Trump on Mocking Christine Ford at Rally: ‘It Doesn’t Matter. We Won’

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

This exchange is a fairly good example of what Trumpism is all about.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Love it.

This. We won. Trumps hate after all .

I mean, at the end of the day, you guys are the ones who have to live with yourselves.  Unless you guys genuinely believe that all of the allegations against Kavanaugh were unquestionably a vast left-wing conspiracy, this sort of blasé attitude about the matter is not just morally revolting, but inching towards an outright evil worldview where you don't care about rape, sexual assault, etc as much as you do about being able to do a Nelson Muntz-style "HaHa" for a month (at most).  I mean, there's none of the nuance or genuinely thoughtful commentary that we've seen from folks like Fuzzy, your posts are just you guys reveling in your own amorality.  Not gonna lie, I really thought both you guys were better than that, but I guess not

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Love it.

This. We won. Trumps hate after all .

I mean, at the end of the day, you guys are the ones who have to live with yourselves.  Unless you guys genuinely believe that all of the allegations against Kavanaugh were unquestionably a vast left-wing conspiracy, this sort of blasé attitude about the matter is not just morally revolting, but inching towards an outright evil worldview where you don't care about rape, sexual assault, etc as much as you do about being able to do a Nelson Muntz-style "HaHa" for a month (at most).  I mean, there's none of the nuance or genuinely thoughtful commentary that we've seen from folks like Fuzzy, your posts are just you guys reveling in your own amorality.  Not gonna lie, I really thought both you guys were better than that, but I guess not

I don't think it's a "conspiracy" but I definitely think all of these accusations were completely made up in order to prevent Kavanaugh from being appointed, and used by Democrats in order to potentially block his nomination and perhaps make sure Republicans could appoint one fewer SCOTUS justice.

Yes, because making up all those accusations is so much more believable than, you know, him actually doing what they accused him of.

As long as there is no evidence - yes.

What about the therapy notes from 2012, the contrast between Kavanaugh and Ford’s sworn testimony, Kavanaugh’s perjury about his drinking, Kavanaugh’s perjury about when he learned of Ramirez’s allegations, the polygraph test, and the fact that there are witnesses supporting Ramirez’s allegations?  You don’t consider any of that evidence?  You don’t think it’s even possible that maybe...just maybe there might be some truth to Ramirez and/or Ford’s allegations?  Side note: This idea that sworn testimony isn’t evidence needs to die.  Victim testimony is good enough to be treated as evidence in criminal court

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Love it.

This. We won. Trumps hate after all .

TIL "Love" is consolidating power through any means necessary and going to any extreme for the sake of "owning" or "triggering" your opponent, which in this case is more than half of the population of the United States. 

Well, once Democrats are in power again, I'm sure conservatives will get plenty of "love" from us.

Brett and the 4 other flawless beautiful conservatives will make sure you don't get too crazy with your new laws, in the end it was all about that anyway .

How about we not refer to people accused of attemed rape, sexual assault, perjury, and lacking the requisite objectivity to serve as a judge as “flawless.”  Also, the type of thing you’re talking about would be the definition of a rogue Judiciary.  You know that, right?

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Since you're insisting on needing evidence, do you have any evidence that this is all a Democratic conspiracy?

This is not how the presumption of innocence works, sweaty.

You insist Kavanaugh is innocent, yet you also insist, without evidence, that the allegations were made up and the Democrats are guilty of a conspiracy.

I will ask my question again. Do you have any evidence that is a Democratic conspiracy or that the allegations were made up? Otherwise, all you have are allegations without evidence. You know, the kind you're complaining about.

Again: this is not how the presumption of innocence works. You are reversing the burden of proof.

Moreover, I do not think there is a Democratic "conspiracy". I do not think they are "behind" this. I think Ford herself found her chance to take down Kavanaugh because she is a partisan Democrat, and congressional Democrats just seized the opportunity to put her on a pedestal and instrumentalize her - but they don't "pull the strings".

How about we not refer to people accused of attemed rape, sexual assault, perjury, and lacking the requisite objectivity to serve as a judge as “flawless.”  Also, the type of thing you’re talking about would be the definition of a rogue Judiciary.  You know that, right?

If I would accuse you of sexual assault now, out of thin air, would you be suddenly any more "flawed"? Clearly not. So the evidence matters. In the case of Kavanaugh, there is none.

1) You never addressed most of the evidence that I've already mentioned in this thread, 2) I'm not a Supreme Court nominee; SCOTUS nominees should be held to a higher standard than Joe Sixpack and I'd oppose a Democratic nominee for the Court even if there was even half the evidence we have with Kavanaugh even if it meant that Republicans ended up getting to replace the deciding vote instead of the Democrats (those who know me know I really mean that), 3) Perjury is literally a felony and Kavanaugh has committed it repeatedly during this process even prior to Ford's allegations being reported (the man simply does not respect the rule of law), 4) Kavanaugh has abandoned even a veneer of neutrality and objectivity and that veneer (thin as it can get at times) is vital to the health of the Supreme Court as an institution, 5) the presumption of innocence is not the appropriate standard for a SCOTUS nominee; they must be (as Fuzzy has noted) "above suspicion," 6) what about Ramirez's allegations, 7) if Kavanaugh committed perjury about his drinking then why should we believe anything else he says, 8 ) you did not address the fact that you're literally calling for a rogue activist Supreme Court, 9) what basis do you have for your allegations about Ford?  I've listed numerous pieces of evidence in an earlier post that have informed my view that Ford and Ramirez's allegations are more likely than not to be true.  What evidence is informing your view about the two distinct allegations?

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

I honestly can't believe people buy the Ford accusations. It was the biggest gaslighting effort in ages and completely insincere, only aimed at partisan goals: slowing down the process in order to make sure Democrats win back the Senate before Kavanaugh could be confirmed. Casting doubt and creating smokescreens for no real reason other than pure partisanship. And it is Democrats who should be ashamed of this, not Republicans. Just like Republicans should be ashamed of not organizing hearings for Merrick Garland.

No, I don't view a testimony as "evidence" in itself, polygraphs are not very reliable, there are holes in Ford's testimony, I don't think Kavanaugh liking beer is a problem, I also don't think Kavanaugh downplaying him liking beer during what is essentially a job interview is a problem, and obviously one can find enough people seconding your story once a SCOTUS nominee of a party disliked in your social circles can be taken down.

I don't know anything about the accusations by people other than Ford, and am not particularly interested in learning more about them. They should have gone to court before if they had a problem with him. End of the story.

I hope thats why they did it but then again....whats wrong with that? Surely the party of phony investigations and dirty tricks like Benghazi, emails, death panels, phony IRS targeting Conservatives, Obama born in Kenya, etc... doesn't have a problem with their own behavior and tactics being used against them? It seem like you guys love to dish it out but cant take it back. Hopefully there are many more Kavanaugh investigations in the future.

Seek help.