My recollection is that McConnell simply said that the "paper trail was too long" implying that there were too many issues that could sidetrack the process. This was something that was reported shortly after the nomination was announced, but I don't recall the source.Lax Fidelis wrote:This question is addressed to those who have been closely following the nomination process. An article that I read earlier today stated that Mitch McConnell told Trump to not nominate Kavanaugh. Anyone know why Mitch recommended that?
As for OD ignoring the Senate leader's advice, what's new? A king doesn't need counselors when he's a very stable genius.
The Independent State Legislature Doctrine
-
- Posts: 1793
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 9:23 pm
Re: SCOTUS
Re: SCOTUS
Trump calls this a big con job but says he could be swayed.
“I don’t take responsibility at all.” —Donald J Trump
Re: SCOTUS
man... this has the feeling of Duke Lacrosse all over it.
Re: SCOTUS
This Swetnick woman seems like a complete whore. Just google her name and you can find she is promiscuous with lots of STDs lol.
Farfromgeneva is a sissy soy boy
-
- Posts: 34169
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm
Re: SCOTUS
This “case” has a crooked district attorney?tech37 wrote:man... this has the feeling of Duke Lacrosse all over it.
“I wish you would!”
Re: SCOTUS
just trying to be funny?...or too literal?Typical Lax Dad wrote:This “case” has a crooked district attorney?tech37 wrote:man... this has the feeling of Duke Lacrosse all over it.
-
- Posts: 8866
- Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm
Re: SCOTUS
What makes you say this?tech37 wrote:man... this has the feeling of Duke Lacrosse all over it.
Four accusers:
one of whom took the trouble to agree to testify before a Senate Committee, and
another who retained a lawyer and submitted a declaration.
What's the parallel tech, just the subject matter and the fact that we may never really know what the heck happened?
-
- Posts: 8866
- Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm
Re: SCOTUS
Just curious, if anyone knows: How did the Committee majority choose Mitchell?
-
- Posts: 34169
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 12:10 pm
Re: SCOTUS
Other than the subject, not sure how this is like the Duke case. There are people that are falsely accused fromtech37 wrote:just trying to be funny?...or too literal?Typical Lax Dad wrote:This “case” has a crooked district attorney?tech37 wrote:man... this has the feeling of Duke Lacrosse all over it.
Time to time. Did you see the articles about the girl from NJ that accused two college football players of “raping” her. Turned out to be false. But I am not of the opinion that most women lie about assault charges. I am all for investigating and clearing a person. Not doing a real investigation is just criminal. The FBI investigated the Anita Hill case in 4 Days. It’s not that complicated. Clear the man’s name.
“I wish you would!”
-
- Posts: 168
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 2:39 pm
Re: SCOTUS
The accuser at Duke wanted to punish the privileged preppy brats.
What the motive here? Why would Ford throw herself in front of this train?
If you believe it's to punish a guy who assaulted her years ago, well, then it proves he did it.
I certainly don't believe she is sacrificing her (until now) peaceful life in order to save the country from the reversal of Roe v Wade.
What the motive here? Why would Ford throw herself in front of this train?
If you believe it's to punish a guy who assaulted her years ago, well, then it proves he did it.
I certainly don't believe she is sacrificing her (until now) peaceful life in order to save the country from the reversal of Roe v Wade.
-
- Posts: 168
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 2:39 pm
Re: SCOTUS
Cause she has that motherly, non-threatening appeal.seacoaster wrote:Just curious, if anyone knows: How did the Committee majority choose Mitchell?
Or, no other decent DA who prosecutes sex crimes would have any part of it.
- MDlaxfan76
- Posts: 27106
- Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2018 5:40 pm
Re: SCOTUS
Let's hope that Mitchell surprises to the upside in how she handles this situation. If she looks to illuminate each account carefully, rather than act as an advocate for the R's intent to ram Kavanaugh through, then that would be helpful. If she simply acts as an inquisitor of Ford and a defender of Kavanaugh, her gender will not likely be a sufficient shield for the GOP Senators.seriously? wrote:Cause she has that motherly, non-threatening appeal.seacoaster wrote:Just curious, if anyone knows: How did the Committee majority choose Mitchell?
Or, no other decent DA who prosecutes sex crimes would have any part of it.
- youthathletics
- Posts: 15856
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 7:36 pm
Re: SCOTUS
Why is that a bad thing? It shows he has loyalty. If I tell you I saw your wife kissing another man, would you immediately divorce her?Trinity wrote:Trump calls this a big con job but says he could be swayed.
A fraudulent intent, however carefully concealed at the outset, will generally, in the end, betray itself.
~Livy
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” -Soren Kierkegaard
~Livy
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” -Soren Kierkegaard
-
- Posts: 8866
- Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2018 4:36 pm
Re: SCOTUS
Sorry, I meant how did they find Mitchell? Who recommended her? Were other folks in the running?
It just seems a little unusual to pick a sex crimes prosecutor to conduct a relatively balanced examination of two witnesses not involved in a criminal trial.
It just seems a little unusual to pick a sex crimes prosecutor to conduct a relatively balanced examination of two witnesses not involved in a criminal trial.
- youthathletics
- Posts: 15856
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 7:36 pm
Re: SCOTUS
Probably because the me too (bowel) movement will not disparage a women for asking questions of a sexual nature, much safer than old white men. At least the water will not get muddied post interview by saying men asking questions were insensitive and misogynistic.seacoaster wrote:Sorry, I meant how did they find Mitchell? Who recommended her? Were other folks in the running?
It just seems a little unusual to pick a sex crimes prosecutor to conduct a relatively balanced examination of two witnesses not involved in a criminal trial.
A fraudulent intent, however carefully concealed at the outset, will generally, in the end, betray itself.
~Livy
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” -Soren Kierkegaard
~Livy
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” -Soren Kierkegaard
Re: SCOTUS
Get your coffee and bagels fellas, show's about to begin. I hope BK goes down, believe he got away with a lot of stuff as a privileged prep and college boy but it's caught up with him. Too long ago to be held accountable now? Don't know, don't care. Had he been held accountable/called out back then would he be where he is now? Payback is a complain, eh?
Re: SCOTUS
Don't know why they picked her, but she has a bit of an issue surrounding her. Maricopa county had a problem in the prosecution of sex offenders. Joe Arpaio was clearly part of the problem. Some folks thought the DA (Mitchell) was as well. Others claim she was part of the solution. I don't know or have an opinion. I really don't think it matters (Mitchell being used) other than it illustrates the problem with the 11 dwarfs.seriously? wrote:Cause she has that motherly, non-threatening appeal.seacoaster wrote:Just curious, if anyone knows: How did the Committee majority choose Mitchell?
Or, no other decent DA who prosecutes sex crimes would have any part of it.
I think what is clear is that the Republicans are going to attempt to play the innocent till proven guilty gambit.
STAND AGAINST FASCISM
- youthathletics
- Posts: 15856
- Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2018 7:36 pm
Re: SCOTUS
As opposed to the Democrats who believe you are guilty until proven innocent. Come on man, you are better than that.jhu72 wrote:I think what is clear is that the Republicans are going to attempt to play the innocent till proven guilty gambit.
A fraudulent intent, however carefully concealed at the outset, will generally, in the end, betray itself.
~Livy
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” -Soren Kierkegaard
~Livy
“There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.” -Soren Kierkegaard
Re: SCOTUS
Interesting perspective. What I find interesting is that this would normally be the reaction of most of Trump's base (know you are not a Trump supporter). Elitist snob thinks he is above us, looking down. Clearly not what they are saying about him.DMac wrote:Get your coffee and bagels fellas, show's about to begin. I hope BK goes down, believe he got away with a lot of stuff as a privileged prep and college boy but it's caught up with him. Too long ago to be held accountable now? Don't know, don't care. Had he been held accountable/called out back then would he be where he is now? Payback is a complain, eh?
STAND AGAINST FASCISM