I understand why you’d feel that way and agree that his style may “impassion opposition”. The issue I have is I’m not sure that this differs much from routine snobbery. — NOS4A2

It is routine for the opposition to react to a President's questionable statements. What isn't routine is the number of questionable statements.

Relativist
1.4k
I understand why you’d feel that way and agree that his style may “impassion opposition”. The issue I have is I’m not sure that this differs much from routine snobbery.
— NOS4A2
It is routine for the opposition to react to a President's questionable statements. What isn't routine is the number of questionable statements. — Relativist

Very, very well put, Relativist!

It is routine for the opposition to react to a President's questionable statements. What isn't routine is the number of questionable statements.

I think questionable statements are commonplace outside of the public relations politics we’ve all grown accustomed to. I remember a time when a weird scream would ruin a politician’s electability. That form of political theater is, I hope, destroyed in the wake of Trump’s presence.

What form of theater was destroyed in Obama's wake? You may be confusing habituation and reactionism.

Never heard that one before. Spliffs are build like carrots, though.

Been there done that got the tshirt.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=PObknmaH9po

I think questionable statements are commonplace outside of the public relations politics we’ve all grown accustomed to. I remember a time when a weird scream would ruin a politician’s electability. That form of political theater is, I hope, destroyed in the wake of Trump’s presence. — NOS4A2

Consider that lots of Republicans give Trump a pass on his numerous instances of sexual misconduct but still go after Biden's. Many do the same with gaffs: Trump's gaffs are OK because they like what he's doing, but then they still jump on Biden's. So I don't think that Republican's acceptance of Trump's negatives (present company excepted) will have any bearing on the future. To quote Stephen Tyler: "Dream On!"

That consideration would apply to both sides, many dems are ignoring Bidens sexual misconduct and focusing on Trumps. Biden being the creep/sexual misconduct type is more believable based on what ive seen and heard to be honest.

Consider that lots of Republicans give Trump a pass on his numerous instances of sexual misconduct but still go after Biden's. Many do the same with gaffs: Trump's gaffs are OK because they like what he's doing, but then they still jump on Biden's. So I don't think that Republican's acceptance of Trump's negatives (present company excepted) will have any bearing on the future. To quote Stephen Tyler: "Dream On!"

I don’t care what republicans think, frankly. In fact the rearranging of republican politics was one of the greatest things of a Trumpian takeover.

Trumps and Kavanaugh’s accusers were given ample time in the media and were used as political cudgel more than a search for justice. So it seems fitting to me that they get to sleep in the bed that they made.

don’t care what republicans think, frankly. In fact the rearranging of republican politics was one of the greatest things of a Trumpian takeover. — NOS4A2

You had said you hoped the "political theater" was being "destroyed in the wake of Trump's presence". All I did was show that's not happening.

That consideration would apply to both sides, many dems are ignoring Bidens sexual misconduct and focusing on Trumps. Biden being the creep/sexual misconduct type is more believable based on what ive seen and heard to be honest. — DingoJones

It's hypocritical to apply a double standard, and
the potential is there for Dems, but it's more than potential for any Trump supporter who blasts Biden.

Politics aside, it would be nice if we could consider how we should respond to such accusations. I think accusations should be taken seriously, but accusations should not become lethal weapons.

I dont see why it should be treated any differently than any other criminal accusation. I recognise there are differences in crimes and unique damages from sex crimes but I do not think any of those justify special exception to legal procedure. Then again, its not the courts of law that so easily discard due process, its the court of public opinion. Thats where social pressure can result in job loss, destroyed reputation, financial ruin...things like “believe all women”. The fuck I will. I dont believe anybody all the time. Human beings are treacherous, dangerous animals.
Sorry, feeling a bit ranty I guess. None of that is meant towards you.

Believe all women? — # Me Too, et al

:chin:

Rather: Investigate all claims corroborated by physical, circumstantial & non-hearsay testimonial evidence.

:mask:

“believe all women”. The fuck I will. I dont believe anybody all the time. Human beings are treacherous, dangerous animals. — DingoJones

Rather: Investigate all claims corroborated by physical, circumstantial & non-hearsay testimonial evidence. — 180 Proof

I tnink we agree that something more is needed than an accusation. Some investigation is needed just to see if there's corroboration.

Kavanaugh and Biden are a good pair of cases to compare. There are some differences between the cases, but are the differences sufficient to consider only one exonerated?

Kavanaugh was the straw that broke the camel's back for me. I don't accept US jurisdiction in international contracts any more.

Im not familiar enough with the cases to talk about legal exoneration but it does seem hypocritical to treat the cases differently in this context. If you think one should or should not be dismissed, then you should think the other should or shouldn't be dismissed as well. If you think the accusation factors into job qualification for one, then you should think it for both. Whatever moral judgements made should be made for both etc etc.

DingoJones
1.7k
↪Relativist

Im not familiar enough with the cases to talk about legal exoneration but it does seem hypocritical to treat the cases differently in this context. If you think one should or should not be dismissed, then you should think the other should or shouldn't be dismissed as well. If you think the accusation factors into job qualification for one, then you should think it for both. Whatever moral judgements made should be made for both etc etc. — DingoJones

One charge involved a young, privileged college student who had drunk way too much "beer" and supposedly happened in a house during a fraternity party...

...the other involved a United States Senator who has no other charges of this sort made during his 40 years in public office...and supposedly happened in a hallway on the Senate side of the Capitol Building of the United States of America...

...and you think they should be treated the same.

Interesting.

But I think that's like saying a sand castle built by a 5 year-old kid at the beach should be treated the same as a house built by Frank Lloyd Wright.

Hang then both and be done with it.

It's true that the charges should not be treated the same. There is more corroborative evidence in Biden's case than there was with Kavanaugh's. So Biden should not only get a congressional hearing, but more besides.

StreetlightX
5.2k
It's true that the charges should not be treated the same. There is more corroborative evidence in Biden's case than there was with Kavanaugh's. So Biden should not only get a congressional hearing, but more besides. — StreetlightX

It's true that the charges should not be treated the same. There is more corroborative evidence in Biden's case than there was with Kavanaugh's. — StreetlightX

Biden's accuser publicly praised him after the alleged event. That's odd behavior for someone who is the victim of sexual assault. Nevertheless, I think it's possible he did it, but it's also possible she exaggerated at the time. How does one treat possibilities like this? I think it will inevitably boil down to one's judgment of the man's character. The same thing goes for Kavanaugh. Character judgment is subjective, and this juxtaposition demonstrates that. People can vote against Biden for this, if they judge it that way. Others are free to judge it differently. There's no objectively correct judgment.

Character judgment is subjective, and this juxtaposition demonstrates that. — Relativist

Lying to ensure you get a cushy job is about his current character and fitness for the job as a judge. I would've hoped there's not that much subjectivity involved about that. That's irrespective of making a judgment call on whether he raped that woman or not.

Lying to ensure you get a cushy job is about his current character and fitness for the job as a judge. I would've hoped there's not that much subjectivity involved about that. That's irrespective of making a judgment call on whether he raped that woman or not. — Benkei

I'm not sure what you're referring to, but at the time - I opposed Kavanaugh's nomination. I thought Blasey-Ford's allegations were credible - both because she was credible and because it pertained to plausible antics for a teen-age boy of privilege. By all accounts that I'm familiar with, he outgrew it (except for his affection for beer) and became a respected judge with a commendable life. I wouldn't hold the alleged teen-age assault against him, just his lies, lack of empathy, and the way he reacted - which didn't seem very judicial to me. Biden's case is a bit different - he and the alleged victim were adults, so it's not the antics of an immature teen, and there's no apparent pattern of such behavior - so I lean toward thinking that he didn't do it. I can't claim I'm completely objective, but I don't think anyone can. I expect that if a poll were taken, Democrats would tend to think Kavanaugh was guilty and Biden innocent, and Republicans would tend to think the exact opposite.

I'm referring to Kavanaugh and in his case he lied when giving testimony. Whether he raped the woman or not doesn't need to be established. The fact that he lied should've been enough grounds since it amounted to perjury. There was the meaning of boofing and the Devil's Triangle, lies about how much he drank in college and William Pryor's nomination. It later was revealed he also lied about having heard of Ramirez. That's a lot of unnecessary lies.

Wow. The case against Michael Flynn has been dropped! Finally some justice.

https://apnews.com/ae1ad252bb13490db2ceffc5d17b6d92

Incoming meltdown.

Trump brutally attacked by his own party.

How do you know this is justice?

Maybe Flynn struck a deal with the deep-state who controls everything and causes all of Trump's failures.

This is really suspicious if you ask me. Why would the corrupt DOJ give quarter to an innocent and graceful champion that was hand selected by Trump?

This is how we know that he is now working against Trump as a part of the continuous governance of insidious and mostly democratic deep-state actors.

That or the USA is a banana Republic.

He was railroaded. This was just the first domino to fall.

Wow. The case against Michael Flynn has been dropped! Finally some justice.

https://apnews.com/ae1ad252bb13490db2ceffc5d17b6d92

Incoming meltdown. — NOS4A2

My guess: Judge Sullivan won't accept this politicized move by DOJ and will give the WH the finger by giving General Flynn more prison time than the six months recommended by Mueller. A presidential pardon is coming. :shade:

That might be the case, though I believe the case against Flynn was politicized, not the other way about.