Hawaii senator Mazie Hirono on Kavanaugh

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

Well, That's good enough for me. When are we all gathering in the town square for the stoning?

So it comes down to Supreme Court appointment for life or Stoning.
Those are the choices?

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

So it comes down to Supreme Court appointment for life or Stoning.
Those are the choices?

certainly seems that way.

I mean its Guilty until proven Innocent in the court of public opinion

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

certainly seems that way.

I mean its Guilty until proven Innocent in the court of public opinion

Senator Horino was on TV last night, she said we "all need to believe her".

In other words, Senator Horino thinks we all "need" to ignore the Constitution, at least when a liberal women accuses a conservative man.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

If an unsubstantiated allegation is enough to derail his nomination, how will anyone ever get confirmed again? The opposition party will always get someone to make an allegation, and then where are we, Pete?

Not saying he shouldn't be confirmed but have an independent investigatative arm of the gov. (the FBI) do an investigation and have a fair hearing w/witnesses.

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Senator Horino was on TV last night, she said we "all need to believe her".

In other words, Senator Horino thinks we all "need" to ignore the Constitution, at least when a liberal women accuses a conservative man.

And Orrin Hatch said

“The judge who I know very, very well, is an honest man, said this didn’t happen,” Hatch said, according to The Hill.

Sounds like he has already made his mind up that K is innocent so the so called hearing will be a joke.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Not saying he shouldn't be confirmed but have an independent investigatative arm of the gov. (the FBI) do an investigation and have a fair hearing w/witnesses.



And Orrin Hatch said

“The judge who I know very, very well, is an honest man, said this didn’t happen,” Hatch said, according to The Hill.

Sounds like he has already made his mind up that K is innocent so the so called hearing will be a joke.

"have an independent investigatative arm of the gov. (the FBI) do an investigation and have a fair hearing w/witnesses."

I have no quarrel with that, but its very likely it will boil down to he said / she said. And the time to do this, as Senator Feinstein well knows, was when the FBI was already doing his background check. Paul, why do you suppose they didn't ask for the investigation then, in which case this would be behind us now?

"The judge who I know very, very well, is an honest man, said this didn’t happen,” Hatch said, according to The Hill."

He shouldn't be saying that, it's wrong for him to say that.

Now Paul, what do you think of Senator Horino, saying on TV that we "need to believe" Kavanaugh's accuser? She has also made up her mind ahead of time, which further contributes to the hearing being a joke.

I cannot possibly know what happened. But I'm pretty certain that the allegation will never be proven to any rational level of certainty, in which case no one should oppose his nomination based on this event.

I gotta hand it to the democrats, this is win-win. If they derail his nomination, and they re-take the senate, they can stop Trump from shifting the court to the right. If he gets confirmed, all of them will be shrieking right up until the midterms, that republicans have no empathy for victims of sexual assault. The only political risk, is that if this tactic (it's pretty underhanded) turns off voters in the key swing states. Sure it will increases the margin of victory in places where they would have won anyway, but does it help in WV and OH? We'll see.

Paul, why do you suppose that Senator Horino says we need to believe Kavanaugh';s accuser, but she's not saying we need to believe Keith Ellison's accuser? This kind of dirty fighting from the left is exactly why Trump got elected, and at times like this I thank God we have a POTUS who is more than wiling to take off the boxing gloves, and out on the brass knuckles, when his opponents do the same.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Paul, why do you suppose they didn't ask for the investigation then, in which case this would be behind us now?
prob. for some of the same reasons the Repubs. waited until the night before to release 17K?? pages of docs.


Now Paul, what do you think of Senator Horino, saying on TV that we "need to believe" Kavanaugh's accuser?

Politics - same as Hatch's statement.

Paul, why do you suppose that Senator Horino says we need to believe Kavanaugh';s accuser, but she's not saying we need to believe Keith Ellison's accuser? PoliticsThis kind of dirty fighting from the left is exactly why Trump got elected, and at times like this I thank God we have a POTUS who is more than wiling to take off the boxing gloves, and out on the brass knuckles, when his opponents do the same.

Both parties do it but you are so blinded that you think 1 party does it more than the other.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Both parties do it but you are so blinded that you think 1 party does it more than the other.

one party consistently takes it to all new levels of ick....

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Both parties do it but you are so blinded that you think 1 party does it more than the other.

Both parties do it, no question. Even in the age of Trump, I see no comparison in frequency. But I know I'm biased.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Both parties do it but you are so blinded that you think 1 party does it more than the other.

And sorry I didn't say it immediately, I respect your post (not the part calling me blind), it was uncommonly honest. Not uncommon for you, uncommon for all of us.

[wdmso]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

This kind of dirty fighting from the left is exactly why Trump got elected,

Your completely indoctrinated in rights proganga if you think

1 the dems fight dirty ( compared to the Republicans )

2 and thats what help elect Trump .


your detached from reality

[fishbones]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Your completely indoctrinated in rights proganga if you think

1 the dems fight dirty ( compared to the Republicans )

2 and thats what help elect Trump .


your detached from reality

If you’re going to accuse people of being detached from reality, it would help your argument if knew the difference between you’re and your. Most of us learned that in elementary school.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by wdmso

Your completely indoctrinated in rights proganga if you think

1 the dems fight dirty ( compared to the Republicans )

2 and thats what help elect Trump .


your detached from reality

OK. So what happens when liberal speakers give a speech on college campus - nothing. WHat happens when conservatives try to give a speech - a riot. Compare the tea party to Occupy Wall Street or Black Lives Matter. Look at this case.

Of course the left's habit of fighting dirty helped lead to Trump.

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Senator Horino was on TV last night, she said we "all need to believe her".

In other words, Senator Horino thinks we all "need" to ignore the Constitution, at least when a liberal women accuses a conservative man.

What does this have to do with the Constitution?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

What does this have to do with the Constitution?

Senator Horino said we "need to believe" the accuser, which necessarily means we need to disbelieve Kavanaugh, and deny him a SCOTUS seat, without any due process.

She is saying we should punish Kavanaugh without any due process.

I'll ask you Spence, and have fun with this question...why is Senator Horino saying we "need to believe" Kavanaugh's accuser, but she isn't saying we need to believe Keith Ellison's accuser?

Why would anyone who feels this disqualifies Kavanaugh, not feel that Keith Ellison should step down? Both men have been accused of domestic violence against women. One gets a pass form the left, one is presumed guilty from the left. How come?

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Senator Horino said we "need to believe" the accuser, which necessarily means we need to disbelieve Kavanaugh, and deny him a SCOTUS seat, without any due process.

She is saying we should punish Kavanaugh without any due process.

He's not being charged in a criminal court, I'm not sure how due process really applies in a legal sense in this case. I do think it's fair to ensure the allegation is properly looked into now that it's out in the open.

I'll ask you Spence, and have fun with this question...why is Senator Horino saying we "need to believe" Kavanaugh's accuser, but she isn't saying we need to believe Keith Ellison's accuser?

I'm not aware of anyone asking her about Ellison.

Why would anyone who feels this disqualifies Kavanaugh, not feel that Keith Ellison should step down? Both men have been accused of domestic violence against women. One gets a pass form the left, one is presumed guilty from the left. How come?

I think one difference here is that Ellison's accuser has undercut her own credibility by changing her story, offering evidence but refusing to produce it etc...

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

He's not being charged in a criminal court, I'm not sure how due process really applies in a legal sense in this case. I do think it's fair to ensure the allegation is properly looked into now that it's out in the open.


I'm not aware of anyone asking her about Ellison.


I think one difference here is that Ellison's accuser has undercut her own credibility by changing her story, offering evidence but refusing to produce it etc...

"I'm not aware of anyone asking her about Ellison."

Ahhhh, you dodging skills are second to none.

"Ellison's accuser has undercut her own credibility by changing her story"

Mrs Fords version that she is telling today, differs from what she told her therapist, so she is also apparently changing her story. She's having trouble remembering where and when it happened, isn't it possible she's misremembering the who as well? This is exactly why we have statutes of limitations.

[The Dad Fisherman]

Originally Posted by spence

What does this have to do with the Constitution?

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury,..... nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"

or we could "Just Believe Her"

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

"No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury,..... nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law"

or we could "Just Believe Her"

According to Horino, you "need to believe her". Or else...

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

What does this have to do with the Constitution?

you are right...the Supreme Court has nothing to do with the Constitution

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

So it comes down to Supreme Court appointment for life or Stoning.
Those are the choices?

they already stoned him in the hearing..this is the execution

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

So it comes down to Supreme Court appointment for life or Stoning.
Those are the choices?

If an unsubstantiated allegation is enough to derail his nomination, how will anyone ever get confirmed again? The opposition party will always get someone to make an allegation, and then where are we, Pete?