US Politics Thread

[Moxie]

And that's the thing here. If a woman accuses someone of rape/sexual assault and is not seeking a civil suit then it becomes a question of why would they make it up? What is there to gain? And we are talking a professor here, do we really think she is going to make this up just to prevent the Kavanaugh nomination when Trump will just nominate another Kavanaugh? But clearly this is a he said she said. The nomination will go through.

Sadly, I think you're right. So much the worse for the reputation of the Supreme Court. Not because he's an entitled douche bag, which it really seems he is, but because he's too partisan.

 

[Federberg]

So it looks like Collins and Flake will vote yes for Kavanaugh. It makes no sense to vote yes now, then no later, unless they are trying to bury him once and for all. I have to say, I find Flake to be quite pathetic. When he first started making speeches criticising Trump I was hopeful he would be a genuine independent, but it seems to me that it's all about political calculation. Clearly he has ambitions for the Oval Office at some point in the future, but I'm not sure this is the way to go about it. I have no issue with his support for Kavanaugh on the basis of Roe v Wade, but he raised concerns about Kavanaugh's blatant partisanship in his opening statement last Thursday. If he has really been convinced by Kavanaugh's Op-Ed in the Journal then he's frankly dumb as shite, or completely dishonest. The idea that Kavanaugh's invective against the Clintons was in the heat of the moment doesn't pass muster. FFS he wrote that in his opening statement so there was deliberate forethought. That wasn't emotion. It was a rallying cry for the GOP and was in its essence a political statement by a supposedly apolitical candidate. That should have been disqualifying on its face, and anyone with a genuine concern for comity or the institution of the Supreme Court simply could not vote the guy in.

 

[Moxie]

Susan Collins was disappointing today, as she made it about sexual misconduct allegations and not about judicial temperament and the lack of investigation. She's going to have a lot to account for in Maine, between her constituents and the Governor and Lt. Governor. The Republicans could have let this very tainted nominee go, since they'll still get a conservative in. But they are in "ram it in at all costs" mode. I hope that Kavanaugh can be impeached down the road for lying to Congress.

 

[Federberg]

Susan Collins was disappointing today, as she made it about sexual misconduct allegations and not about judicial temperament and the lack of investigation. She's going to have a lot to account for in Maine, between her constituents and the Governor and Lt. Governor. The Republicans could have let this very tainted nominee go, since they'll still get a conservative in. But they are in "ram it in at all costs" mode. I hope that Kavanaugh can be impeached down the road for lying to Congress.

Isn’t her Governor that crazy guy with the Cajun sounding name? He won’t care! You’re thinking of Alaska surely?

 

[Moxie]

Yes, I may have misheard that. Alaska basically backs Murkowsky's choice, depending on who you believe...her constituents or Sarah Palin. But a lot of people in Maine backed Collins to vote no, as well. Perhaps just not the Governor. Maine and Alaska, like NH, are kind of complicated in terms of Red/Blue. In any case, I'm disgusted with both Collins and Flake, because they hid behind the notion of that Kavanaugh was not proven to have committed sexual assault, and so they would approve him. They missed the real point, which is that, for lying to the Senate and having no judicial temperament, he was unqualified on face.

 

[Jelenafan]

Perhaps a calculated political ploy by the good doctor. That's why she originally went to a Democrat politician with her story rather than the FBI. Could next months mid term elections have something to do with it ?

Others have tried to give the impression the timing was suspect when in actuality she identified him early on per the alleged assault.

From what I understand, Dr. Ford first related her story to her congressperson when Kavanaugh was on the short list of potential SC justices, thus BEFORE he was even nominated.

 

[Vince Evert]

It was Senator Dianne Feinstein's timing in releasing the information of Ford's allegations that was/is suspect by Republicans.
All history now. Kavanaugh has been confirmed.

 

[Federberg]

So after Trump pretty much admits Khashoggi has been murdered, he goes to a campaign rally and praises a Congressman who accepted charges of assaulting a member of the press. I'm done feeling appalled by this absolute cunt of a President. It's his voters I don't get. I really really don't get it. But as they say... you get the government you deserve

 

[Federberg]

doesn't this say it all?

 

[Federberg]

so apparently the Chinese and Russians are listening in to Trump's unsecured iPhone. And he continues to use the phone despite warnings. Wonder what your thoughts are on this @britbox, considering your views on HRC and her emails. Note I'm not even going to point out that Comey (when FBI director) and several members of the Trump administration use their personal emails for work

 

[Federberg]

So they caught the pipe bomber. Is it just me or is the shit getting really real now? I know somehow Trump's moronic base will make excuses for him again. How and why they will is quite beyond me, but surely any rational human being will see that this President is completely irredeemable. 2 former Presidents could have been killed ffs...

 

[Horsa]

So they caught the pipe bomber. Is it just me or is the shit getting really real now? I know somehow Trump's moronic base will make excuses for him again. How and why they will is quite beyond me, but surely any rational human being will see that this President is completely irredeemable. 2 former Presidents could have been killed ffs...

I'm glad the bomber has been caught so that people will be safe. I think it's getting really scary for Americans like it is for us sometimes & something needs to be done about it.

 

[britbox]

so apparently the Chinese and Russians are listening in to Trump's unsecured iPhone. And he continues to use the phone despite warnings. Wonder what your thoughts are on this @britbox, considering your views on HRC and her emails. Note I'm not even going to point out that Comey (when FBI director) and several members of the Trump administration use their personal emails for work

There is nothing like for like here Fberg in relation to HRC and the relentless newsreel about silly Trump stuff is tiresome and frankly ridiculous.

It's been non-stop since the minute he got in office. I pointed that out a couple of weeks after the original event with CNN... if you remember. There is plenty of much more serious stuff to chew on with regard to Trump than the constant tittle-tattle. In fact, it's the constant tittle-tattle that creates so much noise it hides and deflects from some of the bigger and more serious issues.

Anyway, to address your point... an iphone was used to send a tweet to a public social media network (Twitter)... it might be unsecured... if it was in fact Trump who was using it. It's a public post anyway, so who cares? It might mean that Trump is using it call friends (if it was Trump)... it might mean the Chinese or Russians know who Trump's friends are... I'd imagine they'd know that anyway... and if your comments throughout this thread are anything to go by, then Putin would be on the family and friends list anyway.

HRC deliberately set up an email server in her basement. Clearly wanting to bypass governmental observance and checks. There is no like for like... and she was hacked and it splattered all over Wikileaks.

There is plenty of meat to take Trump to task over... but this is just another media story full of drivel. Nothing to see here.

 

[Federberg]

There is nothing like for like here Fberg in relation to HRC and the relentless newsreel about silly Trump stuff is tiresome and frankly ridiculous.

It's been non-stop since the minute he got in office. I pointed that out a couple of weeks after the original event with CNN... if you remember. There is plenty of much more serious stuff to chew on with regard to Trump than the constant tittle-tattle. In fact, it's the constant tittle-tattle that creates so much noise it hides and deflects from some of the bigger and more serious issues.

Anyway, to address your point... an iphone was used to send a tweet to a public social media network (Twitter)... it might be unsecured... if it was in fact Trump who was using it. It's a public post anyway, so who cares? It might mean that Trump is using it call friends (if it was Trump)... it might mean the Chinese or Russians know who Trump's friends are... I'd imagine they'd know that anyway... and if your comments throughout this thread are anything to go by, then Putin would be on the family and friends list anyway.

HRC deliberately set up an email server in her basement. Clearly wanting to bypass governmental observance and checks. There is no like for like... and she was hacked and it splattered all over Wikileaks.

There is plenty of meat to take Trump to task over... but this is just another media story full of drivel. Nothing to see here.

lol!

(1) HRC wasn't hacked mate. Can't believe you would forget that. Her campaign was hacked.

(2) You don't get to determine her motives for setting up a personal server, sorry but this ain't britbox-world

(3) I have to believe you're being deliberately obtuse here, you're impressive at dialectic because you always try to redirect the narrative. But sorry... this wasn't about tweets. If you didn't know (I reckon you did ) Trump makes calls on his personal phone. That's what is believed to have been hacked. So again... I ask... out of curiosity... thoughts?

you can try to call me bias mate. Given what I've observed about Trump, and what I knew to be true about him before his unfolding tragedy I'll freely admit I am utterly biased against him. But I'm in the luxurious position of not having to rely on bias. I'm just presenting objective truth. You on the other hand use all your tricks to avoid the question, throw what-about-isms and such. That's cool. It's a nice dance. But back to my question... if you would... thoughts?

 

[britbox]

lol!

(1) HRC wasn't hacked mate. Can't believe you would forget that. Her campaign was hacked.

(2) You don't get to determine her motives for setting up a personal server, sorry but this ain't britbox-world

(3) I have to believe you're being deliberately obtuse here, you're impressive at dialectic because you always try to redirect the narrative. But sorry... this wasn't about tweets. If you didn't know (I reckon you did ) Trump makes calls on his personal phone. That's what is believed to have been hacked. So again... I ask... out of curiosity... thoughts?

you can try to call me bias mate. Given what I've observed about Trump, and what I knew to be true about him before his unfolding tragedy I'll freely admit I am utterly biased against him. But I'm in the luxurious position of not having to rely on bias. I'm just presenting objective truth. You on the other hand use all your tricks to avoid the question, throw what-about-isms and such. That's cool. It's a nice dance. But back to my question... if you would... thoughts?

(1) Huh? 30,000 emails were spilled onto Wikileaks sent to and from her personal email server. How else would you describe it?

(2) OK mate... I guess she must have done it for security reasons It's pretty obvious why... Maybe you can spin me another reason... I'm all ears.

(3) Believed to have been hacked... Show me some evidence that it was hacked... not that it could have been... might have been.... was a security risk. On another note, I'd imagine there probably isn't a US president ever who didn't use a private phone for private personal calls... but anyway...

This stuff is part of the continual media sideshow that is actually self-defeating. You could have a nuclear war going on and some elements of the media would be talking about distasteful Whitehouse Christmas decorations.

 

[Federberg]

(1) Huh? 30,000 emails were spilled onto Wikileaks sent to and from her personal email server. How else would you describe it?

no they weren't mate. It's easy to see how you get to a place where you believe that. But the 30,000 relates to what the FBI investigated on her server. There was never any proof that she had been hacked. Some of her close confidants like Podesta were hacked

 

[britbox]

Sorry mate - there were 30,000 on a Wikileaks searchable archive.

 

[britbox]

https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/?q=&mfrom=Hillary Clinton

 

[britbox]

The FBI's investigation was partly to determine which of those 30,000 were classified.

 

[Federberg]

https://wikileaks.org/clinton-emails/?q=&mfrom=Hillary Clinton

I might be wrong here, but I don't believe those were actually hacked from her personal server. I believe those were released after a lawsuit against the State Department.