Jump to content

Brett Kavanaugh Confirmation Thread


Hugo Stiglitz

Recommended Posts

Just now, MixtyMotions said:

I did not.  There is the core question of whether the attackers would have caused billions in damages had they not been stopped.  I don't know the answer to that and I'll guess they probably would not have. 

 

I said exactly what I said.  I stand behind what I said.  You get billions in damages or police dogs and fire hoses.  It's a hypothetical.  Choose.  I did not defend Birmingham unless the facts fit my hypothetical.

If those are the only choices in the hypothetical, you choose the billions in damages. Because the other choice is exactly how it looks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, MixtyMotions said:

I did not.  There is the core question of whether the attackers would have caused billions in damages had they not been stopped.  I don't know the answer to that and I'll guess they probably would not have. 

 

I said exactly what I said.  I stand behind what I said.  You get billions in damages or police dogs and fire hoses.  It's a hypothetical.  Choose.  I did not defend Birmingham unless the facts fit my hypothetical.

It's damages. That isn't even a choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

Come on, man. I recalled that off the top of my head after 7 years. I think I get an A+ and significant versus billions is an insignificant difference. See what I did there?

And I did not know exactly what I said when I said you were getting close but I knew what my beliefs were (and are) and I knew that it overstated my position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, MixtyMotions said:

I did not.  There is the core question of whether the attackers would have caused billions in damages had they not been stopped.  I don't know the answer to that and I'll guess they probably would not have. 

 

I said exactly what I said.  I stand behind what I said.  You get billions in damages or police dogs and fire hoses.  It's a hypothetical.  Choose.  I did not defend Birmingham unless the facts fit my hypothetical.

i think it is a fairly easy calculus - you take the property damage over the potentially large loss of life in case your gestapo tactics spark a panic and a trampling incident.

then you take stock of why the fuck that many people got out in the streets in anger/protest and try to, i dunno, fucking fix that problem.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

We can't have white property owners having to go to the trouble of dealing with insurance companies when there are black people to hose down and terrify.

We just can't have it.

How about we just can't have wholesale property destruction.

and no the ends do NOT justify the means.  Sometimes the best course is to contain and limit the damage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Incredulity said:

So are you good with pepper spray, gas and flash bangs?

or just Burn Baby, Burn.

When it's a police force consisting solely of members of the ruling racial majority using said methods against a group consisting solely of members of a historically oppressed racial minority?

No, I'm not down with that, either. It's a really bad look for the oppressors.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, David Dennison said:

When it's a police force consisting solely of members of the ruling racial majority using said methods against a group consisting solely of members of a historically oppressed racial minority?

No, I'm not down with that, either. It's a really bad look for the oppressors.

Can you please provide the appropriate racial mix of police force to be able to try and stop property damage?  

Does it match of demographics of the country??? city??? the three blocks south of main and west of second?????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

When it's a police force consisting solely of members of the ruling racial majority using said methods against a group consisting solely of members of a historically oppressed racial minority?

No, I'm not down with that, either. It's a really bad look for the oppressors.

Nobody is really oppressed in 2018.  Peoplecare disadvantaged in poorer areas but that is not oppression. 

  • Like 1
  • Fuck You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, sachick said:

They need to ask if they think the assault happened by someone other than Kavanaugh. I've heard a lot rhetoric that they believe her but she's just confused as to who did it.

Yeah I don't think there is any confusion.  It's just a bunch of people trying to be respectful.  Only a very small group of people know whether or not she is telling the truth. 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If an admiral is faced with the choice of sending somebody to die or losing a nuclear aircraft carrier, you don't think they let the carrier go down do you?  They have these decisions pre-thought too.  And here we're talking about loss of life.  And I'd say sending a man into a room to die saving a ship is worse than scaring the shit out of him with dogs or spraying him with a fire hose.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, MixtyMotions said:

If an admiral is faced with the choice of sending somebody to die or losing a nuclear aircraft carrier, you don't think they let the carrier go down do you?  They have these decisions pre-thought too.  And here we're talking about loss of life.  And I'd say sending a man into a room to die saving a ship is worse than scaring the shit out of him with dogs or spraying him with a fire hose.

You couldn't find a worse analogy if you tried.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

These motherfuckers. For the sake of our country, the bastards in the senate need to tell all the special interest groups to fuck off and pick a moderate. Agree on this and have each others backs.

I know that is crazy and naive but I wish they would. This nominee is toxic and fighting for or against is causing a lot of damage. Fuck. Where are the heroes willing to step up against the big money groups? 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This is squarely an attempt by the WH/Senate GOP to shield Brett from lying to the FBI.  It's one thing to lie to a GOP controlled SJC - they willingly accept his lying to the senate if helps him pass through.  FBI not so much.  Crazy to think that Trump tapping Brett could lead to him losing his job, getting disbarred, and potentially serving time for a felony.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, MixtyMotions said:

If an admiral is faced with the choice of sending somebody to die or losing a nuclear aircraft carrier, you don't think they let the carrier go down do you?  They have these decisions pre-thought too.  And here we're talking about loss of life.  And I'd say sending a man into a room to die saving a ship is worse than scaring the shit out of him with dogs or spraying him with a fire hose.

 

 

Where were the fire-hoses and dogs here?!

 

gettyimages-830696202_wide-746123f6d22cd

Edited by happyfunball
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I gotta say, I'm surprised it took so long for the Rs to push the nutty/slutty narrative on Dr. Ford - almost a week after her testimony. What I'm not surprised at is that, as usual, Trump broke the dam and let all the filth flow out.

Edited by Bat Guano
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Bat Guano said:

I gotta say, I'm surprised it took so long for the Rs to push the nutty/slutty narrative on Dr. Ford - almost a week after her testimony. What I'm not surprised at is that, as usual, Trump broke the dam and let all the filth flow out.

"Basket of deplorables" was the most accurate thing said by any candidate in the 2016 campaign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Bat Guano said:

I gotta say, I'm surprised it took so long for the Rs to push the nutty/slutty narrative on Dr. Ford - almost a week after her testimony. What I'm not surprised at is that, as usual, Trump broke the dam and let all the filth flow out.

I posted soon after the circus hearing that I was already seeing far-right accusations that Ford had over 60 sexual partners before entering college and was thus mentally ill.  That one seemed to never fully take hold, which tacitly validates my bullshit assessment.  (Not that there is any correlation between sexual activity and mental health in the first place, but the # seemed way out of whack.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I did not.  There is the core question of whether the attackers would have caused billions in damages had they not been stopped.  I don't know the answer to that and I'll guess they probably would not have. 
 
I said exactly what I said.  I stand behind what I said.  You get billions in damages or police dogs and fire hoses.  It's a hypothetical.  Choose.  I did not defend Birmingham unless the facts fit my hypothetical.


Wait, so hypothetically, you would choose dogs and hoses over billions of dollars in damage?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, scottsins said:

 


Wait, so hypothetically, you would choose dogs and hoses over billions of dollars in damage?

 

You betcha.

 

The Navy will choose a pilot's life over an F-18, but will choose a nuclear aircraft carrier over a machinist's life. 

We trade money and problems all the time.  We decide how much to spend on safety.

There are many examples of choosing the lesser evil.  Many people resist making these hard decisions.  I find the subject fascinating.

Edited by MixtyMotions
Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

So I take it you, too, are simply going to ignore that the left didn't take that "do ANYTHING" approach to Gorsuch's nomination? Why is it that Gorsuch didn't face what Kavanaugh faced.

Neil Gorsuch literally went to the same high school that Brett Kavanaugh attended and graduated only two years after him. If there were some sort of conspiratorial Democratic effort to attack any Trump nominee they could have used basically the same people to attack Gorsuch for made-up high school behavior that they used for Kavanaugh. If they had all these Georgetown Prep people just waiting for a Trump nominee then they could have pulled them out then.

The conspiracy theory makes zero sense whatsoever.

It's not a conspiracy theory to say the democrats are openly trying to oppose this nominee prior to him being named.  Those signs didn't print themselves. 

I think the democrats did see this as an opportunity to hopefully get a less conservative judge nominated after the midterms.  They weren't going to be able to obstruct for 2 years with Gorsuch but maybe the could do it for 3 months?  Maybe..  if they can get far enough into the nomination process and then find a way to throw a wrench in it. They were practically begging people to come forward.  Before the second accuser surfaced, Michael Moore was pleading for someone to come forward and stop this evil man.

The scenario where she is lying doesn't require that she was ready, willing or coordinating with the Dems at the time of Gorsuch either.  To a lot of people, this nomination is about Roe and that's practically a religion to some on the West coast.  Stop him by any means necessary and become a Hero.  As others have pointed out, she made $1 million in a day thanks to her gofundme so she had an incentive.  I'm sure she will get a book deal and all that jazz too now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Amobie said:

It's not a conspiracy theory to say the democrats are openly trying to oppose this nominee prior to him being named.  Those signs didn't print themselves. 

I think the democrats did see this as an opportunity to hopefully get a less conservative judge nominated after the midterms.  They weren't going to be able to obstruct for 2 years with Gorsuch but maybe the could do it for 3 months?  Maybe..  if they can get far enough into the nomination process and then find a way to throw a wrench in it. They were practically begging people to come forward.  Before the second accuser surfaced, Michael Moore was pleading for someone to come forward and stop this evil man.

The scenario where she is lying doesn't require that she was ready, willing or coordinating with the Dems at the time of Gorsuch either.  To a lot of people, this nomination is about Roe and that's practically a religion to some on the West coast.  Stop him by any means necessary and become a Hero.  As others have pointed out, she made $1 million in a day thanks to her gofundme so she had an incentive.  I'm sure she will get a book deal and all that jazz too now.

Democrats can't do anything to stop Brett Kavanaugh from becoming a Supreme Court justice. 

They literally cannot stop it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

BRETT KAVANAUGH AND THE INFORMATION TERRORISTS TRYING TO RESHAPE AMERICA

https://www.wired.com/story/information-terrorists-trying-to-reshape-america/

In case you missed it, this was a really good but long read on the digital insurgency infrastructure that’s been built over the years going back to Gamergate. 

 

Kavanaugh-BC-688737964-w.jpg

Edited by Hugo Stiglitz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

Democrats can't do anything to stop Brett Kavanaugh from becoming a Supreme Court justice. 

They literally cannot stop it.

They tried to delay it to be after the midterms.  They just needed Kavanaugh to drop his name from consideration and did their best to turn his name to trash.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I should probably make this a poll, but let's go informal.  Let's talk about Julie Swetnick's allegation and the letter her former boyfriend sent to the committee.

A key aspect of the effort to discredit Swetnick is the implication that she was just a slut, someone who enjoyed having sex with one boy after another, Train-style (capital "T" because I hate the band).  Let's take that at face value -- she was a slut, with questionable morals.  Wouldn't it stand to reason that any boy involved would also be guilty of the same moral turpitude?  Wouldn't that indict Brett Kavanaugh, as opposed to the line of thought that "well maybe, but she was a slut and those boys were just being boys"?

Ultimately, what I'm getting at is this:  would you think any less of a SCOTUS nominee if he was known to have participated in running a train on a girl?

 

Edited by jimmyjazz
Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, MixtyMotions said:

I did not.  There is the core question of whether the attackers would have caused billions in damages had they not been stopped.  I don't know the answer to that and I'll guess they probably would not have. 

 

I said exactly what I said.  I stand behind what I said.  You get billions in damages or police dogs and fire hoses.  It's a hypothetical.  Choose.  I did not defend Birmingham unless the facts fit my hypothetical.

You know what else would save billions?  Slaves.  That's not even a hypothetical.  

You're a god damned piece of shit.  GFY

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...