Donald Trump is the President Mark IV (Read Mod Warning in OP)

Pelvis

tretorn wrote: »

Its all very tedious at this stage.

Well you are free to log off and go outside.

aloyisious

tretorn wrote: »

How many women are they going to dig up every time Trump wants to appoint someone.

Its all very tedious at this stage.

Do you mean how many women are going to come forward voluntarily in public to face questioning in the senate as to what occurred in their past in relation to a man nominated by Don? Tedious, and the questioning of the Prof in the senate is only starting?

jooksavage

tretorn wrote: »

How many women are they going to dig up every time Trump wants to appoint someone.

Its all very tedious at this stage.

Really? What about Gorsuch? Where were all the allegations when Trump nominated him? Could it be, I dunno, that he didn't have a history of being abusive to women?

pixelburp

tretorn wrote: »

How many women are they going to dig up every time Trump wants to appoint someone.

Its all very tedious at this stage.

It didn't happen with Gorusch, in fact that appointment was basically unopposed. Nor were issues of sexual assault brought up with any other appointees, including Jess Sessions, Carson, Betsy DeVos etc. etc.

You realise all appointees are subject to the same nomination process?

Rjd2

Ross Douthat a NYT writer who is very much a religious conservative posted this not to long ago which got retweeted by plenty of conservatives including

https://twitter.com/DouthatNYT/status/1045322389935067136

I'd agree and anyone who watched that opening speech and thought "bollocks" is at best naive...and worse...

Stallingrad

If Kavanaugh gets through this I'll be amazed. She appears very credible, no woman would put herself through this is it was untrue.

The Reps and T have backed themselves so far into a corner though it is going to be massive climbdown.

Pelvis

This could have been organized better, if all republicans are giving their minutes to the prosecutor then just let her ask her questions in one block, rather than interrupting every 5 minutes.

robinph

Pelvis wrote: »

This could have been organized better, if all republicans are giving their minutes to the prosecutor then just let her ask her questions in one block, rather than interrupting every 5 minutes.

Wondered what was going on there with her being stopped half way through asking a question.

Corkblowin

Not today’s main interest - but Chris Christie’s account of the transition team is amazing - trump thinks they can organize the transition in 2 hours and thinks Christie is stealing his money by bringing in people to help with his administration - & at the end of if all their work is ignored!

One bit that was kind of glossed over is that Trump considered campaign funds as his own money - makes it almost certain he violated campaign finance law at some point.

‪ https://www.theguardian.com/news/2018/sep/27/this-guy-doesnt-know-anything-the-inside-story-of-trumps-shambolic-transition-team‬

tretorn

Is this more about stopping a conservative getting the nomination to the Supreme Court.

This woman appears to be a basket case.

Nothing sticks to Trump really in spite of the millions and millions of articles pointing out his human failing.

*Pussy grabbing*Yawns in boredom.

Sassygirl1999

seems to be lots of gaps in the memory of DR ford

jooksavage

I'm not 100% sure this strategy of having a female lawyer represent the Republican on the committee is going to pay off. It just seems weird and makes them look like they have no idea what empathy is. I mean, they clearly don't if the last few days are anything to go by, but this is almost putting a hat on it.

DrumSteve

tretorn wrote: »

Is this more about stopping a conservative getting the nomination to the Supreme Court.

This woman appears to be a basket case.

Nothing sticks to Trump really in spite of the millions and millions of articles pointing out his human failing.

*Pussy grabbing*Yawns in boredom.

Don't worry, someone might bite eventually.

Zubeneschamali

tretorn wrote: »

Describing someone as a pig is very insulting but thats ok because you are talking about a white middleaged male.

Trump is not middle aged, he is old.

tretorn

There should be a statute of limitation regarding accusations particularly when there is no independent witness.

Anyone who has corroborated her story may be biased, the whole world appears to agin Donald and a lot of what is printed about him is malicious. The media hate him and cant wait to succeed in having him expelled from office.

There isnt a shred of evidence to prove or disprove what happened or if anything happened between Ford and kauvanagh and a person is entitled to innocence unless proven guilty.

This doesnt apply in the court of social media though, men will never get a fair hearing there.

Calina

For every 1000 rapes that take place in the US, in 994 cases the rapist will go free.

And you suggest men don't get a fair hearing.

Rjd2

jooksavage wrote: »

I'm not 100% sure this strategy of having a female lawyer represent the Republican on the committee is going to pay off. It just seems weird and makes them look like they have no idea what empathy is. I mean, they clearly don't if the last few days are anything to go by, but this is almost putting a hat on it.

Mitchell is doing fine tbh. Its a bizarre process and Ford has been very creditable today.

Zubeneschamali

tretorn wrote: »

There should be a statute of limitation regarding accusations particularly when there is no independent witness.

How do you know there are no witnesses? Have the FBI looked for any?

frag420

tretorn wrote: »

There should be a statute of limitation regarding accusations particularly when there is no independent witness.

Anyone who has corroborated her story may be biased, the whole world appears to agin Donald and a lot of what is printed about him is malicious. The media hate him and cant wait to succeed in having him expelled from office.

There isnt a shred of evidence to prove or disprove what happened or if anything happened between Ford and kauvanagh and a person is entitled to innocence unless proven guilty.

This doesnt apply in the court of social media though, men will never get a fair hearing there.

In a court of law perhaps, however this is not a court of law as far as I am aware!

And sure if he is innocent then he has nothing to hide from an FBI investigation eh!?

pixelburp

tretorn wrote: »

There should be a statute of limitation regarding accusations particularly when there is no independent witness.

Anyone who has corroborated her story may be biased, the whole world appears to agin Donald and a lot of what is printed about him is malicious. The media hate him and cant wait to succeed in having him expelled from office.

There isnt a shred of evidence to prove or disprove what happened or if anything happened between Ford and kauvanagh and a person is entitled to innocence unless proven guilty.

This doesnt apply in the court of social media though, men will never get a fair hearing there.

The nomination process isn't a courtroom either; Kavaunagh isn't entitled to anything.

As for evidence, Ford is on record during therapy in 2012, it's there in black & white between her, her husband and counsellor. Another accuser has signed an affidavit. Predates Trump - you don't think it's a problem if a sitting judge - nevermind Supreme Court nomination - has a potential history of sexual assault? Forget Trump for a second.

Penn

Been dipping in and out of watching it, but heard Grassley say that the other accusations will be properly investigated.

The vote is still scheduled for tomorrow isn't it?

tretorn

There was no crime reported so why would the FBI look for witnesses. There is no crime scene and no evidence and no mention of any charcater defect with Kauvanagh until Trump proposed to appoint him to the Supreme court.

I presume Kauvanagh would have had to be vetted for previous roles, was there any stink previously.

Has anyone reported him to the authorities in the last decade.

This is a witch hunt that will be given maximum exposure by a media hostile to Trump.

Trump is lucky he can by pass the partisan media with twitter.

Whats a potential history of sex abuse, oh, sorry, you mean someone can sit in therapy feeling sorry for themselves and the therapist will find someone to blame so therapist can get paid. How can you have a potential history of sexual abuse, how can you have a potential history of anything.

Rjd2

Penn wrote: »

Been dipping in and out of watching it, but heard Grassley say that the other accusations will be properly investigated.

The vote is still scheduled for tomorrow isn't it?

Yep.

Zubeneschamali

frag420 wrote: »

In a court of law perhaps, however this is not a court of law as far as I am aware!

This is the equivalent of a job interview.

Would you hire someone that multiple women tell you is an abuser? A black-out drunk? Has lied under oath multiple times about both?

For a job which is one of just 9 lifetime positions?

Penn

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

This is the equivalent of a job interview.

Would you hire someone that multiple women tell you is an abuser? A black-out drunk? Has lied under oath multiple times about both?

For Trump and the Republicans, I think that just counts as "Experience".

Water John

Senior Republicans are saying this is slipping away. Extremely credible witness.
Today is a moment in time.

Akrasia

Sassygirl1999 wrote: »

seems to be lots of gaps in the memory of DR ford

Do you remember what you had for breakfast on the day you got your junior cert results?

This is how rape trials work, they paint the witness as unreliable by asking about the events leading up to and after the attack and poke holes in their answers implying that if she can't remember which bus she got home, she must not also be able to remember who sexually assaulted her

jooksavage

Reporting there now that Jeff Flake sat looking "pained" during Ford's testimony. Only 1 R needs to break and Kavanaugh is toast.

tretorn

Kauvanagh is happily married for years and his wife is happy to stand by him.

dont you think she knows her husband better than someone who remembers something in therapy thirty years after it happened.

Is there any evidence of her sobriety on the night, therapists like to have someone to blame and everyone, *sighs* hates Trump so lets see can we put woman and Kauvanagh in the same sentence.

tretorn

Akrasia wrote: »

Do you remember what you had for breakfast on the day you got your junior cert results?

This is how rape trials work, they paint the witness as unreliable by asking about the events leading up to and after the attack and poke holes in their answers implying that if she can't remember which bus she got home, she must not also be able to remember who sexually assaulted her

Ford isnt alleging she was raped though.

If I was accused of raping someone I would want the accuser questined in detail and would want craters poked in their answers.

Are you suggesting men should just take their prison sentence and ruined life so an accuser isnt upset.