What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

rufus said:
But we're talking about 1983 here.
Click to expand...

Well, I guess I'd say two things in addition to the fact he doesn't claim he himself was legal. Ford's allegations are placed in the summer of 1982. So that's been the context of most of this the last week. Second, the drinking age in DC, which is just couple miles from Georgetown Prep remained 18 until 1986. I'm really not seeing the "gotcha" on this one.
 
Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Wisko McBadgerton said:
Well, I guess I'd say two things in addition to the fact he doesn't claim he himself was legal. Ford's allegations are placed in the summer of 1982. So that's been the context of most of this the last week. Second, the drinking age in DC, which is just couple miles from Georgetown Prep remained 18 until 1986. I'm really not seeing the "gotcha" on this one.
Click to expand...

I just missed the grandfather clause in MN and I know what the age was and was not for myself when I was 17 going on 18 and beyond. If I had been asked, "What was the drinking age when you were 17" I'd have said without hesitation, "21 and I just missed being grand-fathered in for 18" because I've actually had that conversation more than once. There is no reason whatsoever for him to have said it was 18 (while knowing for him it was not) other than to try and minimize it. Just stop.
 
Wisko McBadgerton said:
If you have something to say, say it. Otherwise, I'm afraid you're wasting your pure genius for making these sorts of insightful comments, on me.
Click to expand...


A lot is wasted on you...and your ilk.
How many times do you need to be told that being a virgin has ZERO to do with your ability to commit sexual assault? It's irrelevant in every way.
 
Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Slap Shot said:
I just missed the grandfather clause in MN and I know what the age was and was not for myself when I was 17 going on 18 and beyond. If I had been asked, "What was the drinking age when you were 17" I'd have said without hesitation, "21 and I just missed being grand-fathered in for 18" because I've actually had that conversation more than once. There is no reason whatsoever for him to have said it was 18 (while knowing for him it was not) other than to try and minimize it. Just stop.
Click to expand...

BS. I made the drinking age by 5 days when it was raised, my friend missed it by 2 days. Both of us when asked what the drinking age was in high school would reply 18. Kavanaugh wasn't asked what it was when he was 17. He wasn't asked anything about the drinking age. I just learned that , "Get your head out of your ***" is apparently the correct phrase for me to use here.
 
Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Wisko McBadgerton said:
Well, I guess I'd say two things in addition to the fact he doesn't claim he himself was legal. Ford's allegations are placed in the summer of 1982. So that's been the context of most of this the last week. Second, the drinking age in DC, which is just couple miles from Georgetown Prep remained 18 until 1986. I'm really not seeing the "gotcha" on this one.
Click to expand...

The point of emphasis isn't whether or not he was of legal drinking age in 1982 or 1983. The crux of this situation is that he's a nominee for SCOTUS and he's deflecting and attempting to obfuscate the situation. It doesn't matter that she was drinking. It doesn't matter that he was drinking. What matters is whether or not he's been doing these things of which he's been accused, and whether or not a SCOTUS nominee is capable of telling the truth during his Congressional Review. At this juncture, all signs point to No.
 
Wisko McBadgerton said:
Kavanaugh says this on Fox:




In the Summer of 1982, Seniors who turned 18 prior to the drinking age being raised on July 1 were still legal to drink on July 2. Kavanaugh doesn't say he was legal, or even that he drank. Although I'm not sure having a beer or even ten at 17 in 1982 is in itself disqualifying for anything.
Click to expand...

But lying about it is.
 
Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

I haven’t read all through the thread re: Kavanaugh, I already despise him for his cowardly stance on Morley vs. CIA.

I may be in the weeds here but allegations like this have not come up with Roberts, Alito, Kagan and Sotamoyor, correct? If yes, then slow this down, get LE to review and pick it back up when the review(s) are over. Jus a quick paint thinner hour thought.
 
St. Clown said:
The point of emphasis isn't whether or not he was of legal drinking age in 1982 or 1983. The crux of this situation is that he's a nominee for SCOTUS and he's deflecting and attempting to obfuscate the situation. It doesn't matter that she was drinking. It doesn't matter that he was drinking. What matters is whether or not he's been doing these things of which he's been accused, and whether or not a SCOTUS nominee is capable of telling the truth during his Congressional Review. At this juncture, all signs point to No.
Click to expand...

Nah semantics matter or something...
 
solovsfett said:
I haven’t read all through the thread re: Kavanaugh, I already despise him for his cowardly stance on Morley vs. CIA.

I may be in the weeds here but allegations like this have not come up with Roberts, Alito, Kagan and Sotamoyor, correct? If yes, then slow this down, get LE to review and pick it back up when the review(s) are over. Jus a quick paint thinner hour thought.
Click to expand...

Well was it Sotomoyor or Kagan the Right accused of being a reverse racist I forget.
 
Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

First Time said:
A lot is wasted on you...and your ilk.
How many times do you need to be told that being a virgin has ZERO to do with your ability to commit sexual assault? It's irrelevant in every way.
Click to expand...

Well, ilk is at least more creative, but I seriously doubt you have a clue as to what my "ilk" is.

Nevertheless, I agree with your statement 100%. And I never suggested it was a defense to sexual assault. However the statement contained in your twitter link on the matter is still incorrect.
 
Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

solovsfett said:
I may be in the weeds here but allegations like this have not come up with Roberts, Alito, Kagan and Sotamoyor, correct? If yes, then slow this down, get LE to review and pick it back up when the review(s) are over. Jus a quick paint thinner hour thought.
Click to expand...
As Rover has explained many times over this isn't really an option for them hence why they're trying to rush it through.
 
Wisko McBadgerton said:
Well, ilk is at least more creative, but I seriously doubt you have a clue as to what my "ilk" is.

Nevertheless, I agree with your statement 100%. And I never suggested it was a defense to sexual assault. However the statement contained in your twitter link on the matter is still incorrect.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter which victim he is saying it about...it's still irrelevant and a disgusting premise to set in your own defense.
That's the issue here...not that a tweet may have gotten the referenced victim wrong.
 
Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

unofan said:
But lying about it is.
Click to expand...

Great. Am I typing in Japanese here or something? Because I posted the relevant quotes earlier and I'm not seeing it in there. So if you don't mind, produce the statement where he lies about whether he did or didn't drink as a minor. Thanks.
 
Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

First Time said:
It doesn't matter which victim he is saying it about...it's still irrelevant and a disgusting premise to set in your own defense.
That's the issue here...not that a tweet may have gotten the referenced victim wrong.
Click to expand...

I understand. Thank you for explaining your position. I just think the statement is false as it reads, and it's not helpful to anyone to put false statements out there.

Obviously what Kavanaugh said in the interview was rehearsed. Kavanaugh and Ford's testimony, assuming it comes off, will be rehearsed. My best guess about it is that Kavanaugh's team is certain he's going to be asked about his sexual history by the Senate. Getting that statement out there now would be a strategy to try and cut down or head off some of those questions. That could be wrong, but it's something I'd probably advise Kavanaugh to try to do if I was in his corner.
 
Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Vote is scheduled for Friday. That means Flake, Collin, and Murkowski have already caved. Also heard that they won't tell us the prosecutor's name they're going to have do the questioning for her "safety".

Full Senate vote Tuesday. Committee Friday.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top