Shame on Orrin Hatch - The Patron Saint of Quack Medicine

[creekster]

Barf.

What a horrible mess.

Agreed. But I don't think it can be placed at the feet of Hatch or essential oils.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Agreed. But I don't think it can be placed at the feet of Hatch or essential oils.

Whatever. He is responding to dirty politics with even dirtier politics. That is ugly.

[Northwestcoug]

So this guy reaches out to Hatch. He then prepares a written statement (which has substantially more detail and specific information than any allegation against Kavanaugh to date) that he provides to the Judiciary Committee and which is posted publicly at the judiciary committee website (I assume you followed the link?). After this document is posted with a public link Hatch's office tweets out the info and includes the link. Is there anything there that says it hasn't been or won't be given to the FBI? Isn't gathering information also a function of the committee (spoiler alert: Yes, it is)? So what, exactly, did Hatch do that was so horrible? Tweeting out the fact that the guy's statement was linked on the committee website?

Maybe I am missing some info, and maybe it was Hatch alone that caused this. But that's not what it looks like.

Why is he publicizing it? Does he need to? That's what I find distasteful. Let it remain on the website.

Not horrible, and I didn't say that.

[Uncle Ted]

So this guy reaches out to Hatch. He then prepares a written statement (which has substantially more detail and specific information than any allegation against Kavanaugh to date) that he provides to the Judiciary Committee and which is posted publicly at the judiciary committee website (I assume you followed the link?). After this document is posted with a public link Hatch's office tweets out the info and includes the link. Is there anything there that says it hasn't been or won't be given to the FBI? Isn't gathering information also a function of the committee (spoiler alert: Yes, it is)? So what, exactly, did Hatch do that was so horrible? Tweeting out the fact that the guy's statement was linked on the committee website?

Maybe I am missing some info, and maybe it was Hatch alone that caused this. But that's not what it looks like.

If you read his letter he said that a church leader put him in touch with Senator Hatch's SLC office. Maybe the dude is a mormon?

[Jeff Lebowski]

This is insanity. There is no good way to spin that tweet.

And repeating what that poor dad allegedly said about his daughter? Bloody hell.

[chrisrenrut]

If you read his letter he said that a church leader put him in touch with Senator Hatch's SLC office. Maybe the dude is a mormon?

He is. He’s in my ward.

[creekster]

Whatever. He is responding to dirty politics with even dirtier politics. That is ugly.

WHo is? Hatch? What on earth makes what he did dirtier? How can you possibly say that it is dirtier compared to the other stuff we have seen? Let's say Hatch was a democrat and someone walked in with this statement and then Hatch held it and did not put in the record because it was 'dirty.' How would that have played? I think this whole process is disgusting but how you are anyone concludes Hatch is at fault WRT this statement escapes me.

[Uncle Ted]

And repeating what that poor dad allegedly said about his daughter? Bloody hell.

Yeah, that is all hearsay anyway... even if she is crazy.

[falafel]

Why is he publicizing it? Does he need to? That's what I find distasteful. Let it remain on the website.

Not horrible, and I didn't say that.

Is there only some information that the American people get to see? Let's publish the unsubstantiated half-allegations of Kavanaugh's accusers in the NYT and WaPo, but for heaven's sake don't publish anything about the accusers themselves!

[Jeff Lebowski]

WHo is? Hatch? What on earth makes what he did dirtier? How can you possibly say that it is dirtier compared to the other stuff we have seen? Let's say Hatch was a democrat and someone walked in with this statement and then Hatch held it and did not put in the record because it was 'dirty.' How would that have played? I think this whole process is disgusting but how you are anyone concludes Hatch is at fault WRT this statement escapes me.

"Democrats would have done it" doesn't strike me as a particularly convincing way to argue morality/ethics.

[creekster]

Why is he publicizing it? Does he need to? That's what I find distasteful. Let it remain on the website.

Not horrible, and I didn't say that.

If you think his tweet is too much gas on the existing bonfire, that could be. I can see that point. But it isn't 'propaganda' and it, alone, doesn't mean Hatch is a POS. At least not IMO.

[Uncle Ted]

He is. He’s in my ward.

Wat? Dennis Ketterer, the weatherman, is in your ward?

[falafel]

Wat? Dennis Ketterer, the weatherman, is in your ward?

And, likely, his new wife of 3 years.

[Flystripper]

This is insanity. There is no good way to spin that tweet.

And repeating what that poor dad allegedly said about his daughter? Bloody hell.

So because she allegedly spoke about having sex with multiple partners at the same time while in high school, and that she allegedly spoke of enjoying multiple partners at the same time in the 90s, it makes her less credible that she was assaulted? The fact that she allegedly had what her dad referred to as "psychological problems" it means that she was not assaulted? To me these "facts" point to it being more likely that she was assaulted by somebody, not less likely. In any case, it is a pretty disgusting display of victim shaming.

[Northwestcoug]

If you think his tweet is too much gas on the existing bonfire, that could be. I can see that point. But it isn't 'propaganda' and it, alone, doesn't mean Hatch is a POS. At least not IMO.

Hatch is playing cheerleader and throwing more gas onto what is already a disgusting circus. It is propaganda, designed to move public opinion. This is a ridiculous hill to mount a typical Creekster semantics argument on.

And please stop insinuating I think Hatch is 'horrible' or a 'POS'. I didn't say either.