Trump gets another SCOTUS appointment?

zyffyr wrote:

gcomeau wrote:And FFS, even if you think it WAS "recovered" memory you would be admitting this was NOT a hatchet job on a Supreme Court nominee if the recovery happened 6 freaking years ago and was documented at the time!!!! So make up your mind what BS story it is you want to claim is going on here.

I haven't seen anything credible suggesting that it is a 'recovered memory'. If it was, however, I would instantly place zero value on her story. Why? So called 'recovered memories' are almost always false memories created by the questions asked by the therapist.

Agreed, recovered memories are horribly unreliable.

Also agreed, there is absolutely no credible evidence this was a recovered memory. That is just something people on the right are making up.

gcomeau wrote:

zyffyr wrote:So called 'recovered memories' are almost always false memories created by the questions asked by the therapist.

Agreed, recovered memories are horribly unreliable.

Also agreed, there is absolutely no credible evidence this was a recovered memory. That is just something people on the right are making up.

There was an experiment done some time back (several years) where small children were asked about an event that had never happened (getting their finger caught in a mousetrap).
Within a week or so, most of the kids were convinced it had happened to the point that several of them were confused as to the lack of scar on their finger as "blood went everywhere".

Recovered memories are not reliable. In all too many cases, they could easily be called fabricated memories. At least one case of alleged sexual abuse quite dramatically collapsed when one of the memories was proven to have been physically impossible due to the alleged perpetrator being in another country entirely for the period of time in question.
Sadly, it is not unknown for one parent to use this phenomenon in order to falsely accuse the other of abusing their children during a divorce.

Not wanting to get into details, but I have physical scars that evidence horrific injuries inflicted on me as a toddler which I have no memory of.

The pool of probable SCOTUS nominees is not large. The Democrats have known whom they needed to do extensive op research and FABRICATION on for some time.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:Not wanting to get into details, but I have physical scars that evidence horrific injuries inflicted on me as a toddler which I have no memory of.

The pool of probable SCOTUS nominees is not large. The Democrats have known whom they needed to do extensive op research and FABRICATION on for some time.

As opposed to the GOP, who just refuses to follow established precedent in selecting SCOTUS judges when a seat becomes available because they can't stand the idea of someone not following their ideology on the Supreme Court.

I gotta wonder which you think is better here, to thoroughly investigate the life and character of someone who's in the running for a lifelong appointment to one of the most important posts in your system of government, or to refuse a nomination because the President making the nomination only has less than half his term of office remaining.

Also: Why do you conservatives keep nominating people vulnerable to these sort of accusations?

The E wrote:As opposed to the GOP, who just refuses to follow established precedent in selecting SCOTUS judges when a seat becomes available because they can't stand the idea of someone not following their ideology on the Supreme Court.

I gotta wonder which you think is better here, to thoroughly investigate the life and character of someone who's in the running for a lifelong appointment to one of the most important posts in your system of government, or to refuse a nomination because the President making the nomination only has less than half his term of office remaining.

Also: Why do you conservatives keep nominating people vulnerable to these sort of accusations?

In this case, Dear Leader needs someone who will cover from him. None of the other potential conservative judges are on the record as saying the President can't be indicted.

TFLYTSNBN wrote:Not wanting to get into details, but I have physical scars that evidence horrific injuries inflicted on me as a toddler which I have no memory of.

The pool of probable SCOTUS nominees is not large. The Democrats have known whom they needed to do extensive op research and FABRICATION on for some time.

Unless you're saying they knew since 2012 when she told her therapist about this so they could spend the last many years FABRICATING her claims... or are perhaps claiming the Democrats simply posses time travel capabilities and jumped back to set it all up after Trump put Kavanaugh on his list of possible nominees... just grow up.


I know that's asking a lot considering who I'm talking to, but make an effort to act like you belong at the adults table.

gcomeau wrote:

TFLYTSNBN wrote:Not wanting to get into details, but I have physical scars that evidence horrific injuries inflicted on me as a toddler which I have no memory of.

The pool of probable SCOTUS nominees is not large. The Democrats have known whom they needed to do extensive op research and FABRICATION on for some time.

Unless you're saying they knew since 2012 when she told her therapist about this so they could spend the last many years FABRICATING her claims... or are perhaps claiming the Democrats simply posses time travel capabilities and jumped back to set it all up after Trump put Kavanaugh on his list of possible nominees... just grow up.


I know that's asking a lot considering who I'm talking to, but make an effort to act like you belong at the adults table.

Well now that we have heard from the microcephalic and microphallic, let the real men speak.

I don't know the absolute truth and obviously can not know. However; this article articulatess my skeptisc..

https://www.google.com/amp/s/pjmedia.co ... -ford/amp/

Something allegedly happened to this woman and her apparent need for therapy suggests that something did happen. However; the therapists records show no record of the alleged perp being named until Kavenaugh was nominated for SCOTUS. That fact combined​with Feinstein withholding the letter until the eleventh hour to justify a delay until after the election is highly suspicious.

Also, Democrats have ZERO credibility regarding sexual assaults after supporting Bill Clinton. Just ask all of the women he DID RAPE, or intimidate.

Let us not forget that former Mayor of Portland, Secretary of Transportation under Carter, Governor of Oregon and CHILD RAPIST Neil Goldscmidt is another Democrat who got a free ride from journalists.

Did I mention City of Portland mayor Sam (aka Sodomy Sam) Adams who was sodomizing teenaged interns in the bathroom at City Hall?

TFLYTSNBN wrote:

gcomeau wrote:Unless you're saying they knew since 2012 when she told her therapist about this so they could spend the last many years FABRICATING her claims... or are perhaps claiming the Democrats simply posses time travel capabilities and jumped back to set it all up after Trump put Kavanaugh on his list of possible nominees... just grow up.


I know that's asking a lot considering who I'm talking to, but make an effort to act like you belong at the adults table.

Well now that we have heard from the microcephalic and microphallic, let the real men speak.

Oh look, someone pulled out their word a day Calendar. Good job pretending like you belong at the adult's table...

I don't know the absolute truth and obviously can not know. However; this article articulatess my skeptisc..

https://www.google.com/amp/s/pjmedia.co ... -ford/amp/

I find it completely believable that some hack job blog article on PJ Media "articulatess" your "skeptisc".

Something allegedly happened to this woman and her apparent need for therapy suggests that something did happen. However; the therapists records show no record of the alleged perp being named until Kavenaugh was nominated for SCOTUS.

Generally naming a specific name not occurring in a couples therapy session when something like this is brought up isn't something anyone should find surprising. Her description of who it was narrows the possible pool of people down pretty damn well.

That fact combined​with Feinstein withholding the letter until the eleventh hour to justify a delay until after the election is highly suspicious.

She withheld it until it leaked that she had it.

It was withheld because Ford hadn't decided to go public, and requested anonymity while providing her congressperson with a warning about this guy they were considering giving an EXTREMELY powerful position in the Judiciary to.

What part of this is so damn hard for you to wrap your brain around?

Also, Democrats have ZERO credibility regarding sexual assaults after supporting Bill Clinton. Just ask all of the women he DID RAPE, or intimidate.

1. Those allegations weren't made against Clinton before Democrats elected him president. Unlike with Trump, from over a DOZEN women, which Republicans shrugged off as "meh" then put him in charge of the country KNOWING how many sexual assault accusations were out there against him.

2. A lot of Democrats are *not* ok with those accusations. And Clinton would have a lot harder time getting elected if he was running now, after they were made public.

3. Even if every single accusation against Clinton was true, "this other guy is bad so we can make an accused attempted rapist a Supreme Court Justice so there!" is not anything resembling a rational argument.

4. Those allegations WERE investigated. But I don't expect anything as commonplace in your camp as raging hypocrisy to make you blink an eye.

Yes, lets not forget the giy who quit politics, when the allegations were made, and not say the GOP guy WHO RAN FOR OFFICE.

Fly, I know you didn't mean to, but you have perfectly illustrated one of the big differences between the US left and right.

The left will admit it (when caught, far from an ideal situation), the right deny (to the point of making death threats to the victims)

You also find that for every Dem politician paedophile, there are 10 GOP ones. Aparently "Family values" involves fucking children.


To get back to Kavanaugh. He has claimed that he definately didn't do it, and that he has no memory of the party. (He was a reknowned black out drunk at that age according to the other guy that was in the room)
One of Kavanaugh's statements is a lie.