Former Justice John Paul Stevens suggests Kavanaugh should not sit on Supreme Court

  • Thread starter Thread starter dvdjs
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
ucfengr said:
Stevens rational seems to be that Kavanaugh shouldn’t be on the Court because can’t be impartial to the people that have called him a “rapist”. I wonder if that’s because Stevens doesn’t think rape is a big deal and so being accused of being one shouldn’t have given Kavanaugh any reason to get angry.
Click to expand...
As I said, how would Sotomayor, Kagan and some others act, if they had been put under this pressure? That is what I would ask the former Supreme Court Justice. Especially since the accusations seem contrived with no backing.

I’m glad though, that at 98 years old, he can give his speeches.
 
Victoria33 said:
ISIS, other terrorists would give not a second thought to using their worse weaponry on us and if they should ever acquire nuclear war heads?
Click to expand...
Half the time those weapons are US made weapons. Anyway, I thought the groping TSA and its parent the giant Homeland Security bureaucracy we’re protecting us from the terrorist. The military budget is growing since we now have to give benefits to homosexual couples and pay for sex change operations.
 
Last edited:
niceatheist said:
I think as much as anything calling out the Democrats was Kavanaugh’s biggest mistake, and he seems to know it, if his WSJ op ed piece is any indication.
Click to expand...
I think calling out the Democrats was probably the turning point that put a lot of people that weren’t paying attention on his side. It made his confirmation more likely than a “Romney-esqe” response would have.
 
Last edited:
ucfengr said:
Stevens rational seems to be that Kavanaugh shouldn’t be on the Court because can’t be impartial to the people that have called him a “rapist”. I wonder if that’s because Stevens doesn’t think rape is a big deal and so being accused of being one shouldn’t have given Kavanaugh any reason to get angry.
Click to expand...
Remember, as is being justified on CAF…this is a job interview, it doesn’t matter if people call him a racist, or compare him to Putin or Kim, or say a vote for him is a vote for evil, or that he is guilty until proven innocent. Nope, God suspends the 8th commandment, and the rule “Do Unto Others…” for judicial nominations.
 
Unfortunately a prelate of the Church called people who don’t like Pope Francis or his actions racists. So far as I know no one has called him out on that nor has he apologized. So what should we expect from the broader culture?
 
Can you cite this? I have a hard time believing that that was the sum total of the argument.
 
exnihilo said:
Half the time those weapons are US made weapons. Anyway, I thought the groping TSA and its parent the giant Homeland Security bureaucracy we’re protecting us from the terrorist. The military budget is growing since we now have to give benefits to homosexual couples and pay for sex change operations.
Click to expand...
The situation rightfully can be looked at. At the same time, I don’t buy a lot of Russian/Iranian/Syrian propaganda/Ron Paul/Inforwars conspiracy type theories. Saying half the time, the terrorists have American weapons sounds a bit like that.
 
The US military contractors can’t sell their weapons to American citizens. But it can and does sell them to foreigners. Whether it is arming the Taliban in Afghanistan, the Contras in Nicaragua, or the Syrian ‘rebels’ it is a long running story. But it most certainly isn’t a conspiracy theory. It is a well established fact.
 
I wish Justice Stevens had never been seated. But he was, and Kavanaugh will be. So can we go back to the days when most of us didn’t care what Justice Stevens thought?
 
Last edited:
I have heard the accusation from you (I think it was you, anyway) that her accusations were rediscovered or reconstructed with the help of a therapist. Where are you getting this information, please? Could you please cite a credible source? From all I have read, she brought this up in couples therapy and the only reason that her therapist/therapy was being mentioned in relation to her accusations is that her therapist could corroborate and say that this has indeed been her story for years.
 
Former Justice Stevens is entitled to his opinion, but it is extremely bad form for a judge to say this about another currently sitting judge. I can’t help but feel that age has gotten the better of his judgment.

In any event, he doesn’t get a say.
 
Victoria33 said:
The situation rightfully can be looked at. At the same time, I don’t buy a lot of Russian/Iranian/Syrian propaganda/Ron Paul/Inforwars conspiracy type theories. Saying half the time, the terrorists have American weapons sounds a bit like that.
Click to expand...
Remove the blinders man. We have actual pictorial evidence that terrorists get weapons from US companies:

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.) http://www.imfdb.org/images/thumb/8/82/IronmanJavelin.jpg/601px-IronmanJavelin.jpg

😛
 
@cloistered this article was the best I can do. It appears to be more of a theory or a question that can’t be answered until or unless we see the therapist’s notes. To be honest I thought there was more to the story than this.
 
Last edited:
They would have been if the Republicans were as smarmy as the leftist Dems
If you think any of this circus has REALLY been about Kavanaughs past some 30 ago ,you are far more gullible than I thought… Additionally,if you don’t the they will do this when RBG is retires then you really do have blinders on
 
Last edited:
exnihilo said:
The US military contractors can’t sell their weapons to American citizens. But it can and does sell them to foreigners. Whether it is arming the Taliban in Afghanistan, the Contras in Nicaragua, or the Syrian ‘rebels’ it is a long running story. But it most certainly isn’t a conspiracy theory. It is a well established fact.
Click to expand...
We don’t arm the Taliban but this is not the place for this discussion. Again, it sounds once again, more like Russian propaganda. Check if they arm the Taliban.

ISIS defeated, well, the Caliphate has been busted in Iraq but not so much in Syria, our SDF, Syrian Democratic Forces comprised mainly of Kurds and including some Christians defeated ISIS in Syria, at least in their capital of Raqqa, no thanks to the regime and Russia.

Syria has been listed as a state sponsor of terrorism since 1979; so back to the Carter and Reagan era. I guess, one could say all sides can be called terrorists.
FirstFiveEighth said:
Remove the blinders man. We have actual pictorial evidence that terrorists get weapons from US companies:
Click to expand...
This proves nothing whatsoever.

US companies doesn’t mean the US Government either. You all need to get your stories together.

Again, my news is not from RT, consortium news, antiwar.com or any number of other sources like that, nor from Ron Paul.
 
Last edited:
dvdjs said:
40.png
Victoria33:
Sotomayor or Kagan never were treated in this manner as Kavanaugh has been
Click to expand...
Why would they have been?
Click to expand...
You are right. The republicans would never have done to Sotomayor or Kagan what the democrats did to Kavanaugh.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top