The Winners and the Losers of the Kavanaugh Confirmation Hearings:
It's been a long, long, long process, and after three months of senseless bickering and fighting, the process is over. It's time for me to go over who I feel won and lost in the process.
The Winners of the Hearings:
Kavanaugh and the Republican Party*
Brett Kavanaugh was brought up to nomination on July 9th, 2018, to replace retiring Justice Anthony Kennedy, who was due to leave July 31st. In the process, Democrats vehemently attacked him, stating that he was an enemy to women's rights, gay marriage, and various other topics if he were to make it to the Supreme Court. Republicans defended him on the grounds that he was a textualist and not a judicial activist. Accusations of rape came up against him in early September, being accused by professor Christine Blasey Ford and eventually being accused by two other people. Kavanaugh testified on September 27th, 2018, under oath, to defend himself against the accusations. This would pit a lot of energy between liberal Democrats and conservative Republicans, with those who were independent to see who would be the more truthful side. Kavanaugh was confirmed today in a 50-48 Aye-Nay vote, with one Democrat (Joe Manchin of West Virginia) voting Aye and two Republicans retracting their vote (Senator Steve Daines of Montana would have voted Aye but attended his daughter's wedding; Sen. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska would have voted Nay but retracted her vote to offset the balance under an agreement with Daines), leaving the final vote tally to a majority Aye. He will sit on the Court starting Tuesday.
Meanwhile, Republicans and their surprising pushback reaffirmed to a lot of Republican voters that they still had a backbone in a time where the Democrats may have had an edge in the midterms. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky stood up to Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and pushed back hard on him, while Lindsey Graham of South Carolina proved himself to a lot of Republicans that he could put up a fight, and probably won himself a lot of Trump voters because of it in a time where his standing with Trump supporters was not very high. Susan Collins, on the other hand, showed up with a last minute statement explaining why she was voting Aye on Kavanaugh, after a lot of wondering if she would vote so, also reaffirming that Kavanaugh would win and the Rs had a backbone.
The Losers of the Hearings:
The Democrats, the Protesters and the Media
Just like with the accusation hearings, the Democrats had their chance to explain themselves, and they blew it. Instead of attempting to comprehensibly explain themselves, they instead threw temper tantrums (hint hint, Minnesota Senators) and showed that they were only doing this as a part of #TheResistance rather than on their own accord. They wanted to project partisanship on Kavanaugh but failed. Instead, they made themselves look crazy to the independents on the fence and reaffirmed to the Republicans that they had nothing new in store.
The protesters... aye. No one's saying you can't protest and I don't discourage you to use your rights like that. That being said, there was nothing organic about the anti-Kavanaugh protests. A lot of dirty Soros cash was flung around, and if the initial Stop Kavanaugh "XX" pages didn't tell you anything, the protesters and the signs would have. Basically, paid protesters and nothing grassroots about it.
A few choice words to the media: STOP BLAMING EVERYTHING ON THE WHITE MAN. IT HASN'T FUCKING WORKED AND THE PENDULUM IS GOING TO HIT YOU VERY HARD WHEN IT SWINGS BACK AT YOU. Come on, thinly veiled racism isn't funny. I'm a gay Mexican defending the fact that Kavanaugh being a white man has literally nothing to do with this, racism is fucking annoying when it's done by anyone and it's even worse when the media perpetuates it. That and the presumption of "innocent until proven guilty" has been thrown out by the media and peddled by the Democrats. I'm not saying Dr. Ford was lying about being raped, what I'm saying here is that the media peddled HARD that Kavanaugh was guilty because of them framing him as such.
* for Lisa Murkowski. I dunno where to really stand on her.
- TheSLSAMG, Tech_Dreamer, handymanshandle and 1 other
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
This entire shit show was simple "framing & telling" attempt from the democrats, they didn't have any straight argument that can stand up opposing him , his senate hearings proved it, far more evenly qualified than Neil on how he framed questions & replied, so they used their dirty tactic , even when it meant ruining the mans lifelong reputation & his work for the entirety of his life, recycled from Trump election run & acted like it's something real & serious just for the sole purpose of delay .
Knowingly manipulated women & took advantage of their fears & used them to act out fear & rage & not rationalism, ironically they were fighting the wrong enemy , but within that there were deliberate biased people stirring things up knowingly. plus same info manipulation to lots of clueless people & throw off balance another lot of confused people, Moreover using media & news,paper,industry celebrities to spread the fake & overblown allegation with manufactured evidence that something was threat to them in order to get a rise out of them & attack him & his family or anyone who supported him , something we expect to see from fraudulent people . they went right at it again & did it again .
- PlayStation 2 and TheSLSAMG
-
2
-
-
On Ford , wasn't even a rape to begin with , it's misconduct/misdemeanor in technical terms if that event had ever happened the way she described , which she wasn't able to prove if it even occurred , plus the list of witness she put forward including her friend all have denied that a party was held there at that time or was there a party at all , plus Brets diary puts him out of town , in a nutshell , it's allegation which wasn't/cannot be/hasn't proved.
Poly was done in a closed up manner in a controlled environment, with 2 , Just 2 question! asking if a written statement was true, no video or audio recording , just the readings from the leads , they were covert on who arranged the poly to frame it as an evidence, in a standard setting , heavy preliminary lineup of baseline questions are asked & followup of thorough description form of questioning happens, see how contrasting that is to this?
Legally when there is no evidence present (no witness, no explicit time frame, photographs, notes of the event from 2nd & 3rd party), victims statement is taken as the evidence , here plays Fords statement as a key final evidence, but there comes the counter-statement of witnesses she put forward denying her claim. again allegation doesn't match up with counter 'evidence' (witness testimony)
rape allegations came from a second personal , who wasn't able to provide any facts or even a corroborating evidence from 100s to 1000's in overall collective witnesses of the potential event from the parties she described, zero people concur with her or even say he acted out of line, if it had happened , it was down right allegation from a single witness who was supposedly at all parties he went to alleging he ran rape event at all parties. (believe she said she was at 12 or 15 parties in the area) in a nutshell Lie, FBI Has just her statement & that's it, Catch is they interviewed few people from parties Bret went & they countered her statement stating he never went out of line. again final verdict it doesn't match up with the allegation . it's allegation which wasn't/cannot be/hasn't proved. why do you think ford was there instead of her? because this cannot make it by any means , but fords their best shot at halting the event. because it's convincing with a victim story telling rather than alleging .
i wish i could say it simply , but these are the details are suppressed or expressed to stamp him Good or Bad in the broad generalization. Bad or Good?
Evidence says he's clean, Allegations says he's bad, it's just that simple. he has been put through the sieve too many times & have still come clean. but allegation is stinky.
if this was a political hit job, they won on smearing him on a confusing chaos. this is the mess they wanted. they wanted him hurt & dirty going in .
- TheSLSAMG and PlayStation 2
-
2
-
I'm split on Murkowski. On one hand, I think she's kowtowing to the tactics of the Democrats. On the other hand, I understand her point and I don't think it's necessarily a bad one.
-
What gets me is regardless of where you lie on this there are far greater fundamental implications. Look here we have allegations with no evidence and people willing to completely toss aside due process of law and innocent until proven guilty to pursue what it politically expedient for them. At what point do you have to say enough is enough?
-
people thinking & acting like a panicked clueless mob like in medieval time on a modern age, no wonder he called it a witch hunt. nothing changes with stupid people no mater what timeline it is.
