Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Maize Hirono, D-Hawaii

If you are pro-life you're not entitled to due process or the presumption of innocence.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/...ocess.html

This is getting scary folks.

(09-23-2018, 03:16 PM)jj82284 Wrote: [ -> ]Maize Hirono, D-Hawaii

If you are pro-life you're not entitled to due process or the presumption of innocence.  

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/...ocess.html

This is getting scary folks.

This isn't new, it's their primary play for 50 years now.

(09-23-2018, 03:16 PM)jj82284 Wrote: [ -> ]Maize Hirono, D-Hawaii

If you are pro-life you're not entitled to due process or the presumption of innocence.  

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/...ocess.html

This is getting scary folks.

She's also the person that tried to discredit Kavanaugh because he couldn't recite the entirety of Hawaiian history, including the prehistoric parts. She's about as nutty as Elizabeth Warren.

(09-23-2018, 04:58 PM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-23-2018, 03:16 PM)jj82284 Wrote: [ -> ]Maize Hirono, D-Hawaii

If you are pro-life you're not entitled to due process or the presumption of innocence.  

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/...ocess.html

This is getting scary folks.

She's also the person that tried to discredit Kavanaugh because he couldn't recite the entirety of Hawaiian history, including the prehistoric parts. She's about as nutty as Elizabeth Warren.

The fact that people like this get elected is even more frightening.

(09-23-2018, 04:03 PM)flsprtsgod Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-23-2018, 03:16 PM)jj82284 Wrote: [ -> ]Maize Hirono, D-Hawaii

If you are pro-life you're not entitled to due process or the presumption of innocence.  

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/...ocess.html

This is getting scary folks.

This isn't new, it's their primary play for 50 years now.

true, but it was always disguised or given some covering or excuse before.  Now they are just flat out nakedly telling people that those who disagree with them are second class citizens.  When you couple that with the demand to go second in the hearing there is really a literal attempt to codify this insanity into legal tradition not just cook fringe rants.

Drudge is reporting The New Yorker has a story of another woman, but her credibility is shaky.

(09-23-2018, 06:55 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Drudge is reporting The New Yorker has a story of another woman, but her credibility is shaky.

And Ford's isn't?

(09-23-2018, 07:03 PM)TJBender Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-23-2018, 06:55 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Drudge is reporting The New Yorker has a story of another woman, but her credibility is shaky.

And Ford's isn't?

Irrelevant. In the eyes of Kavanaugh's detractors, the charge must be disproven in order to establish innocence.

Claim emerges about exposing himself at a party...

I picked a hack of a day to quit drinking...

Are there any fathers to young children like me on here who seriously worry about their kids social lives when they get older? What does dating look like in 10 years?

This is getting out of hand.

This has always been the plan. Wait until the last possible minute before revealing more accusations. This one will be about as credible as the last one. But now they’re throwing Kavaugh’s witness, Mike Judge, in for good measure. Gotta discredit anyone supporting Kavanaugh now.

Creepy Porn Lawyer has another one coming tomorrow. This should be good.

Looks like another Dem operative. I wonder who this one is married to?

Grassley needs to grow a set and put it to vote. Let everyone out their cards in the table. We can replace Jeff Flakes vote with a dem trying to win reelection in a red state. This has gone too far.

(09-23-2018, 09:51 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]Grassley needs to grow a set and put it to vote. Let everyone out their cards in the table. We can replace Jeff Flakes vote with a dem trying to win reelection in a red state. This has gone too far.

Ain't gonna happen. Too many Republicans will go wobbly because they don't want to run for reelection under constant allegation from opposing candidates that they sent an accused sexual abuser to the SC. Accusations of this sort do not require absolute proof in the eyes of the public at large, and the dems capitalized on it. Not only will they most likely derail this nomination, but they'll sully this man's name and family strictly for the sake of political expediency - and not lose a minute of sleep over it.

(09-23-2018, 09:39 PM)JagNGeorgia Wrote: [ -> ]This has always been the plan. Wait until the last possible minute before revealing more accusations. This one will be about as credible as the last one. But now they’re throwing Kavaugh’s witness, Mike Judge, in for good measure. Gotta discredit anyone supporting Kavanaugh now.

I'm pretty sure I called this a few pages ago. Might've said Monday is when they'd all come out of the woodwork, but anyone who didn't see this coming is either blind or staring exactly where Maizie tells them to.

(09-23-2018, 10:20 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-23-2018, 09:51 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]Grassley needs to grow a set and put it to vote. Let everyone out their cards in the table. We can replace Jeff Flakes vote with a dem trying to win reelection in a red state. This has gone too far.

Ain't gonna happen. Too many Republicans will go wobbly because they don't want to run for reelection under constant allegation from opposing candidates that they sent an accused sexual abuser to the SC. Accusations of this sort do not require absolute proof in the eyes of the public at large, and the dems capitalized on it. Not only will they most likely derail this nomination, but they'll sully this man's name and family strictly for the sake of political expediency - and not lose a minute of sleep over it.

So, is this the end of confirmation hearings then , if this is a proven smear that works?

Someone has to break the mold eventually, right? Our democracy depends on it.

The dems want an FBI investigation. Give it to them and have it concluded in two weeks. If nothing credible is found, which is most likely, then hold the vote on that.

(09-23-2018, 10:25 PM)StroudCrowd1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(09-23-2018, 10:20 PM)homebiscuit Wrote: [ -> ]Ain't gonna happen. Too many Republicans will go wobbly because they don't want to run for reelection under constant allegation from opposing candidates that they sent an accused sexual abuser to the SC. Accusations of this sort do not require absolute proof in the eyes of the public at large, and the dems capitalized on it. Not only will they most likely derail this nomination, but they'll sully this man's name and family strictly for the sake of political expediency - and not lose a minute of sleep over it.

So, is this the end of confirmation hearings then , if this is a proven smear that works?

Someone has to break the mold eventually, right? Our democracy depends on it.

If Kavanaugh advances past the Senate Judiciary Committee, I would assume he's in. Even if Murkowski and Collins vote against him on the Senate floor, there are a few red-state Democrats who are going to have one hell of a time winning their election if they vote against a nominee whose only flaw is that Democrats don't like him--errrr, he maybe touched someone inappropriately 35 years ago, possibly, and maybe a second time the next year, but that woman admits that she was drinking and isn't even 100% sure it was him thrusting his junk into her face.

I don't like the idea of Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court. I'd rather not see a Supreme Court with such a strong ideological bias in one direction, regardless of which direction that's in. But what's happening with his nomination is disgusting. After the committee hearing is over, regardless of the end result, I'd love to see an FBI investigation. I'd love to see that investigation into who knew what, who said what and when, so that we can establish exactly how big the conspiracy to obstruct this proceeding is, and how many people knew that the claims were completely bogus (if they are). Senators can be expelled.