US Politics/2016 Election Pick Your Poison Master Thread

[aygart]

Now you want to switch gears since I called you out. Not going to work.
What did I miss?

Even that statement is one sided. Everything has been rehashed many times and each time you twisted it to meet your biases. If you want to just think that you are unbiased then go ahead and enjoy your alternate reality.

[zh cohen]

How will a fair investigation derail his career?

If the investigation delays the vote until after the mid-terms, and Democrats win a majority in the Senate that is the end of his career.

I can think of at least 2 cases that I know personally where accusations that were proven 100% false ruined a guys life.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Even that statement is one sided. Everything has been rehashed many times and each time you twisted it to meet your biases. If you want to just think that you are unbiased then go ahead and enjoy your alternate reality.

You claim I don't understand what others are saying. I ask you over and over what did I miss. You refuse to answer to back up your claim. Everyone can see right through your BS.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

If the investigation delays the vote until after the mid-terms, and Democrats win a majority in the Senate that is the end of his career.

This is a real answer instead of the BS @aygart keeps posting. I agree with you 100%. I would be against any investigation that would delay this past the mid-terms.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

I can think of at least 2 cases that I know personally where accusations that were proven 100% false ruined a guys life.

Yes it does happen. This is the exception instead of the rule. Remember the Thomas investigation. It saved his career.

[aygart]

This is a real answer instead of the BS @aygart keeps posting. I agree with you 100%. I would be against any investigation that would delay this past the mid-terms.

Except that you keep pushing everything which would do that.

[gingyguy]

Someone is obsessed with the politics involved instead of addressing the credible allegations. Known as a smokescreen. 

sorry to interrupt but what are the requirements for an allegation to be credible?

[Yammer]

On one side we have the accuser asking for a fair investigation.
On the other side we have the accused not asking for a fair investigation.
Very interesting why he doesn't want a fair investigation. Yes I am assuming since he has not once asked for a fair investigation that means he does not want one.

Projecting what? All I said from day one is their should be a fair investigation. You either agree with that or you don't. You and the other Trumpsters keep bringing in all the other BS to justify no fair investigation.

Blame what he wants is not the issue. In the reason he doesn't want a fair investigation because it will stop him from becoming a SCOTUS justice then he doesn't deserve it. No on should want this type of individual on the court. Cue where @aygart states they would all do this to justify his flaws!!!

FTFY

Does it concern you in the least that she only asked for a "fair investigation" once that became the politically expediant thing for the Democrats?

Do you not recognize that this "fair investigation" is not fair to the accused, because the investigation itself will derail his career?

How will a fair investigation derail his career? Trying to get to the truth will derail his career?

I know what they are saying. They are blaming the D's for this whole mess. They are saying K is afraid of a fair investigation because it will derail/kill his nomination. Am I missing anything?

If the investigation delays the vote until after the mid-terms, and Democrats win a majority in the Senate that is the end of his career.

This is exactly what I was going to write. Took the words out of my mouth

Yes it does happen. This is the exception instead of the rule. Remember the Thomas investigation. It saved his career.

That's why the best way would be for the Rs to commit to removing him from the bench if it's verified as true. But I doubt the Ds would accept that. The whole reason why it was pushed off until now was precisely to prevent him from being nominated..

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Everyone can see right through your BS and dishonesty. You will see the same post over and over until you answer.

Only because you decided that any discussion of the parts that you don't want discuss means that feel what fits your biases to have them saying. Your biases are preventing you from even knowing what people are really saying. That is how biased you are.

I know what they are saying. They are blaming the D's for this whole mess. They are saying K is afraid of a fair investigation because it will derail/kill his nomination. Am I missing anything?

You are missing more than you are getting. You need to own up to your biases so you can see past them.

What am I missing?

You will not get it until you own up to your biases. Everything he's been very explicit but your biases are pending you from seeing it.

What am I missing?

[ChaimMoskowitz]

sorry to interrupt but what are the requirements for an allegation to be credible?

Glad you asked. 

Depends what your definition of credible.
For me credible=believable.
Just as K's denial is credible. Unlike @aygart who can't separate politics from this I hope you can.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

That's why the best way would be for the Rs to commit to removing him from the bench if it's verified as true. But I doubt the Ds would accept that. The whole reason why it was pushed off until now was precisely to prevent him from being nominated..

Neither side would agree to this.

[gingyguy]

Glad you asked. 

missed that one sorry... i would have thought that the fact that she waited 35 years gives her credibility a pretty big dip

[Yammer]

Neither side would agree to this.

I don't see why Rs wouldn't

[zh cohen]

Yes it does happen. This is the exception instead of the rule. Remember the Thomas investigation. It saved his career.

Do you see that her actions in this case seem to indicate that that is her goal?
https://twitter.com/seanmdav/status/1043570199390240773

[ChaimMoskowitz]

i would have thought that the fact that she  35 years gives her credibility a pretty big dip

Most including me would agree with you because we don't understand how trauma like this effects victims. That is why she wants expert witnesses to testify to help everyone understand.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

Do you see that her actions in this case seem to indicate that that is her goal?

That is how you see her actions. I want a fair investigation to sort all this out.

[ChaimMoskowitz]

I don't see why Rs wouldn't

They would get crucified by their base.

[avromie7]

Glad you asked. 

A vague story with no corroborating evidence or witnesses is NOT a credible accusation.

[gingyguy]

Most including me would agree with you because we don't understand how trauma like this effects victims. That is why she wants expert witnesses to testify to help everyone understand.

then why are you calling it credible if you agree that its not credible?

[ChaimMoskowitz]

A vague story with no corroborating evidence or witnesses is NOT a credible accusation.

That is how you look at it and I don't have a problem with it. The problem is your facts are wrong. There are witnesses and they claim there is corroborating evidence from her doctor and husband. That is why we need a fair investigation to see who is telling the truth.