No nominee should have to withdraw or be yanked based on a single , 35-year, unverified accusation. You are wrong to say that I would be calling for Merrick Garland to withdraw if Hillary were president right now and ALL WE HAD was one person accusing garland of an awful act 35 years ago.

Like, it doesn't work that way. and it shouldn't work that way. are you guys really suggesting that from here on out, all we need is an accusation? so the next time a Dem president nominates a SC justice, and someone WRITES A LETTER.....it doesn't matter if it's true or not. or provable. or even investigated. all it takes is for SOMEONE to say, "that person once was an attempted rapist, batterer, blackjack card counter, underground cock-fight league commissioner!".....and we all say, welp, guess that's that.


Really? cuz I don't want that to be the standard for either/any party.

lol

Investigated you say?!

a full reverse hypothetical would be a nonwhite athiest or muslim liberal. it'd be chaos. like keith ellison is probably out of the running for a supreme court seat at this point, it's looking like. but only republicans would show contempt for women by actively working to confirm him for a lifetime position NOW, and not even investigate, it's monday testimony no investigation no other witnesses or forever hold your peace.

and here's a preview of the republican talking points on monday: you don't have any witnesses! there's been no professional law enforcement investigation!

It's time for some floorplan theory

What kind of threat is this? You guys blocked a Dem SCOTUS nominee for no ****ing reason at all!

Would be a fun little offshoot of the simulation to fork off a couple new scenarios to determine just how big of a scumbag the GOP would let sit on SCOTUS, knowing that they are about to lose their majorities in November.

Off the top of my head I set the line at Bill Cosby.

yeah investigated. as in the people who are saying that this nomination should be scuttled, even without an investigation.

I get that half the country is still in the throes of a 2-year temper tantrum, the current symptoms of which is lying on the floor, kicking and screaming about SCOTUS.

but it doesn't change the fact that it's preposterous to suggest that a nomination should be withdrawn based on a single unproven accusation.

At first I thought perhaps you were raised by wolves and emerged from the forest quite recently but since you are clearly aware of Merrick Garland's existance, what in the ****ing world are you pearl clutching about and why?

"I'm not mad, I'm laughing, you're mad"

bahahahahahahahahaha

"I'm not saying Ford is lying, you guys are saying Ford is lying, because you're inventing the standard that anyone writing a letter can derail an entire nomination, so really, this smearing of Ford is all on you"

TIWRAB

oh also im not saying there shouldn't be an investigation by the (proper) authorities. The FBI took a few days to investigate Anita Hill's claims. that would be fine here, imo.

I'm skeptical of HOW the investigation would work, is all, given that Ford isn't sure where it took place, or when, or how she got to the house or left the house. That's not to question the validity of her claim. I sure as heck can't remember the where/when details of every thing that happened in highschool.

But I'm not an investigator so my skepticism as to how such an investigation could be conducted is admittedly meaningless.

But let's say for argument's sake: they investigate. Aggressively. lets say they find ZERO information to corroborate the claim.

would you guys say that he should still be yanked/voted down BECAUSE of the accusation??

Just publicly available information is enough to pull his nomination.

when it comes to hypotheticals, i assure you, we will always do the right thing

Chyme, do you think this is a good look or do you even care?

All he cares about is owning the libs, which is the same reason why the Kavanaugh isn't being withdrawn. Like if they withdrew him now they could still just ram through one of the other finalists before the midterms, but now if they withdraw him they "lose."

Seems like the better democrat play woulda been to find a lyin' ***** for Gorsuch, since he was going into the stolen seat.

Compromising with or losing to Democrats on anything is the only thing that the base ever holds Republicans accountable for. It's literally the only thing they care about.

It should be withdrawn because of the perjury, the financial irregularities, and the obvious lack of qualification.

But we'll take what we can get.

Mother****er talking "2 year temper tantrum" boy your kind elected a senile ****ing conman from the TeeVee because you were so mad that a black got to be President.

Yeah if you haven't read it, the cliffnotes are "I have concocted a very elaborate alternative theory in my superbrain that absolves Kav, ergo he's innocent"

FWIW Chyme, everyone itt thought Kavanaugh shouldn't be appointed *before* this allegation even came up. It's just a miracle that something came up that could disqualify him in 2018, because the 10 prior reasons are bo longer disqualifying.

I legit laughed out loud at the house blueprints. Thought it was fake for sure.

Whelan straight up accusing a random stranger of rape is incredible since he's been laying the ground work in a whisper campaign in like the last 3-4 days that he and the Federalist Society were gonna crack this case wide open. They got Parker to write an ATROCIOUS opinion column about how nice it would be if there was a way Ford and Kavanaugh could both be telling the truth.

And this:


implies that the NOMINEE was involved in this ****show?

If he stopped at "here's a photo of both of them, she could have been mistaken" that probably would have been enough to sow some doubt in some stupid minds. Instead he came up with a bunch of garbage and created something that only QAnon people will believe.