Supreme court nominees

  • Thread starter Thread starter Kmcicco2000
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
White House Finds No Support in FBI Report for Claims Against Kavanaugh
Click to expand...
WASHINGTON—The White House has found no corroboration of the allegations of sexual misconduct against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh after examining interview reports from the FBI’s latest probe into the judge’s background, according to people familiar with the matter.
Click to expand...
Wall Street Journal has a paywall. Just the opening excerpt.

Plan C is to say the FBI investigation was not thorough.

Unconfirmed report from “people familiar with the matter”.
 
Last edited:
Plenty of people have been found guilty of crimes they did not do.

Plenty of people have been found innocent when they are guilty of crimes.

This did not even merit a trial.

So, what your statement is based on is basically, the sex card. Asserting some sort of prejudice is at play.
 
Regular_Atheist said:
The mere words of a woman. Not nearly as authoritative as the POWERFUL words of a man!
Click to expand...
I think the point was the need for corroborating evidence, not a comparison between men and women. But I understand: due process and presumption of innocence are such patriarchal constructs. :roll_eyes:
 
Kmcicco2000 said:
Can anyone tell me why it was okay for Mitch McConnell to block a Supreme court nominee by Barack Obama for 10 months because it was too close to an election and then now push through a nominee two months before an election?
Click to expand...
It’s not okay. It was disgraceful and deplorable, and it shows the true color of the Republican Party.
 
Victoria33 said:
Plan C is to say the FBI investigation was not thorough.
Click to expand...
It wasn’t enough. And why hurry? Republicans saw no need to hurry when Obama nominated Merrick Garland.

Having a thorough investigation is only fair to Ford and even to Kavanaugh. Without a thorough investigation, a dark cloud of suspicion will always hang over Kavanaugh’s head.
 
Last edited:
Along with plumbing, electricity, and modern civilization in general.
 
ConstantLearner said:
It wasn’t enough. And why hurry? Republicans saw no need to hurry when Obama nominated Merrick Garland.

Having a thorough investigation is only fair to Ford and even to Kavanaugh. Without a thorough investigation, a dark cloud of suspicion will always hang over Kavanaugh’s head.
Click to expand...
Democratic activists are now threatening Republicans. These threads have talked about Merrick Garland. The Republican control the Senate, they can advise and consent on these matters. The Democrats did similar in the same situation.

Please see how this has been addressed in this forum numerous times already.
 
Last edited:
Victoria33 said:
Please see how this has been addressed in this forum numerous times already.
Click to expand...
Do you actually think I’m going to search through these hate filled threads. No way! I’ll take your word for it.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
That assumes of course, that Dr. Ford was not assaulted by Kavanaugh. No one wants their loved ones to be attacked unjustly. But let us assume for a moment that Dr. Ford was assaulted by Kavanaugh. In that case I wonder how many of the people criticizing Ford have wives, sisters, daughters, granddaughters? Would they want their loved one who was assaulted to be dismissed? I am not saying Ford is right and Kavanaugh is wrong. I am just pointing out that the stakes are equally high on both sides for deciding incorrectly.
Click to expand...
The alternative to requiring evidence is not “dismissal”. Ford has been given every opportunity to make her case. The real question here is whether or not we believe in a standard of fairness that applies equally to both sides. No one has ever suggested Ford’s allegations should be dismissed. Unfortunately quite a number of people have taken the position that her charge should simply be accepted despite the complete lack of any corroborating evidence.

There is no justification whatever for assuming Kavanaugh actually did what Ford alleges.
 
dvdjs said:
Nonsense. Both gave testimony. One has a story with gaps that one might have expected from analogous cases. The other went into an angry mode of total denial; the denials have been directly contradicted by contemporaries. The determination of credibility is not arbitrary, it is evidence based.
Click to expand...
What assertion has Kavanaugh made that has been directly contradicted by contemporaries?
 
Ender said:
What assertion has Kavanaugh made that has been directly contradicted by contemporaries?
Click to expand...
I’ve posted a link to the NYT story that documented the falsehoods and misleading remarks in the judsge’s testimony. It is here in one or another of the threads.
 
Ender said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
That assumes of course, that Dr. Ford was not assaulted by Kavanaugh. No one wants their loved ones to be attacked unjustly. But let us assume for a moment that Dr. Ford was assaulted by Kavanaugh. In that case I wonder how many of the people criticizing Ford have wives, sisters, daughters, granddaughters? Would they want their loved one who was assaulted to be dismissed? I am not saying Ford is right and Kavanaugh is wrong. I am just pointing out that the stakes are equally high on both sides for deciding incorrectly.
Click to expand...
The alternative to requiring evidence is not “dismissal”. Ford has been given every opportunity to make her case. The real question here is whether or not we believe in a standard of fairness that applies equally to both sides. No one has ever suggested Ford’s allegations should be dismissed. Unfortunately quite a number of people have taken the position that her charge should simply be accepted despite the complete lack of any corroborating evidence.

There is no justification whatever for assuming Kavanaugh actually did what Ford alleges.
Click to expand...
True. And I am not assuming that either. In fact I am genuinely undecided as to what I think is more likely.
 
LeafByNiggle said:
True. And I am not assuming that either. In fact I am genuinely undecided as to what I think is more likely.
Click to expand...
I think that this is an interesting take.

www.nydailynews.com

Where the judge lost me: A conservative former appeals judge explains why he turned against Brett Kavanaugh

It seems very few minds were changed by the Christine Blasey Ford-Brett Kavanaugh hearings. But mine, I’m sorry to say, was one of them. I was enthusiastic about the Kavanaugh appointment. Fr…
www.nydailynews.com www.nydailynews.com
 
Smith is pathetic, his argument is based on “he did it” and should just apologize.

Glad he’s off the court if he reaches guilty conclusions with the evidence presented…
 
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle said:
True. And I am not assuming that either. In fact I am genuinely undecided as to what I think is more likely.
Click to expand...
Well the FBI report is now out and guess what? There is no corroborating evidence, that means there is now every reason to reject the allegation Ford made. That it is still conceivable that her charge might possibly be true is a totally inadequate reason for actually believing it.

The choice seems abundantly clear: either accept that baseless charges should be rejected, or hold that evidence of wrongdoing is irrelevant and people ought to be convicted because of who they are rather than for what they have done.
 
Ender said:
40.png
LeafByNiggle:
True. And I am not assuming that either. In fact I am genuinely undecided as to what I think is more likely.
Click to expand...
Well the FBI report is now out and guess what? There is no corroborating evidence, that means there is now every reason to reject the allegation Ford made.
Click to expand...
Well, there is that pesky reason that you are forgetting - the fact that Ford says it happened.
That it is still conceivable that her charge might possibly be true is a totally inadequate reason for actually believing it.
Click to expand...
As I said, I don’t “believe” it. Nor do I disbelieve it.

But even if the charges turn out to be false, the manner in which Kavanaugh “defended” himself is enough to disqualify him.
 
Last edited:
dvdjs said:
I’ve posted a link to the NYT story that documented the falsehoods and misleading remarks in the judsge’s testimony. It is here in one or another of the threads.
Click to expand...
Here are some:

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/brett-kavanaugh-lies_us_5bb26190e4b027da00d61fcd

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...tions-and-absurdities/?utm_term=.7577a5d55102

www.chicagotribune.com

Brett Kavanaugh didn’t ‘lie’ — he just told some ‘little white-male-privilege lies’

I’m going to have ask people to stop accusing Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of lying under oath. It’s really getting in the way of him becoming a Supreme Court justice, which is…
www.chicagotribune.com www.chicagotribune.com

www.elle.com

All the Times Brett Kavanaugh Lied During His Hearing

From his drinking habits to his Yale connections.
www.elle.com www.elle.com
 
Ender said:
Well the FBI report is now out and guess what? There is no corroborating evidence, that means there is now every reason to reject the allegation Ford made. That it is still conceivable that her charge might possibly be true is a totally inadequate reason for actually believing it.
Click to expand...
They were too restricted in who they could interview, on Ford’s behalf or Kavanaugh’s. If I were Kavanaugh and not guilty, I would insist on a full investigation to clear my name. At least half of the country will always see him as a would-be rapist now, and it’s possible the incident never happened. Possible it did, too, which is the problem.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top