Political Wrinkles  

Go Back   Political Wrinkles > General Forum > Opinions & Editorials
Register FAQDonate PW Store PW Trivia Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Opinions & Editorials Discuss Brett Kavanaugh's accuser gets all the attention, while Keith Ellison's gets none at the General Forum; Originally Posted by GetAClue When a Democrat is accused, the accuser is nothing but a tramp looking for a payday. ...

Reply
 
Share LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 09-20-2018, 12:56 PM
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,332
Thanks: 9,930
Thanked 8,207 Times in 4,870 Posts
Default Re: Brett Kavanaugh's accuser gets all the attention, while Keith Ellison's gets none

Quote:
Originally Posted by GetAClue View Post
When a Democrat is accused, the accuser is nothing but a tramp looking for a payday. When it is a Conservative, the seriousness of the charge is all that is required to assign blame.
On the other hand, when the accuser is nothing but a tramp looking for a payday, it's the Conservative who is to blame. Even if that Conservative is a president of the country or a person applying for the highest position in the third leg of our 3 branches of government.
Reply With Quote
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 09-20-2018, 01:04 PM
cnredd's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Philadelphia
Gender: Male
Posts: 55,179
Thanks: 2,242
Thanked 35,473 Times in 20,329 Posts
Default Re: Brett Kavanaugh's accuser gets all the attention, while Keith Ellison's gets none

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dog Man View Post
I think Shiva is a perfect example of a pathetic partisan. Ellison may make a run for POTUS someday, and Shiva could less about the "Real" accusations made about him.

Pathetic, hypocritical, partisanship on display. But Shiva is so far entrenched, he is unable to see it. hence the word "PATHETIC!"
I like how Shiva doesn't consider Ellison's accusations a national issue because he's trying to get elected to Attorney General in Minnesota...Ummm...

Isn't he the second-in-command of the whole dang Democrat NATIONAL Party????...
__________________
"You get the respect that you give" - cnredd
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to cnredd For This Useful Post:
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 09-20-2018, 01:17 PM
GetAClue's Avatar
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Northern Ohio
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,116
Thanks: 7,447
Thanked 5,111 Times in 2,912 Posts
Default Re: Brett Kavanaugh's accuser gets all the attention, while Keith Ellison's gets none

Quote:
Originally Posted by cnredd View Post
I like how Shiva doesn't consider Ellison's accusations a national issue because he's trying to get elected to Attorney General in Minnesota...Ummm...

Isn't he the second-in-command of the whole dang Democrat NATIONAL Party????...
That's what's known as an "Inconvenient Fact". He would rather not dwell on it.
__________________
To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead - Thomas Paine

A lie doesn't become truth, a wrong doesn't become right, and Evil doesn't become good, just because it is accepted by the majority. - Booker T Washington
Reply With Quote
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 09-21-2018, 02:23 AM
ShivaTD's Avatar
Progressive Libertarian
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Immigrant to Arizona
Gender: Male
Posts: 7,429
Thanks: 1,492
Thanked 2,314 Times in 1,840 Posts
Default Re: Brett Kavanaugh's accuser gets all the attention, while Keith Ellison's gets none

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimbo View Post
Shiva, the review of the Kavanaugh nomination time period is over and done. At best DiFi knew of this new accusation sometime in July and chose not bring it up until after the chairman called the meeting adjourned. At worst same DIFi and accomplice's are making things up in hopes of stalling until after the midterms. It won't work, and just makes the entire left look worse than I hope they are.

Unconfirmed suspicion of a high school situation bars no one from nothing. Bringing it up 30 years after the fact and days after the public discussion period has passed makes it less so.
It's been reported that Senator Feinstein withheld bringing the matter up at the request of Christine Blasey Ford that requested the matter be kept confidential. Assuming the reporting is accurate, and there's no reason to doubt that it is, then it's sort of refreshing that someone can write to a Senator and be able to trust them in keeping a matter private.

But the fact that the entire process is being rushed by Republicans is also important to note. As we well know there's no actual reason for rushing Kavanaugh's confirmation through the Senate because Republicans have already established the precedent that there's no rush at all to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court. They let the Garland nomination languish in the Senate for ten months and did absolutely nothing about his nomination.

But we can ignore that as well. What is important is that the allegation have now surfaced against a nominee for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. Those allegations must be investigated and perhaps what's more important than the attempted rape of a 15 year old girl by an intoxicated 17 year old boy over 30 years ago is whether Kavanaugh's categorical denial that he wasn't there and didn't commit the act is the truth or a lie. Is Kavanaugh committing perjury today to cover-up a felony that occurred when he was a teenager under the influence of alcohol?

Kavanaugh has already established that he's been less than candid in testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2004 and 2006 related to his involvement in issue while working in the Bush Administration. Is he being less than candid, or committing perjury, today related to the allegations against him?

In any case it's for the best of the country that Christine Blasey Ford did come forward with very creditable allegations before Kavanaugh was confirmed. Had she not come forward then she would be complicit in allowing a person guilty of a felony in their youth being appointed to the Supreme Court assuming her allegations are true. She's literally thrown herself under the bus in fulfilling a civic duty to publicly present her allegations during the confirmation process.

Even with that there's a "kicker" I was unaware of. While most states have a statute of limitations on the felony count of attempted rape Maryland does not. When contacted law enforcement in Montgomery County Maryland said that there hasn't been a criminal investigation of this case because no complaint have ever been filed. They also said that they would initiate a criminal investigation of Brett Kavanaugh for the felony of attempted rape if Christine Blasey Ford ever chooses to file a complaint either now or at anytime in the future. If they find the evidence for an indictment and prosecution then they would indict and prosecute Brett Kavanaugh in the case of Christine Blasey Ford.

No policy exists that would prevent the criminal indictment and prosecution of a sitting Supreme Court Justice unlike the DOJ against indicting and prosecution a sitting President.

So Republicans can ignore or brush aside Christine Blasey Ford allegations and rush through Kavanaugh's confirmation but his position on the Supreme Court would always be at risk because all Dr. Ford has to do is file a criminal complaint for the felony of attempted rape from over 30 years ago and the criminal investigation begins. That criminal investigation alone would be grounds enough for impeachment and removal from the Supreme Court.

The real bottom line for Republicans is that they want a far-right-wing Justice on the Supreme Court and the Federalist Society has provided Trump with over a dozen individuals that meet this requirement. Should Republicans stick with Kavanaugh when being elevated to the Supreme Court is inherently carrying with it a criminal scandal? Wouldn't it be better for Republicans and Trump to dump Kavanaugh and select someone else from the Federalist Society's list that isn't carrying the baggage of a very possible criminal investigation into their past.

Kavanaugh no matter how we look at the situation is a tainted nominee that, for the first time in recorded history for Supreme Court Justice nominations, is carrying a -4% negative approval rating based upon polling information. The GOP controlled Judicial Committee could end this whole problem by dumping Kavanaugh because he's easily replaced by another far-right-wing nominee that isn't carrying all of the negative baggage and that isn't opposed by the public like Kavanaugh.
__________________
"I always had a rule, if a restaurant is dirty on the outside, it's dirty on the inside." Donald Trump

"I always had a rule, if the White House is dirty on the inside, it's dirty on the outside." ShivaTD

Based upon the corruption, brutality, inhumanity, immorality, dishonesty, and incompetence of the Trump administration the White House is the dirtiest house in America and there's no known cleanser that with remove the stains of the Trump Administration.
Reply With Quote
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 09-21-2018, 03:07 AM
Jeerleader's Avatar
Master
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: Upper Bucks County, PA
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,034
Thanks: 955
Thanked 1,449 Times in 668 Posts
Default Re: Brett Kavanaugh's accuser gets all the attention, while Keith Ellison's gets none

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
<snip>
When one boils it down to the veracity and believability of unsubstantiated claims, what's the difference between Ford's claim against Kavanagh and if she made claims of alien abduction occurring 36 years ago?

Given the same lack of supporting facts but just altering the event, would she be granted (does she deserve) the level of credibility you have granted to her?

Is the credibility of the present claim a direct, singular product simply of it being of a sexual nature . . . That women accusing men of sexual misconduct are above reproach and must be believed no matter what? Why shouldn't that blanket endorsement of claims be extended to all claims by women, even claims of alien abduction . . . especially when:
There is no physical evidence in the record now and no evidence can be expected to be found that supports her claim.
The people that Ford claims were present, have made emphatic declarations that they were not present for the events she describes.
So, if she were claiming alien abduction instead of sexual assault, would you believe her?

Could it be you just want to believe her claim of sexual assault because you don't want Kavanagh seated?

.
__________________
You can’t truly call yourself “peaceful” unless you are capable of great violence.
If you are incapable of violence, you are not peaceful, you are just harmless.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jeerleader For This Useful Post:
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 09-21-2018, 08:20 AM
Conservative Sage
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Scottsdale, AZ
Posts: 17,940
Thanks: 11,316
Thanked 12,037 Times in 7,113 Posts
Send a message via ICQ to AZRWinger
Default Re: Brett Kavanaugh's accuser gets all the attention, while Keith Ellison's gets none

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
It's been reported that Senator Feinstein withheld bringing the matter up at the request of Christine Blasey Ford that requested the matter be kept confidential. Assuming the reporting is accurate, and there's no reason to doubt that it is, then it's sort of refreshing that someone can write to a Senator and be able to trust them in keeping a matter private.

But the fact that the entire process is being rushed by Republicans is also important to note. As we well know there's no actual reason for rushing Kavanaugh's confirmation through the Senate because Republicans have already established the precedent that there's no rush at all to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court. They let the Garland nomination languish in the Senate for ten months and did absolutely nothing about his nomination.

But we can ignore that as well. What is important is that the allegation have now surfaced against a nominee for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. Those allegations must be investigated and perhaps what's more important than the attempted rape of a 15 year old girl by an intoxicated 17 year old boy over 30 years ago is whether Kavanaugh's categorical denial that he wasn't there and didn't commit the act is the truth or a lie. Is Kavanaugh committing perjury today to cover-up a felony that occurred when he was a teenager under the influence of alcohol?

Kavanaugh has already established that he's been less than candid in testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2004 and 2006 related to his involvement in issue while working in the Bush Administration. Is he being less than candid, or committing perjury, today related to the allegations against him?

In any case it's for the best of the country that Christine Blasey Ford did come forward with very creditable allegations before Kavanaugh was confirmed. Had she not come forward then she would be complicit in allowing a person guilty of a felony in their youth being appointed to the Supreme Court assuming her allegations are true. She's literally thrown herself under the bus in fulfilling a civic duty to publicly present her allegations during the confirmation process.

Even with that there's a "kicker" I was unaware of. While most states have a statute of limitations on the felony count of attempted rape Maryland does not. When contacted law enforcement in Montgomery County Maryland said that there hasn't been a criminal investigation of this case because no complaint have ever been filed. They also said that they would initiate a criminal investigation of Brett Kavanaugh for the felony of attempted rape if Christine Blasey Ford ever chooses to file a complaint either now or at anytime in the future. If they find the evidence for an indictment and prosecution then they would indict and prosecute Brett Kavanaugh in the case of Christine Blasey Ford.

No policy exists that would prevent the criminal indictment and prosecution of a sitting Supreme Court Justice unlike the DOJ against indicting and prosecution a sitting President.

So Republicans can ignore or brush aside Christine Blasey Ford allegations and rush through Kavanaugh's confirmation but his position on the Supreme Court would always be at risk because all Dr. Ford has to do is file a criminal complaint for the felony of attempted rape from over 30 years ago and the criminal investigation begins. That criminal investigation alone would be grounds enough for impeachment and removal from the Supreme Court.

The real bottom line for Republicans is that they want a far-right-wing Justice on the Supreme Court and the Federalist Society has provided Trump with over a dozen individuals that meet this requirement. Should Republicans stick with Kavanaugh when being elevated to the Supreme Court is inherently carrying with it a criminal scandal? Wouldn't it be better for Republicans and Trump to dump Kavanaugh and select someone else from the Federalist Society's list that isn't carrying the baggage of a very possible criminal investigation into their past.

Kavanaugh no matter how we look at the situation is a tainted nominee that, for the first time in recorded history for Supreme Court Justice nominations, is carrying a -4% negative approval rating based upon polling information. The GOP controlled Judicial Committee could end this whole problem by dumping Kavanaugh because he's easily replaced by another far-right-wing nominee that isn't carrying all of the negative baggage and that isn't opposed by the public like Kavanaugh.
Feinstein didn't act out of some noble impulse to preserve the accuser's privacy. The Senator waited until after the confirmation hearings had concluded to launch the smear campaign. Democrats couldn't Bork Kavanaugh so out comes the high tech lynching ala Clarence Thomas.

Given your track record of questionable veracity it's not safe to assume the claim of no statute of limitations for some sex crimes in Maryland is accurate. But let's indulge the Resistance zealot mentality by assuming the accuser could file a complaint. The question is why hasn't she done so before? Kavanaugh has been a prominent judge on the DC court of appeals for 12 years and his name was widely publicized as a contender for Trump's first SCOTUS nomination but neither the 6 FBI background checks nor the accuser never uncovered any of the allegations. The obvious reason is that such a compliant would go nowhere, there is nothing to investigate. Resistance Democrats want to ignore the complete lack of foundation for such a complaint in favor of shameful pandering to identity based politics.

Even the accuser insists that her claim must be subject to minimal scrutiny with her appearance before the Senate confirmation hearing is conditional on nobody but the Senators questioning her and insisting Kavanaugh speak first. In addition, Kavanaugh must not be in the room when she testifies. Of course even the preliminary inquiry following a criminal complaint wouldn't comply with any of these ridiculous demands which is why none has been filed.

Indeed Democrats are calling for the FBI to conduct what would be a 7th background investigation of Kavanaugh on the basis of an allegation with no specific location, no corroborating witnesses, no forensic evidence and a date range of 2 years. According to the accusations the other witness present some 37 years ago denies the incident ever took place.

Democrats are hoping there is some remnant of Obama's weaponized FBI that would "investigate" then produce a predetermined conclusion opining the accuser is credible and Kavanaugh deceptive based on nothing but animus toward Trump.

Please share with us any other Senate hearing where the witness is allowed to dictate who may question them, the order of their appearance and the banning of other witnesses from the hearing room. Of course there are none but then again this charade is all about partisan political theater not a sober advise and consent process.
__________________
What is a 30 something year old single man with a rock in one hand and a Honduran flag in the other?

An asylum seeker.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to AZRWinger For This Useful Post:
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 09-21-2018, 10:57 AM
PW Enlightenment
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,332
Thanks: 9,930
Thanked 8,207 Times in 4,870 Posts
Default Re: Brett Kavanaugh's accuser gets all the attention, while Keith Ellison's gets none

Quote:
Originally Posted by ShivaTD View Post
It's been reported that Senator Feinstein withheld bringing the matter up at the request of Christine Blasey Ford that requested the matter be kept confidential. Assuming the reporting is accurate, and there's no reason to doubt that it is, then it's sort of refreshing that someone can write to a Senator and be able to trust them in keeping a matter private.

But the fact that the entire process is being rushed by Republicans is also important to note. As we well know there's no actual reason for rushing Kavanaugh's confirmation through the Senate because Republicans have already established the precedent that there's no rush at all to fill a vacancy on the Supreme Court. They let the Garland nomination languish in the Senate for ten months and did absolutely nothing about his nomination.

But we can ignore that as well. What is important is that the allegation have now surfaced against a nominee for a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the land. Those allegations must be investigated and perhaps what's more important than the attempted rape of a 15 year old girl by an intoxicated 17 year old boy over 30 years ago is whether Kavanaugh's categorical denial that he wasn't there and didn't commit the act is the truth or a lie. Is Kavanaugh committing perjury today to cover-up a felony that occurred when he was a teenager under the influence of alcohol?

Kavanaugh has already established that he's been less than candid in testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2004 and 2006 related to his involvement in issue while working in the Bush Administration. Is he being less than candid, or committing perjury, today related to the allegations against him?

In any case it's for the best of the country that Christine Blasey Ford did come forward with very creditable allegations before Kavanaugh was confirmed. Had she not come forward then she would be complicit in allowing a person guilty of a felony in their youth being appointed to the Supreme Court assuming her allegations are true. She's literally thrown herself under the bus in fulfilling a civic duty to publicly present her allegations during the confirmation process.

Even with that there's a "kicker" I was unaware of. While most states have a statute of limitations on the felony count of attempted rape Maryland does not. When contacted law enforcement in Montgomery County Maryland said that there hasn't been a criminal investigation of this case because no complaint have ever been filed. They also said that they would initiate a criminal investigation of Brett Kavanaugh for the felony of attempted rape if Christine Blasey Ford ever chooses to file a complaint either now or at anytime in the future. If they find the evidence for an indictment and prosecution then they would indict and prosecute Brett Kavanaugh in the case of Christine Blasey Ford.

No policy exists that would prevent the criminal indictment and prosecution of a sitting Supreme Court Justice unlike the DOJ against indicting and prosecution a sitting President.

So Republicans can ignore or brush aside Christine Blasey Ford allegations and rush through Kavanaugh's confirmation but his position on the Supreme Court would always be at risk because all Dr. Ford has to do is file a criminal complaint for the felony of attempted rape from over 30 years ago and the criminal investigation begins. That criminal investigation alone would be grounds enough for impeachment and removal from the Supreme Court.

The real bottom line for Republicans is that they want a far-right-wing Justice on the Supreme Court and the Federalist Society has provided Trump with over a dozen individuals that meet this requirement. Should Republicans stick with Kavanaugh when being elevated to the Supreme Court is inherently carrying with it a criminal scandal? Wouldn't it be better for Republicans and Trump to dump Kavanaugh and select someone else from the Federalist Society's list that isn't carrying the baggage of a very possible criminal investigation into their past.

Kavanaugh no matter how we look at the situation is a tainted nominee that, for the first time in recorded history for Supreme Court Justice nominations, is carrying a -4% negative approval rating based upon polling information. The GOP controlled Judicial Committee could end this whole problem by dumping Kavanaugh because he's easily replaced by another far-right-wing nominee that isn't carrying all of the negative baggage and that isn't opposed by the public like Kavanaugh.
Feinstein didn't withhold the data. She delayed mentioning it until it suited her. Coincidently immediately after the time to bring up these matters. Even then she forwarded it to the FBI, who has no jurisdiction in state matters.

No rush here. Ford has had 35 years. Garland has nothing to do with this case. Feinstein had several months to come forward. The time for allegations to surface has long passed.

As you say, Kavanaugh was vetted in 2004 and 2006. Nothing new here. Reports have it that Kavanaugh has passed background checks by the FBI at least 4 other times.

No Shiva, Ford has not come forward with very credible accusations. Ford has come forward with baseless allegations. Can't remember the date, the location, who was at the party. For 35 years she can't remember, now 2 days after remember time she starts to remember.

AFAIK, the allegations were/are harassment, not attempted rape. Considering the age of the people, the vagueness of the story and the time lapse, the charge, if any, would misdemeanor 3 or 4. Statute of limitations 1 year. You're correct, there has been no investigation because no complaint has ever been filed - in 35 years. There still has been filed in this state matter. And it's a state matter. What we have now is a letter forwarded to FBI who promptly said don't look at us, try the state, and an allegation after the allegation time has passed.

As for the motives of the Republicans. You're correct. The Repubs want a conservative. Far right is debatable. Kavanaugh doesn't impress me as far right. On the other hand, the left is pushing for a down the middle pure Constitutionalist who calls things only in strict accordance with the beliefs of the founders. Sure they are. But as someone once said, elections have consequences.

You're correct, all appointments are always at risk to frivolous suits.I don't like it, but that's how it is. That is not, however, a reason to never appoint a judge.

FYI, Kavanaugh will not be dumped. If he were it wouldn't matter. It's never been about Kavanaugh. It's about Democrats losing the election.

It's 10:50, nearly an hour past the drop dead time. Last time I checked her lawyer has a new list of demands and conditions for the privilege of Congress hearing her babble. Grassley should give her one and one reason only. A subpoena, In her, her or her lawyers hands. 10:00 Monday. Show or be arrested. We vote at 2:00. Seating is at 4:00. End of story.
Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to jimbo For This Useful Post:
Reply

Tags
accuser, all, attention, brett, ellison, gets, kavanaugh, keith, none, the, while

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:32 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0