Why the Left Is Consumed With Hate

[jg121783 3,921]

I know some are saying this is a job interview and not a trial. That fine. Has anyone ever heard of a job interview where the interview is over and the person is on their way to getting the job then at the last minute some drunken floosie comes into the office and says the person being interviewed might have raped her 35 years ago but she can't remember because she was really drunk then the company considers not hiring the person based solely on this? I think in most cases the company would ask the drunken accuser to leave and not even give it any consideration as far as the job goes. But this is a special interview with a bunch of cry baby lefties as interviewers who hold a bias against the interviewee because of their blind hatred against the person who referred the interviewee to the job.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

Heck, she couldn't even remember what day her polygraph was on last month.  Or who paid for it.

 

But she's SURE it was Kavanaugh 36 years ago.

Edited September 27, 2018 by Satisfied

[Dashinka 24,753]

11 hours ago, Satisfied said:

Heck, she couldn't even remember what day her polygraph was on last month.  Or who paid for it.

 

But she's SURE it was Kavanaugh 36 years ago.

I am curious as to her fear of flying excuse explained as wanting to do the interview in private in CA.  Now I was in Korea/China when this all started, but I remember seeing it all over the news that the Senate Committee offered that as an option.  Did she not see that (it was on the leftist biased news stations, but I assume even Fox mentioned it, couldn’t get anything but CNN over there)? An even better question is why did her DNC lawyer not mention it?

 

Overall, we are in the same place, he said she said.  There is no collaboration new here, and all the relevant witnesses mentioned have been interviewed by investigators and denied not knowing anything.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

20 hours ago, jg121783 said:

I know some are saying this is a job interview and not a trial. That fine. Has anyone ever heard of a job interview where the interview is over and the person is on their way to getting the job then at the last minute some drunken floosie comes into the office and says the person being interviewed might have raped her 35 years ago but she can't remember because she was really drunk then the company considers not hiring the person based solely on this? I think in most cases the company would ask the drunken accuser to leave and not even give it any consideration as far as the job goes. But this is a special interview with a bunch of cry baby lefties as interviewers who hold a bias against the interviewee because of their blind hatred against the person who referred the interviewee to the job.

 

  Haven't heard of any of that, but I do know a bad analogy when I see one. 

 

  I have had people who interviewed well and then had issues come up after. Usually it's due to making up too much stuff. You can't go overboard with the BS. There was one guy a few years back though who got killed by the references he gave. 

 

   Anyway, looks like Kavanaugh's still getting the job. Much ado about nothing.

[jg121783 3,921]

2 hours ago, Steeleballz said:

Anyway, looks like Kavanaugh's still getting the job. Much ado about nothing.

I disagree. A man's name was smeared based on nothing more than an accusation from a woman with a questionable past and the democrats and corporate media are complicit in this. I didn't even support Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court but I know a politically motivated smear job when I see one. Think about if his confirmation is denied and he goes back to his current position. Will he be able to continue his life and career without this hanging over his head?

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

4 hours ago, Steeleballz said:

 

  Haven't heard of any of that, but I do know a bad analogy when I see one. 

 

  I have had people who interviewed well and then had issues come up after. Usually it's due to making up too much stuff. You can't go overboard with the BS. There was one guy a few years back though who got killed by the references he gave. 

 

   Anyway, looks like Kavanaugh's still getting the job. Much ado about nothing.

I bet you’d feel WAY differently about it if you were in Kavanaugh’s shoes.  But it’s ok to make light of his situation, since he’s not a democrat; there was really no harm done, right?

[Steeleballz 7,550]

1 hour ago, Satisfied said:

I bet you’d feel WAY differently about it if you were in Kavanaugh’s shoes.  But it’s ok to make light of his situation, since he’s not a democrat; there was really no harm done, right?

 

   If I had ever sexually assaulted someone, I would actually expect it to come out if I was nominated to be a SC justice. So yeah I guess I would feel differently than Kavanaugh, since he didn't seem to expect it at all.  Looks like they will be delaying for an investigation into the allegations against him now. I saw that was a position taken earlier by the American Bar Association. As I said earlier, get it done right. We were told after Scalia died that time is not an issue. Why should it be now?

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

35 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

   If I had ever sexually assaulted someone, I would actually expect it to come out if I was nominated to be a SC justice. So yeah I guess I would feel differently than Kavanaugh, since he didn't seem to expect it at all.  Looks like they will be delaying for an investigation into the allegations against him now. I saw that was a position taken earlier by the American Bar Association. As I said earlier, get it done right. We were told after Scalia died that time is not an issue. Why should it be now?

What if you have never sexually assaulted someone?  Yet you were treated as guilty unless/if you could prove yourself innocent?

[Steeleballz 7,550]

7 minutes ago, Satisfied said:

What if you have never sexually assaulted someone?  Yet you were treated as guilty unless/if you could prove yourself innocent?

 

    How do you know Kavanaugh hasn't assaulted anyone. Were you with him? False allegations do happen obviously, and if that's what happened here, in the absence of proof, the process would likely hinge on Kavanaugh's overall character, and he would likely be confirmed.

 

   I'm not sure you can just dismiss allegations out right other. The drunken floozy comments are out of line and beside the point. The ABA got it right, when they called on the senate to delay the vote and allow an investigation. People would do well to listen to that reasoning. You can allow for justice to happen without artificial time constraints. We know there is no rush. We were already told when Garland was nominated. If Kavanaugh is innocent, he gets in with his reputation intact. If he isn't, he probably doesn't get in. I'm OK with either outcome as long as they get all the facts straight.

 

    

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 hour ago, Steeleballz said:

 

    How do you know Kavanaugh hasn't assaulted anyone. Were you with him? False allegations do happen obviously, and if that's what happened here, in the absence of proof, the process would likely hinge on Kavanaugh's overall character, and he would likely be confirmed.

 

   I'm not sure you can just dismiss allegations out right other. The drunken floozy comments are out of line and beside the point. The ABA got it right, when they called on the senate to delay the vote and allow an investigation. People would do well to listen to that reasoning. You can allow for justice to happen without artificial time constraints. We know there is no rush. We were already told when Garland was nominated. If Kavanaugh is innocent, he gets in with his reputation intact. If he isn't, he probably doesn't get in. I'm OK with either outcome as long as they get all the facts straight.

 

    

Great job deflecting!!  Try answering the question, straight-up, as it was asked.

[Dashinka 24,753]

1 hour ago, Steeleballz said:

 

    How do you know Kavanaugh hasn't assaulted anyone. Were you with him? False allegations do happen obviously, and if that's what happened here, in the absence of proof, the process would likely hinge on Kavanaugh's overall character, and he would likely be confirmed.

 

   I'm not sure you can just dismiss allegations out right other. The drunken floozy comments are out of line and beside the point. The ABA got it right, when they called on the senate to delay the vote and allow an investigation. People would do well to listen to that reasoning. You can allow for justice to happen without artificial time constraints. We know there is no rush. We were already told when Garland was nominated. If Kavanaugh is innocent, he gets in with his reputation intact. If he isn't, he probably doesn't get in. I'm OK with either outcome as long as they get all the facts straight.

 

    

I am just curious, what is the FBI going to do that the Senate investigators haven’t already done?  Witnesses of the alleged event have already been interviewed, there is really no place to start based on the statements of the supposed victim, and there are no forensics.  Should take a day or so.  It is quite telling that all these allegations supposedly occurred when Kavanaugh was either a minor or 18, Senator Graham had it right, sexual predators don’t generally just decide to stop one day, so where are the allegations of more recent attacks?  Sure, get it right, but I would posit it has already been done right.  The GOP used a very experienced prosecutor to do the questioning and she said there was nothing to pursue, they gave her a chance to speak and didn’t attack her as the Dems did to Kavanaugh.  Plain and simple, this is a delaying tactic by the Dems and I only hope they pay for it in November.  Flake is an idiot to think compromising with Democrats is possible, heck, Schumer all but said he was going to fight against Kavanaugh minutes after he was nominated and the members of the committee telegraphed they were no votes before any allegations came forward.  After extensive meetings, and hearings, the vote is ready to go ahead and bam, here is a woman with an unsubstantiated allegation, then as that one cools down, out comes number 2 with an even more outlandish story, then 3 comes up with a truly amazing story.  None of them went to the proper authorities, no they connected with Democrat lawyers and started a circus.  I know it is just fine to destroy a conservative purely for political reasons, but this is simply a joke.  I asked this before and have yet to receive an answer, name the last Democrat president nominee for any position that was put through the same destructive process as Kavanaugh?

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

I’m sure the FBI will do a bang-up job...

 

[Steeleballz 7,550]

1 hour ago, Satisfied said:

Great job deflecting!!  Try answering the question, straight-up, as it was asked.

 

    I answered your question. If he didn't do it, he will be confirmed with his character intact. Since this discussion is based on an actual event, I chose to expand on the answer to clarify the fallacy of presumption contained within your question. 

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

1 hour ago, Steeleballz said:

 

    I answered your question. If he didn't do it, he will be confirmed with his character intact. Since this discussion is based on an actual event, I chose to expand on the answer to clarify the fallacy of presumption contained within your question. 

No you did not.  You made it sound as if this won’t hurt Kavanaugh if he is innocent, which is pure poppycock.  His character will never be intact again.

 

I ask again... how would YOU feel, if YOU were accused of wrongdoing, and knew you were not guilty, but the media/press painted you out to be a bad guy?  You would suffer, your family would suffer, and your career would suffer, because there is likely NO WAY you can prove your innocence.

Even though you refuse to give a straight answer, I know it would upset me to no end, having my reputation tarnished and my family treated poorly and threatened.  

Edited September 29, 2018 by Satisfied

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Its them trying to stall past the midterms.  It's that simple . Next week it will be more outrage, bat crazy protests and an attempt to kick it down the road again.