The Trump Presidency – 2016

[kingfc22]

Originally Posted by Lathum

It’s like the entire right has conveniently forgotten Merrick Garland exists.

Seriously. This whole shit show political BS would just end if we just put Garland on the bench and move on.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by tarcone

So no false accusations have ever hurt women in their fight against this terrible thing.

Who is out of tough?

And a woman speaking out and taking on one of the most powerful institutions on the land will do far more good.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by tarcone

You step into the public eye, you get that type of thing.

I have no dog in this fight, but I cannot really believe that she decided to come out 36 years after the incident happened. Where was she during the rest of his career?

And how did Kavanaugh make it through 6 FBI vettings and not even a sniff of this came out before?

First, the Fbi doesn't do in depth vetting.They collect statements. They do absolutely nothing to corrberate those statements. So if his general ackground check is clean and he doesn't bring these things up then they're not going to be checked. That's why people are pushing for an fbi investigation.

The rest of your post is the same out of touch shit that's spewed by older white people in regards to sexual harassment claims.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Because none of this is a trial. Due process means you get you get a fair and impartial trial when the state is seeking to deprive you life, liberty, or property. It does not apply in non trial instances.

"Due process is the legal requirement that the state must respect all legal rights that are owed to a person. Due process balances the power of law of the land and protects the individual person from it. When a government harms a person without following the exact course of the law, this constitutes a due process violation, which offends the rule of law. "Notice and opportunity to be heard are fundamental to due process of law."

When the committee did not give him his right to a hearing the day after the accusations came out they violated his rights. He was harmed by the government by the government letting it hang out there for 10 days.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by Lathum

And a woman speaking out and taking on one of the most powerful institutions on the land will do far more good.

Not if she is lying.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by tarcone

You step into the public eye, you get that type of thing.

I have no dog in this fight, but I cannot really believe that she decided to come out 36 years after the incident happened. Where was she during the rest of his career?

And how did Kavanaugh make it through 6 FBI vettings and not even a sniff of this came out before?

I find fewer things more disgusting than when an old white man puts himself in the shoes of a woman or minority then tells them how they should have handled a situation.

[Brian Swartz]

Originally Posted by kingfc22

This whole shit show political BS would just end if we just put Garland on the bench and move on.

No it wouldn't. The Garland thing made it a lot worse, but the way we treat judicial nominations had been headed straight downhill for at least a solid decade prior to that, and given how much the well has been poisoned both before and since a lot more than Garland would need to change to fix it.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by Atocep

First, the Fbi doesn't do in depth vetting.They collect statements. They do absolutely nothing to corrberate those statements. So if his general ackground check is clean and he doesn't bring these things up then they're not going to be checked. That's why people are pushing for an fbi investigation.

The rest of your post is the same out of touch shit that's spewed by older white people in regards to sexual harassment claims.

How is it out of touch? Why does a womens word have more bearing than a mans?

Why is this woman, who is obviously a very successful woman, wait 36 years to cry "rape". Where was she 10 years ago? 20 ytears ago? 36 years ago?

The timing is so bad it is laughable.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by tarcone

"Due process is the legal requirement that the state must respect all legal rights that are owed to a person. Due process balances the power of law of the land and protects the individual person from it. When a government harms a person without following the exact course of the law, this constitutes a due process violation, which offends the rule of law. "Notice and opportunity to be heard are fundamental to due process of law."

When the committee did not give him his right to a hearing the day after the accusations came out they violated his rights. He was harmed by the government by the government letting it hang out there for 10 days.

You keep banging that drum. He has no rights to have a hearing after an accusation in respect to a job interview. What law requires that? What's the "exact course of the law" that was violated? I'm sure though, Cavanaugh will sue the Senate for not affording him a Senate hearing during a confirmation process.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by Lathum

I find fewer things more disgusting than when an old white man puts himself in the shoes of a woman or minority then tells them how they should have handled a situation.

I find fewer things more disgusting than a woman or minority lying to "bring down the white man".

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by tarcone

"Due process is the legal requirement that the state must respect all legal rights that are owed to a person. Due process balances the power of law of the land and protects the individual person from it. When a government harms a person without following the exact course of the law, this constitutes a due process violation, which offends the rule of law. "Notice and opportunity to be heard are fundamental to due process of law."

When the committee did not give him his right to a hearing the day after the accusations came out they violated his rights. He was harmed by the government by the government letting it hang out there for 10 days.

What was the harm? He may not get a promotion, but he'll still be a federal judge, he won't go to jail, there will be no financial penalties.

And look at what you're asking for. Do you expect a hearing with both Ford and Kavanaugh? You really think that would have helped his chances? Bullying her into testifying the next day or refusing to hear her would have been a terrible look. Or you could just have a hearing with him and ignore her entirely. That would also not look good.

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by tarcone

I find fewer things more disgusting than a woman or minority lying to "bring down the white man".

Baby, it's hard out there for pimps.

[Lathum]

Originally Posted by tarcone

How is it out of touch? Why does a womens word have more bearing than a mans?

Why is this woman, who is obviously a very successful woman, wait 36 years to cry "rape". Where was she 10 years ago? 20 ytears ago? 36 years ago?

The timing is so bad it is laughable.

You’re doing it again.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

You keep banging that drum. He has no rights to have a hearing after an accusation in respect to a job interview. What law requires that? What's the "exact course of the law" that was violated? I'm sure though, Cavanaugh will sue the Senate for not affording him a Senate hearing during a confirmation process.

"The interpretation of due process is sometimes expressed as a command that the government must not be unfair to the people or abuse them physically"

In this case the government was being unfair to Kavanaugh.

[ISiddiqui]

Originally Posted by tarcone

"The interpretation of due process is sometimes expressed as a command that the government must not be unfair to the people or abuse them physically"

In this case the government was being unfair to Kavanaugh.

Bullshit.

In that case, I guess Merrick Garland has a case against the Senate. He should sue too.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by tarcone

How is it out of touch? Why does a womens word have more bearing than a mans?

Why is this woman, who is obviously a very successful woman, wait 36 years to cry "rape". Where was she 10 years ago? 20 ytears ago? 36 years ago?

The timing is so bad it is laughable.

Yes, she brought this up in therapy 10 years ago in order to take down Kavanaugh in the future.

Have you ever actually known anyone that was a victim of sexual assault or read any of the studies on sexual assault and sexual assault victims?

My wife was sexually assaulted as a teenager by one of her dads best friends in the middle of the night in her own home. Her dad and no one else don't know anything about it for the reasons rapes commonly go unreported.

I suggest taking some time to read up on the subject because your viewpoint on this is out of touch, refuted by numerous studies, and is embarrassing in 2018.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Well, I am a lawyer. That's why I said he hasn't been coached very well here. Usually when trying to blunt an accusation if this were a court of law someone would be informed to be far more calmer than this. It just seems like throwing emotional crap against the wall to see if anything sticks.

Heh. Fair point, and I'll defer to your expertise. You have a professional standard and expectation for what successful preparation looks like.

Those of us not in the business of law tend to expect people to act more like regular people in stressful circumstances, though...and I tend to think that the court of public opinion is the one that's going to end up mattering most in this context.

(Not that I imagine it'll matter in the end. People pre-disposed to believing him will read his emotions as normal outrage from someone who has been falsely accused; other people will read them as a guilty person trying to deflect suspicion. I personally would have been more suspicious of him if he hadn't shown any emotion at all, because the content of his defense is based on 1) weird HS calendar journaling*, and 2) the 'I'm not racist because I have a black friend" defense of "I have daughters, coach girls' basketball, and have chick interns")

* I don't want to be too condemnatory here. "Weird" is contextual for your average male kid. Not sure that a prep school boy who ultimately ends up slotted for confirmation on the highest court in the land counts as "average".

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by Lathum

You’re doing it again.

Am I offending you because a woman waited until a man is being nominated to the supreme court.

Sorry about that. But waiting this long and absolutely killing his career and family is okay?

Why does a liar get afforded more rights than an honest person? Because the accuser is a woman?

[stevew]

Hummus and guacamole are far more disgusting.

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by tarcone

How is it out of touch? Why does a womens word have more bearing than a mans?

Why is this woman, who is obviously a very successful woman, wait 36 years to cry "rape". Where was she 10 years ago? 20 ytears ago? 36 years ago?

The timing is so bad it is laughable.

It's completely out of touch because Bill fucking Cosby was just put into jail based on the testimony of multiple women who waited years to tell their stories. Between Cosby and Kavenaugh one would have to completely dedicate themselves to avoid the thousands and thousands of articles published in that time that DIRECTLY answered the question of why a woman would wait to report a rape or abuse.

Do you really want to know why women wait so long to report sexual assault?Â* - Chicago Tribune

https://www.pcar.org/news/why-victims-wait-report

403 Forbidden

Why Sexual Assault Victims Wait to Speak Out

Since You Asked, Roy Moore, Here Is Why Victims Of Sexual Violence Wait Decades To Come Forward | HuffPost

https://moneyish.com/ish/why-were-st...we-can-change/

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/25/o...ault-rape.html

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Well, I am a lawyer. That's why I said he hasn't been coached very well here. Usually when trying to blunt an accusation if this were a court of law someone would be informed to be far more calmer than this. It just seems like throwing emotional crap against the wall to see if anything sticks.

Kind of like the left trying to take down an accomplished man.

[Drake]

Originally Posted by stevew

Hummus and guacamole are far more disgusting.

Please tell me you mean separately and independently here.

Mixing them together would be an abomination and definitely a case of "two awful tastes that taste even awfuller together".

[JPhillips]

Originally Posted by ISiddiqui

Bullshit.

In that case, I guess Merrick Garland has a case against the Senate. He should sue too.

And Hillary should sue over Lock Her up at Trump rallies.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by stevew

Hummus and guacamole are far more disgusting.

Hummus is okay. But I agree on the guacamole.

I heard one time that California had a big surplus of Avacaos, so the growers decided to do a media blitz on how good avacados were for you. Avacados started selling like hot cakes after that.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by JPhillips

And Hillary should sue over Lock Her up at Trump rallies.

Yep. Welcome to a sue happy society.

Never bad to be a lawyer in this country.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Kind of like the left trying to take down an accomplished man.

I had a feeling this was entirely political for you.

The right trying to take down an accomplished woman is cool though. She'd probably slash your tires anyway.

[Galaril]

Why can't the guy being lying?! It is always the woman is lying.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by Atocep

I had a feeling this was entirely political for you.

The right trying to take down an accomplished woman is cool though. She'd probably slash your tires anyway.

And this isnt political?

And no, I will not back a liar based on which side of the aisle they come.

And I think Im more afraid of you than a woman slashing my tires. You are the problem with this country today. As a friend of my calls it "the wussification of our country".

You are soft and afraid. You are a victim and play that to the hilt.

Life is hard and the government will not always be there to pick up your pieces. What will you do?

[Galaril]

Originally Posted by Atocep

I had a feeling this was entirely political for you.

The right trying to take down an accomplished woman is cool though. She'd probably slash your tires anyway.

Yeah but he doesn't have a horse in this race 😂.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by Galaril

Why can't the guy being lying?! It is always the woman is lying.

Perspective. And timing.

The funny thing, is if HRC would have nominated a person that was accused of sexual assault, this entire thread would be about how the republicans are pieces of shit and making things up.

[tarcone]

"You have interacted with professional women all your adult life and not one accusation."

Huh. What a great quote there.

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Perspective. And timing.

The funny thing, is if HRC would have nominated a person that was accused of sexual assault, this entire thread would be about how the republicans are pieces of shit and making things up.

Yes let's politicize sexual assault to show how in touch you are.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Yes let's politicize sexual assault to show how in touch you are.

I never claimed to be "in touch". Whatever your definition of that is, I obviously dont fit it.

I wasnt politicizing sexual assault. I was politicizing this thread.

You are the poster child for the left. Lie and name call and shout others down until they are gone or think like you do.

I think you are not "in touch".

[JPhillips]

Flatulence is Kavanaugh's go to explanation.

Sir, what did you mean by felching? - Flatulence.

Rusty trombone? - Flatulence.

Donkey punch? - Flatulence. When I was seventeen every word meant fart.

[tarcone]

I didnt know what a rusty trombone was until my 40s when a dude named his fantasy football team that.

[kingfc22]

Originally Posted by tarcone

You are the poster child for the left. Lie and name call and shout others down until they are gone or think like you do.

I think you are not "in touch".

So what would you call Lindsay Graham's performance then? Come on...

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by tarcone

I never claimed to be "in touch". Whatever your definition of that is, I obviously dont fit it.

I wasnt politicizing sexual assault. I was politicizing this thread.

You are the poster child for the left. Lie and name call and shout others down until they are gone or think like you do.

I think you are not "in touch".

Where have a lied? I have at least a basic understanding of sexual assault victims based on personal experiences and reading studies and statistics.

And, yes, you are 100% politicizing sexual assault in that post.

[sabotai]

Originally Posted by tarcone

You are the poster child for the left. Lie and name call and shout others down until they are gone or think like you do.

Accuses someone of name calling...

Originally Posted by tarcone

You are soft and afraid. You are a victim and play that to the hilt.

...literally right after calling them names.

I'm wondering if tarcone really suffers from this high level of cognitive dissonance or if he's just really drunk right now.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Where have a lied? I have at least a basic understanding of sexual assault victims based on personal experiences and reading studies and statistics.

And, yes, you are 100% politicizing sexual assault in that post.

Ah, So Im politicizing sexual assault. I guess Im the only one. bad on me.

Wait, The left isnt politicizing sexual assault? No they are just being good citizens.

What is the best weapon the left has right now? Oh yeah, sexual assault.

Quit being a hypocrite. Oh yeah, another trait held by people on the left.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by sabotai

Accuses someone of name calling...



...literally right after calling them names.

I'm wondering if tarcone really suffers from this high level of cognitive dissonance or if he's just really drunk right now.

You will never know.

Nor do you want to. I do not subscribe to your rhetoric, therefore I am wrong.

I know the game. Im just throwing wrenches.

[sabotai]

I guess this is the part where someone says "Por que no los dos?"

[Radii]

Originally Posted by tarcone

The funny thing, is if HRC would have nominated a person that was accused of sexual assault, this entire thread would be about how the republicans are pieces of shit and making things up.

Bullshit. Abso-fucking-lutely not. Sometimes its not "both sides suck". Sometimes one side does a thing fucking better. How dare you suggest that everyone here would be okay with rape and sexual assault if it were "my team".


Amidst the horrible shitshow that was the Roy Moore election, where someone with countless allegations of inappropriate conduct with minors surfaced, allegations were made against a sitting democratic congressman in Al Franken. Members of his own party called for investigations, and he himself resigned. Even in democratic echo chambers like /r/politics on reddit the most upvoted comments on the original threads on the allegations were basically "well fuck, and I liked him too, but this isn't okay and something should be done about it."

I know there's more grey area than that, but if you fuck up and nominate a rapist to the supreme court, you don't lose your fucking presidency. You just quite simply withdraw the nomination and nominate the next old white man who will uphold legislation to overturn Roe v Wade, support corporations and support the idea that a sitting president can't break the law. This guy isn't the only one out there.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by kingfc22

So what would you call Lindsay Graham's performance then? Come on...

Oh yeah. He is totally going after the left. He threw down the gauntlet.

But was he wrong?

I have a hard time when women wait. Im sure when it really happens it a supremely traumatic event.

But i find it hard to believe Ford. And for this I am an asshole.

Well, some of you need to take of your left leaning glasses and have an open mind.

I have been accused of politicizing sexual assault. But that is what all of you are doing. Dragging some guy through the mud and ruining his life because he is a conservative and it will tip the country away from big government running our lives.

Maybe California will break off and you can have your utopia.

[Toddzilla]

Did Neil Gorsuch go through a circus like this?

I'll help, the answer is "no" because (1) He probably never sexually assaulted multiple women while blacked-out drunk and (2) This process is about the truth, not about the candidate's politics.

[thesloppy]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Perspective. And timing.

The funny thing, is if HRC would have nominated a person that was accused of sexual assault, this entire thread would be about how the republicans are pieces of shit and making things up.

The fact that you think the timing is suspect just further points to your bias and obliviousness.

The dude is being publicly vetted and investigated for one of the most important jobs in the country...the fact that issues would arrive at the exact time that hundreds of people and millions of dollars of resources have been dedicated to looking for issues isn't exactly suspect.

Were you equally shocked by the timing when multiple women came forward with years old allegations when Bill Cosby started being publicly investigated?

Were you equally shocked by the timing when multiple women came forward with years old allegations when Harvey Weinstein started being publicly investigated?

Were you equally shocked by the timing when multiple men came forward with years old allegations when Kevin Spacey started being publicly investigated?

Were you equally shocked by the timing when multiple women came forward with years old allegations when Les Moonves started being publicly investigated?

Were you equally shocked by the timing when multiple women came forward with years old allegations when Matt Lauer started being publicly investigated?

At this point there's been literally dozens of the country's highest powered men who were taken down by decades old allegations of sexual assault that came out after a public investigation began, so to claim that those exact factors necessarily point to Ford's lying is completely blind to very-recent history and culture, and points to a perspective that is narrow and uninformed, at best.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by Atocep

Yes let's politicize sexual assault to show how in touch you are.

He's just implicitly stating that most of the individuals on this board would defend rape as long as they would uphold our ideals politically. Only tarcone is above the fray.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by Radii

Bullshit. Abso-fucking-lutely not. Sometimes its not "both sides suck". Sometimes one side does a thing fucking better. How dare you suggest that everyone here would be okay with rape and sexual assault if it were "my team".


Amidst the horrible shitshow that was the Roy Moore election, where someone with countless allegations of inappropriate conduct with minors surfaced, allegations were made against a sitting democratic congressman in Al Franken. Members of his own party called for investigations, and he himself resigned. Even in democratic echo chambers like /r/politics on reddit the most upvoted comments on the original threads on the allegations were basically "well fuck, and I liked him too, but this isn't okay and something should be done about it."

I know there's more grey area than that, but if you fuck up and nominate a rapist to the supreme court, you don't lose your fucking presidency. You just quite simply withdraw the nomination and nominate the next old white man who will uphold legislation to overturn Roe v Wade, support corporations and support the idea that a sitting president can't break the law. This guy isn't the only one out there.

I dont disagree the GOP is full of hypocrites and liars. But thinking the Dems are cleaner is just naive.

This country is in trouble because of all these fools. To be in politics today, you are dirty. You have skeletons in the closet.

[tarcone]

Dang, 63 women who knew Kavanaugh wrote letters about his character.

They must be lying. Because, you know, one woman said he sexually assaulted her.

Who do you believe?

[Atocep]

Originally Posted by tarcone

Dang, 63 women who knew Kavanaugh wrote letters about his character.

They must be lying. Because, you know, one woman said he sexually assaulted her.

Who do you believe?

Pretty sure Bill Cosby could find 63 women he didn't rape. That doesn't make him innocent or a Saint.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by thesloppy

The fact that you think the timing is suspect just further points to your bias and obliviousness.

The dude is being publicly vetted and investigated for one of the most important jobs in the country...the fact that issues would arrive at the exact time that hundreds of people and millions of dollars of resources have been dedicated to looking for issues isn't exactly suspect.

Were you equally shocked by the timing when multiple women came forward with years old allegations when Bill Cosby started being publicly investigated?

Were you equally shocked by the timing when multiple women came forward with years old allegations when Harvey Weinstein started being publicly investigated?

Were you equally shocked by the timing when multiple men came forward with years old allegations when Kevin Spacey started being publicly investigated?

Were you equally shocked by the timing when multiple women came forward with years old allegations when Les Moonves started being publicly investigated?

Were you equally shocked by the timing when multiple women came forward with years old allegations when Matt Lauer started being publicly investigated?

At this point there's been literally dozens of the country's highest powered men who were taken down by decades old allegations of sexual assault that came out after a public investigation began, so to claim that those exact factors necessarily point to Ford's lying is completely blind to very-recent history and culture, and points to a perspective that is narrow and uninformed, at best.

Yes, that is one way to look at it.

But I am not saying she is lying because she waited. Im saying she is lying because she is a pawn used by the Dems.

I do not believe her.

And do I want the Supreme Court unbalanced? No. I dont want a huge majority of conservatives or liberals. I would like it to be 5-4. Always.

I just do not believe her. I think this is as a politically based attack that has come down since Thomas.