Official LRC President Donald J Trump Thread

Flagpole wrote:

Runningart2004 wrote:

There is nothing in my past. Attempted rape is a big deal. But also this was 35 years ago when he was a minor. If this was years earlier it would be a bigger deal. It’s also unproven it’s just an accusation.

Name calling makes you sound so adult and mature.

Alan

I get the last word...you are wrong, and there is pretty much complete agreement here that you are wrong, and that NEVER happens. You are accepting of sexual assault. You could not be more wrong.

Like you with Hillary and the interns. Yep, you are wrong, just plain ole>>>>wrong;).

Stupid is as stupid speaks. You're stupid.

JaminLoper wrote:

Like you with Hillary and the interns. Yep, you are wrong, just plain ole>>>>wrong;).

Stupid is as stupid speaks. You're stupid.

Butt . . . . Hillary!

^ The standard JaminLoper reply.

Do some research, brother:

From 2014: In which Kavanaugh at a speech to the Yale Law School Federalist Society in which he recalled drinking and partying in law school.

"I am approaching the 24th anniversary of my graduation from this school. That means I am approaching the 24th anniversary of my organizing 30 classmates in a bus to go to Boston for a Red Sox game and a night of Boston bar-hopping, only for us to return falling out of the bus onto the front steps of Yale Law School at about 4:45 a.m."

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2018/09/brett-kavanaugh-gave-a-speech-about-binge-drinking-in-law-school/

agip wrote:

Trollminator wrote:

I don’t fully accept that. Do you see yourself taking the side of the accused as a first reaction to a sexual misconduct allegation, even if he were a Democrat nominee? I can’t toggle my position on this stuff. I felt just as strongly about Roy Moore as I did about Franken. Get them all the fvck out.

How about Bill Clinton? You agree that the women who accused him of assault/rape are credible, and do you think he should have been pushed aside when they came forward?

It’s apples to oranges. He was in office already and presidents don’t go through confirmation hearings. This guy is being vetted for a SCOTUS seat. If I had my way, any presidential candidate or SCOTUS candidate should go through some standard FBI-style vetting for high clearance. Lie dector test included. The higher the responsibility and implication of the position, the higher the scrutiny and vetting.

Bill Clinton was a dirt bag, but as far as has been proven he did not rape anyone. He lied through his teeth which warranted the impeachment. I was for him getting the booth and not serving out the rest of his term. Our standards have lowered too much.

Al,

You are just a bit off on this.

1) You don't know that this isn't about the victim... that is simply your take on it. You could be right but if so it sure does seem like it took a bit of planning over a long period of time.

2) Yes, drunk teenagers do stupid stuff all of the time... but... and this is the issue... you actually do need to care about the details because they do matter. Since I don't know what happened I am not going to create a straw man to illustrate why details matter, however, I think you are smart enough to understand why specific details do matter.

3) If we all did something horrendous 35 years ago in high school and it is just coming to light now... then, yes, maybe we should all be dragged over the coals for it.

It is possible this women is lying or not remembering things they way they happened or it is also possible that this guy shouldn't be a supreme court justice.

Let it play out.

Remember. Always take what Trump says in reverse. He will pull Kavanugh's nomination. It is just a matter of when the best strategic time is to throw him under the bus.

“I feel so badly that he’s going through this,” Trump said during a news conference at the White House. “This is not a man who deserves this.”

“We want to give everybody a chance to say what they have to say,” Trump added.

women said he raped them.

so got it - you don't believe the women, unless they are on your side.

Democrats are a disgrace

Twinkles wrote:

This is why wrote:

This is why I lurk on this site

That describes Hardloper to a tee.

But I'm a raging flamer, so who cares what I think!

After sitting back for several days and watch the most of libs here already convict Kavanaugh. I did some checking about a current Democrat House Rep who has a similar situation that is much more recent. Remember Keith Ellison?

There is an actual police report from Karen Monahan, the accuser. The libs here hardly mentioned it all. Why does Ellison get to keep his job as both Vice Chair of the DNC & his House seat? Monahan has been ignored here. I guess that #metoo doesn't apply to her.

If you do a Gooogle News Search for Christine Blasey Ford, you will get around 225,000 results

If you do a Google News Search for Karen Monahan, who is Ellison's alleged victim, there are about 2,070 results.

That's over 100 times the media coverage when a Republican has been accused vs. when a top Democrat has been. The Democrats don't believe Monahan but they are "all in" with Ford.

I wonder if the Kavanaugh accuser was also heavily drinking that night of the party and was actually a willing participant only to change her story years later? She will also have to answer questions such as:

Did she like to attend high school parties to drink & get laid?

Was she known to "hook up" with multiple guys in HS?

Not plausible at all but very representative of current butchered thought process. I saw the same thing in the Facebook articles regarding Hillary in 2016, the ones my sister showed me. Those articles were loaded with one ridiculous twist and turn after another. Not short articles but wandering and wandering. I wanted to believe nobody could be stupid enough to think the claims were legitimate. But bottom line people who have a poor grasp of probability actually prefer the convoluted versions. As long as you string one variable on top of another and then another and another they come to believe it has to be true, especially if it aligns with their biases.

Powerful older white males can lie and get away with it. Our systems protect them because their stature applies overboard benefit of a doubt. Since those males believe they are making great contributions they have no problem excusing the lies as necessary and just in the big picture.

That is more of a bottom line truism than any of the wandering versions.

Duane wrote:

"This just in. Unbelievable.

The woman has given the Senate several open dates to chose from. The Senate chose a date that is not on her list. Now the GOP is crying that the hearing will not happen because she will not be available, even though they knew she was not available.

So, no hearing on Monday."

This was the first version some genius posted

A very stable genius to you

Trollminator wrote:

The immediate defensive reaction from the right feeds right into their male anxiety target strategy. It is blowing up bigly in their faces, a term has been coined “himpathy”. Women are going to wreck the GOP’s election results.

Heard the same in 2014 and 2016.

as the GOP planned wrote:

Trollminator wrote:

This is proof the GOP doesn’t have their $hit together. They knew this was a bad candidate and now they are hesitating - they are in meltdown mode now. The Dems will have even more time to beat the discrimination drums to the public. The Senate is possible after all and may soon become likely for the Dems. Keep it up GOP idiots.

Picking a bad date was intentional by the GOP. It lets then blame her for not coming to be interrogated. It also allows them to delay a vote on Kavanaugh while claiming that a delay is not their fault.

Might this have been solved if Feinstein came forth with this important info months ago or perhaps questioned him on this when she had her chance during the hearings or in her meeting with him?

Flagpole wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

What was discussed in the Don Jr meeting is not known, so it isn't proof of collusion, but it shows a willingness by the campaign to collude. This is compounded by Junior's idiotic over-the -top enthusiasm and it having been attended by the campaign manager. A competently managed campaign would notified the FBI about the contact.

Trump himself said it was to get dirt on Hillary:

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1026084333315153924

If you want to use the defense that he lies about everything, then ok, but he said this. He made the caveat that it is done all the time and it legal, but he's flat wrong about that. Also, matters not that it "went nowhere".

Woodward and Page say no collusion in that meeting.

Brother. wrote:

Woodward and Page say no collusion in that meeting.

Wrong, brah. Neither said any such thing.

Solution wrote:

as the GOP planned wrote:

Picking a bad date was intentional by the GOP. It lets then blame her for not coming to be interrogated. It also allows them to delay a vote on Kavanaugh while claiming that a delay is not their fault.

Might this have been solved if Feinstein came forth with this important info months ago or perhaps questioned him on this when she had her chance during the hearings or in her meeting with him?

Would have been solved LONG ago if Trump listened to his SCOTUS pre-team and quietly removed Kavanaugh from consideration.

Huh? Whaaa?? What way? That way??? Look, over there!!!