vetting it themselves? Should they have dragged Dr. Ford thorugh the public Hell she is going through now before they were ready to bring her forward? Lets say that a woman you know came to you and told you she had been raped 30 years ago by a man running for office. Would you immediately hold a press conference announcing the accusation, or would you want to make sure it stood up to scrutiny to avoid a potential embarrassment for your mother and a false accusation of rape that right wing nutters and mysogynists would NEVER LET GO OF EVER? Would you want her name dredged up by legions of blonde, blue-eyed Fox Newsmodels who seek the approval of the men they work for by crowing about how 'liberal women who accuse men of rape are lying whores, like <your woman friend's name>?'

How would you expect an innocent man to act when accused of attempted rape, and gang rape as a high school student, or when the New Yorker posts a story about an allegation of wrongdoing in college by someone who wasn't sure about the memory, and didn't actually see him do it?

While there are crazy rightwing conspiracy theories, the uncorroborated gang bang and roofie cocktails accusation is on that level. It reflects poorly on anyone who takes it seriously, and considers it a valid complaint against Kavanaugh.

I would expect an innocent man to act the way I would: I didn't do it, I demand a full investigation into the accusations, and I am confident that I will be exonerated, since, y'know...I didn't do it. I would not expect an innocent man - especially a supposedly 'conservative' judge, who is supposed to be an exemplar of decorum in the courtroom and worthy of taking a lifetime appointment to the highest, most prestigious court in the land - to devolve so quickly into a scowling, screaming, blubbering, hollering, conspiracy theory spouting wreck of a human being under the slightest pressure.

The woman who accused Kavanaugh of gang bangs, trains and roofies did so under oath, and has proven herself worthy of various security clearances that make her accusations worthy of taking seriously and investigating, even if the claims seem outlandish to you. To those of us who know women who were raped at parties, or who were brutalized by a man they thought they could trust, it isn't hard to believe her claims. Unless, of course, you think women lie for attention/to get famous/to avenge the Clintons.

[Malvolio]

Serious question...

Have you ever heard of DNA evidence exonerating men who have been found guilty of rape and imprisoned?

While each case is it's own thing, the idea that "It wasn't me." hasn't actually wound up being the case many times is odd.

Which isn't to say it is not the case here. Just that it has indeed been the case many times.

Yes, I have heard of DNA evidence exonerating men convicted of rape. To be honest, I don't think there would be enough evidence to convict Kavanaugh if he were on trial for rape in a criminal court. But he's not on trial for rape in a criminal court. He's been nominated to serve a lifetime term on the Supreme Court. And I think there is enough evidence to keep him off the Supreme Court.

[numberthirty]

Yes, I have heard of DNA evidence exonerating men convicted of rape. To be honest, I don't think there would be enough evidence to convict Kavanaugh if he were on trial for rape in a criminal court. But he's not on trial for rape in a criminal court. He's been nominated to serve a lifetime term on the Supreme Court. And I think there is enough evidence to keep him off the Supreme Court.

Agreed.

Just pointing out that the reasoning there is the equivalent of Pirro trying to dismiss the accusation out of hand because it is decades later.

[Gray Lensman]

From the political cartoon section.....







<Trigger Warning> No, seriously. I winced when I saw this one.





I have no idea how to spoiler tag an image, you have been warned as best I can.







fark_p_boHAH2EEG6biFAwl_wNmAJdEo.jpg

[Malvolio]

Some of the best political cartoons are also the most disturbing.