Ten oz

It is unclear what Trump's true net worth is. Two things are clear however and they are that if he were smart with money he'd be worth more than he is and he has lied about the extend of his wealth throughout his entire adult life.

I think there should be an option to opt out.

At this point several of Kavanaugh's references during his testimony have been proven false. From making false claims about one of his accusers (I linked in my previous post) to mischaracterizing his drinking which fromer classmateshave come forward regarding Here it is plainly clear that Kavanaugh has been dishonest during this process. At this point it is purely argumentative state otherwise.

Seems Kavanaug knowing made miss leading comments about his second acusser.

That explains the Senate's behavior perhaps but not the White House's behavior. Trump isn't above publicly bullying any Republican Senator who doesn't give him what he wants. Winning fights, especially ones with lots of media coverage, at all cost always is Trump's shtick . Not calculating the fallout or worrying about what comes next. If Collins or Murkowski voted against Kavanaugh Trump could have just gone ballistic against them and Democrats then appointed another Judge. By virtue of the way many conservatives feel Kavanaugh has been mistreated his replacement would have iron clad support on day one and the rush to get them through would be fever pitched. I do not think concern about swing votes is what has muted Trump over the last few days. I can't imagine that being enough for him to call Ford a credible witness, appoint the FBI, and joked about Kavanaugh's drinking. Trump appears comfortable with Kavanaugh failing. Perhaps the White House has someone else they like more in more mind, perhaps they have info that on Kavanaugh that renders him not worth fighting harder for, or etc. I don't know but at the moment I am leaning towards a X factor not currently circulating more so than standard Senate concerns about votes or the midterms.

I am surprised they didn't vote Kavanaugh through last. Even without Flake's they could still have had Pence cast the deciding vote. I suspect there must be additional information we (the public) aren't privy to floating around about Kavanaugh. Even Trump has been unusually restrained over the last few days. I don't buy that it has to do with fear of election backlash because Kavanaugh on the bench would be a massive win for the base.

Obviously no crimes should be committed and if any are law should be enforced.

All politicians and their appointees are subject to public criticisms. It is neither fair or unfair that Trump attacks Jeff Sessions on twitter or that some political aids get booted from restaurants. No one is forced into these very public positions which impact the lives of everyone in the country. I don't pity any of them from Hilary Clinton to Trump or Brett Kavanaugh. A political appointee crying about being criticized publicly is like a Football running back crying about being tackled during a play in my opinion.

Right, but you do realize that Kavanaugh's suitablity for SCOTUS is what Ford is testifying to? If is why she wrote to her Senator rather than walked I to a police department and filed a complaint.

@swansont, Kavanaugh is a Judge. As boasted he's a Yale graduate. Providing knowingly misleading testimony, citing partisan conspiracies, and challenging Senators who questioned him is all ugly behavior by Kavanaugh. If this were a trial Kavanaugh would have been found in contempt of court must likely in my opinion. J.C.MacSwell and MigL seem to be saying they don't care about his behavior or fitness for office. Rather they seem to have a philosophical issue with the fact Ford's claim have been included in his nomination process in the first place. I get the impression they feel it is unfair to Kavanaugh that anything he has not been proven guilty of in a court of law would be brought of. Video could come out tomorrow showing Kavanaugh violently hold Ford down covering her mouth and MigL and J.C. MacSwell would still argue that everything up to the release of the tape had been unfair. They don't seem to care whether he is guilty or innocent. They seem to care that he is treated as 100% innocent every second up to the moment he is proven 100% guilty. MigL has repeatedly stated that Kavanaugh's fitness for the bench doesn't matter. Opening sentence of MigL's OP is " This is not about B Kavanough's suitability for the Supreme Court". J.C.MacSwell and MigL are doing mental gymnastics that I find disingenuous . I have attempted to stick exclusively to merits of the misconduct claim but the Senate hearings are purely about Kavanaugh's suitability. It is precisely what the Constitution empowers the Senate to evaluate and vote on. Not his guilt or innocence in any specific crime. Suitability is the purpose of these hearings yet per the OP it is off topic to consider suitability. This isn't a trial the Senate job here isn't to determine if Kavanaugh violated a federal or state statutes. This processes only purpose is to determine his lifetime appointment. Ford wrote her Representative, Senator Feinstein, a letter regarding the assault months before hearing began and her Representative brought it up during the hearings. That is how representative govt works. The way this conversation has been boxed in by the OP does it a disservice in my opinion. I do understand MigL's and J.C. MacSwell's point about being innocent until proven guilty but MigL and J.C. MacSwell don't seem to understand the point of the Senate Judiciary Committee's hearings. As such we are all just posting past each other.

Where did I say his testimony would be disallowed by a trial judge? I personally think the "selective" memory stuff is overstated. All memory is selective to various degrees. I remember the moment I got married but can't tell you the last conversation I had with my prior or the fist conversation after. The mind doesn't remember every moment of every day the same. Details which are peripheral to a traumatic or important event simply aren't going to be as clear. Dr. Ford herset explained the science behind it in her testimony. Reagan couldn't remember. Considering he had Alzheimer's (wasn't interviewed by special counsel till he was out of office), yes I consider his testimony truthful. Right, which means one of Kavanaugh's own stated defenses would be gone.

Ford and her Husband claim (sworn affidavit) that Ford named Kavanaugh to her therapist back in 2012. If the FBI can confirm that with the therapist it at least knocks down suspicions this is all a political stunt by the Democrats to keep Kavanaugh off the bench. Kavanaugh wasn't a SCOTUS nominee in 2012. So one wouldn't be able to claim Ford's just making this up now to block him. If the 2012 claim is proven Ford has been making the claim about Kavanaugh for several years. Kavanaugh himself claimed this is a sham by Democrats rooted in 2016 fustrations and the Clintons. That was the defense he put forward out of his own mouth. Conformation that Ford named him as her attacker in 2012 at the very least is evidence that Kavanaugh's stated defense is inaccurate. Or do you feel a judge would disallow sworn affidavits and evidence from 2012? What politically charged motive can you imavy Ford would have had in 2012 to name Kavanaugh to her therapist?

@Eise, you are obscuring the fact that written works by Thales were believed to have existed by individuals whom were very probably real. We can debate whether or not those very probably real people had access to that work or interpretations of that work but ultimately work was thought (by Aristotle and others) to have existed. Even Paul didn't believe any work of Jesus existed. Not only that but the work credited to Thales would take an elitely educated person to write. It is very sophisticated for it's time. Thales is credited with contributions to geometry for example. If Thales didn't exist whomever invented Thales had insight and intellect at the level credited to Thales. Thus, Thales by another name. Jesus's story is full of common lure and tropes which were well worn by the time the Gospels came along. Only a Thales level mind could have invented Thales. While any literate person familiar with Judaism could have invented Jesus. You have already clearly argued about Old Testament Messiah prophecy with others. Jesus's story isn't original. The existence of E=mc2 is excellent proof in of itself that either Einstein or someone with all of Einstein's attributes had to have lived.

I had to sign a legal document stating I have never been involved in domestic violence for one of my qualifications and had a full background including a pointed interview for my clearance. Personal questions aren't uncommon for a variety of federal positions.

The point of the submit between Trump and Kim, from the U.S.'s stand piont was to secure an agreement for NK to disarm. Something Trump came back home claiming he had accomplished. Obviously that isn't the case. https://www-nbcnews-com.cdn.ampproject.org/v/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna882246?amp_js_v=a2&amp_gsa=1&usqp=mq331AQCCAE%3D#referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com&amp_tf=From %1%24s&ampshare=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nbcnews.com%2Fpolitics%2Fwhite-house%2Ffull-text-u-s-north-korea-agreement-signed-trump-kim-n882246

After Trump thumbed his nose at Germany and China, turned his back on Canada, and gave his only kind words to Kim Jong-un during his U.N. address North Korea has responded by saying they aren't disarming.

I didn't say eliminate. I asked where his humility was.

Sure but the Senator can be held accountable for any behavior her constituents deem inappropriate while a SCOTUS Justice cannot once seated. His calculation, in my opinion, was a bit of an assualt on our Democrat processes. SCOTUS Justices are supposed to be impartial and do what's right by the Constitution and per the Constitution Kavanaugh as a SCOTUS nominee is obligated to answer Senators questions. From what I saw Kavanaugh was not respectful. As an extra bit of sand in the eye Kavanaugh was appointed by a President who lost the popular vote by 3 million and has a double digit negative approval rating. Where is Kavanaugh's humility here. Obviously a significant portion of the country is uneasy with him being on the bench and it is those tens of millions Senators (elected representatives) asking questions speak for. It is those tens of millions who will be impacted by Kavanaugh's judgements if he is appointed. It really shouldn't matter if those tens of millions are Democrats or Republicans. Yet in Kavanaugh's emotional knee jerk defense of himself he demagogued Democrats by name. Democrats represent a plurality of voters. It is terrible behavior for a potential SCOTUS Justice.

In response to those which, which were reasonable, Kavanaugh got after the Senator asking what she drinks and so on. It wasn't professional.

During investigations or legal proceedings of any kind do you think it is normal to ask questions regarding the accusers with doubt? I am not familiar with that. For what I have seen both the accused and the accusers are ask stern straight forward questions. Asking someone if they drink, have ever blacked out from drinking, and so on are simply questions.

In response to a question from Sen. Whitehouse about drinking Kavanaugh responded “I like beer, like beer. I don’t know if you do…. Do you like beer, Senator, or not? What do you like to drink? Senator, what do you like to drink?” This was an ugly exchanged where I felt Kavanaugh showed a lack of basic reasoning and an inability to be impartial. Kavanaugh is up for a Lifetime appointment. The Senator asking the question is not. The Senator holds an elected position where her constituents can vote her out of office. A lifetime appointment is permanent. The Senator is accountable to those she represents and a SCOTUS judge is accountable to no one. Yet in throwing questions back at the Senator about whether or not she drinks Kavanaugh attempted to pretend the standards between the two are equal. As if nothing different or greater should be expected of him. Plus it was Kavanaugh being questioned and not vice versa. The Senator doesn't answer to him. She answers to her constituents and per the Constitution she is empowered to question SCOTUS nominees. Kavanaugh boasted about being top of his class, a Yale grad, and spoke about how hard he worked yet in action was failing to respect the process which like it or not is a lawful process. The Appointment Clause in the U.S. Constitution empowers the Senate Committee to do what they are doing and you'd think a graduate of Yale Law would understand have some tiny amount of respect for that. Rather it appeared Kavanaugh was temperamental and disrespectful of the process. How that relates to sexual misconduct for me (my feeling based on his public testimony) is it raises questions about his temperament. If he can't stay calm and behavior in a cooperative manner with the world watching during a formal proceeding authorized by the Constitution imagine how he is behind a closed doors with some beers in him. For the record I like Beer. I brew craft beer at my home. I also am not fit for a lifetime appointment to SCOTUS for at least a thousand different reasons.

I have never understood the father of lies title. If it is God who created all things. God created truth, lies, pain, joy, stars, moons, planets, humans, angels, and etc. It is God who created the Devil and it is God who created lies and endowed the Devil with the ability to lie. Than it is God who fathered lies. Because by simple logic of a singular creator of all things (God) neither the Devil or Lies exist less Good created them.

You mean Incidents ? Kavanaough has multiple accusers at this point.

Merrick Garland didn't even get the respect of hearings.

We can get into the weeds and debate whether or Aristotle or Diogenes had direct access to Thales work or manuscripts based on Thales work but that only muddies the water. Aristotle was clearly very probably a real person and Aristotle made it crystal clear he believed Thales was real and had studied his work. The closest thing we have to that for Jesus is Paul. Paul was neither Philosopher or Historian and is not believed or claimed to have had access to anything written or otherwise produced by Jesus. Not manuscripts based on things written or produced by Jesus or anything. Whether you believe Aristotle studied works of Thales or works that referenced Thales work either way the assessment is that works of Thales had existed. No works of Jesus are assumed to have ever existed. No one believes Jesus wrote or produced anything. Thus the Pauline epistles are a weaker testimony to the existence of Jesus than is Aristotle work to the existence of Thales. Moreover if you argued that one or more of the Pre-Socratic Philosophers may not (50/50) have existed or were composites of others I would agree. I consider the odds that all have accurately been accounted for as low. Even an occurrence with a 9 in 10 chance of being correct will still fail once in 10 times which is still a lot in my opinion.