AZhitman wrote: ↑Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:54 pm
Are we at all concerned about Mr. Booker's behavior?
Or do we only conduct witch hunts when they're politically expedient?
Wasn't aware of the Booker situation.
Thought maybe it's because my "information bubble".
Decided to look into it. Couldn't find any respected sources.
2 traditional sources from Indianapolis, then places like BizPac Review, The New American, Twitchy, PJ Media, etc. Most of these sources covering not the social media post but a piece from Laura Ingraham's show.
I can understand the lack of coverage but if this really is a thing you could find it on most places even if just a small story but you could find something about it. This person hasn't gotten ANY offers from hungry news sources looking for a blockbuster story? OR are all the potential news sources not interested in hearing this person's story because they are all looking out for Cory Booker?
I don't understand how you can equate the two.
- One made an anonymous social media post.
- The other identified herself while telling her story to WaPo, then to Sen. Finestien, then testified in congress.
- Finally people can vote Booker out when he's up for re-election and SCOTUS is a lifetime appointment.
If Dr. Ford only managed to write an unnamed social media post about Kavanaugh then I think it would get equal traction.
AZhitman wrote: ↑Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:54 pm
Let's agree that a genuine investigation is warranted. Let's also agree that if an accuser is found to have been dishonest, criminal sanctions shall apply. That keeps political pawns from crawling out of the woodwork and 'falling on their sword' [apologies to Mr. Booker] for 10 minutes of fame or a book deal.
I would agree.
If you can prove the allegation was false I would like there to be some legal ramifications which to my knowledge already exists in the legal code.
AZhitman wrote: ↑Mon Oct 22, 2018 8:54 pm
I think we can also agree that BK's nomination could easily have been defeated legitimately.
I disagree with you on this one.
I remember Rick Santorum said about the Kavanaugh investigation
"Republicans didn't investigate because they had the votes." I tried looking but couldn't find the clip. It was CNN after Flake asked for an investigation.
Rick Santorum's characterization matched exactly what people saw out of this nomination process. Move as fast as possible so we can get him in before mid-terms and do the minimum necessary. Once they didn't have the votes they did a VERY limited investigation and kept the results private. Not because it was a no brainer that most people wanted but because they didn't have the votes.
Even with all that, he still should have lost his nomination because of his temperament. Any objective person can see that this guy was groomed to be a Republican partisan. This is like the equivalent of having Eric Holder nominated for SCOTUS. Kavanaugh's obvious partisanship was on full display and yet a group of Senators representing only ~44% of the country sent a man into a life time appointment when 52% of Americans opposed him and only 40% supported him.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics ... d05da55167
(If you can't see the WaPo article, just open it up in an incognito window on your browser)
So I hope I made my case.
There was plenty wrong with BK and Rs didn't care.
They did serious harm to this country by politicizing the SCOTUS in a time when people's trust for institutions are at an all time low.
They did it without blinking an eye, or extending an olive branch.
It was a huge FCK YOU to the majority of Americans and afterward they celebrated.