Supreme court nominees

[Jeanne_S]

Agree thanks for correcting my statement

 

[Ender]

It does appear Blasey-Ford’s story has fallen apart.

Which story? The one where this happened when she was 15, or the one recorded in her therapists notes as happening in her late teens? The one where it was just her and four boys, or the one with the boys and another girl? Beyond not remembering virtually any other detail of her story, she is not even consistent with the few details she claims she does remember.

 

[Dr_Meinheimer]

If Kavanaugh goes down as the nominee, they are just going to fast-track another nominee that was already vetted on his short-list, and EVEN IF they lost the Senate, they approve him or her in the lame duck session. We will have a new justice by the end of January, so the net gain for Democrats is very small, and the potential loss very big.

 

[Jeanne_S]

Meanwhile the reputation of a honorable man has been smeared.I hope Kavanaugh gets through like Justice Thomas. Then God willing Trump can appoint a third Justice in the next year or so.That would be awesome!

 

[KMC]

Fascinating cartoon. Same argument was used to support Moore in Alabama.
Has there been anyone, though, who suggested that the legal rights of Moore or Kavanaugh be set aside?

Senator Hirono seems to be implying that Kavanaugh is guilty without any due process:

“Not only do women like Dr. Ford, who bravely comes forward, need to be heard, but they need to be believed. They need to be believed,” Hirono said. “We cannot continue the victimization and the smearing of someone like Dr. Ford.”

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2018/09/18/sen_hirono_on_kavanaugh_men_need_to_shut_up_accuser_needs_to_be_believed_and_i_believe_her.html

 

[Ender]

If Kavanaugh goes down because of this the loss will be huge, just as it was when Bork went down. Every shred of reasonableness will have disappeared from the nominating process. If this type of behavior is rewarded then literally nothing is too extreme. Whether or not something should be done will be determined not by whether it is right or wrong but solely by whether it has a chance of working.

The real problem is that Democrats face very little down side for doing this, as can be judged by comments in this thread.

 

[Jeanne_S]

Meanwhile it’s guilty until proven innocent in the Leftis/ Dems eyes.Smearing the reputation of an honorable man isn’t an issue for th m apparently.

 

[qui_est_ce]

On another similar topic, now closed, a poster mentioned that this same letter was used during the Gorsuch nomination, but not disclosed. I would like to know more about that. Does anyone have any more info on this?

This needs to be investigated by the FBI AT ONCE!!!

 

[John24]

On another similar topic, now closed, a poster mentioned that this same letter was used during the Gorsuch nomination, but not disclosed. I would like to know more about that. Does anyone have any more info on this?

No one has any information on this because it is not a reality-based claim.

Yes, progressives believe so strongly they should hold power they are willing to happily blow up the constitutional system in order to have it.

It’s telling that conservatives talk up the Constitution like it’s the Bible and then characterize using the procedures in the Constitution as “blowing up the constitutional system”.

So, stop being vague. Are you saying here that Republicans are okay with violence against women?

I’ll certainly be saying that if the Republicans in Congress fail to reauthorize the VAWA for the first time in a quarter-century when it expires in 11 days.

One can hope that, should this attempt to derail Kavanaugh fail, we might see the end of this particular tactic.

Women putting themselves and their families at risk to try to prevent powerful predators from getting even more power is not a “tactic”, it’s a courageous sacrifice for the greater good. Ford is a hero.

If Kavanaugh goes down as the nominee, they are just going to fast-track another nominee that was already vetted on his short-list, and EVEN IF they lost the Senate, they approve him or her in the lame duck session.

Which makes the Republicans’ anti-woman stance so clear: they are in no danger of losing the seat on the Court if they swap out nominees, but because a women got too uppity they are desperate to get this guy confirmed.

Senator Hirono seems to be implying that Kavanaugh is guilty without any due process:

I don’t see where in that article she’s calling for Kavanaugh to be imprisoned. Did I miss it?

 

[MonteRCMS]

Why is it? One of the Democrat party’s masters and Sacred Cows, Planned Parenthood feels threatened. Their half a billion, 350 million whatever is the current budget, a year might not come through.

Big difference, if one talks about delaying and doing it legally and BTW, as shown above, some Democratic nominees, received plenty of support.

Yeah, something is dirty alright.

Brother of Woman Accusing Kavanaugh of Harassment Worked for Planned Parenthood “Dirty Tricks” Group
https://www.lifenews.com/2018/09/18/brother-of-woman-accusing-brett-kavanaugh-of-harassment-worked-for-planned-parenthood-dirty-tricks-group/

Politics, elections, primaries, yes, I agree, those are dirty on both sides. A lot of times, I think things are totally created out of whole cloth to discredit someone.

Harry Reid saying about Mitt Romney that someone told Reid that Romney hadn’t paid income taxes in 10 years on the Senate floor?

Senator Dianne Feinstein says she held back the letter.

Turns out Senator Feinstein’s driver for twenty years was an agent of the Communist Chinese government.

So, does the driver get a U.S. pension … or a Chinese pension?

What kind of character judgement does Senator Feinstein have?

2:11 four (4) attackers … not two.

3:11 Attorney Debra Katz’s history

Senator Feinstein says she cannot say it’s true:

 

[KMC]

KMC:

Senator Hirono seems to be implying that Kavanaugh is guilty without any due process:

I don’t see where in that article she’s calling for Kavanaugh to be imprisoned. Did I miss it?

I appreciate you parsing her words so she doesn’t sound as sexist as she really is. This is about her trying to tank a confirmation by trashing the reputation of a judge without being impartial to the testimony of both sides. While not a court of law, she is advocating a punishment without due process.

Do you support her view?

 

[niceatheist]

Kmcicco2000:

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?

Because McConnell’s party controlled the Senate at the time and they could get away with it.

This situation isn’t quite the same, though. After November, Trump will still be the one nominating the judges. That wasn’t true for Obama.

It also seems pretty likely that the Republicans will still control the Senate. So, barring a number of Republican Senators rejecting Kavanaugh he’s just as likely to be on the Supreme Court after November as he is now.

 

[Ender]

Women putting themselves and their families at risk to try to prevent powerful predators from getting even more power is not a “tactic”, it’s a courageous sacrifice for the greater good. Ford is a hero.

And here it is: Ford is a hero for making an accusation, which makes Kavanaugh guilty because he…has been accused. The concept of providing evidence, let alone proof, is abandoned. To support such a society is to champion not justice but chaos.

 

[Joe_5859]

Right. People can like it or not, but that’s where things are at. The Democrats can try to postpone things enough to push it till after the election on the hopes of pulling a Trump-like upset and regaining control of the Senate. I suppose it’s their only play at the moment.

 

[niceatheist]

But even if the Democrats somehow pull off flipping the Senate, there’s still the interim period where the Republicans can still push through Kavanaugh.

 

[marybobo]

It is my understanding that the FBI investigates federal crimes.
Where is the federal crime in this instance?

 

[qui_est_ce]

It is my understanding that the FBI investigates federal crimes.
Where is the federal crime in this instance?

It doesn’t matter! We need a full investigation!

 

[KMC]

What I have heard only once is this: If this accusation were to be adjudicated, it would have to be in juvenile court, since both the accuser and accused were under 18 at the time of the alleged incident.

 

[dvdjs]

Should we preemptively condemn everyone because such judgments are occasionally accurate?

No one was condemned.

This is precisely what your comment suggests: Moore was guilty so Kavanaugh is probably guilty too.

I made no suggestion of the kind.

You mean like the legal right to the presumption of innocence?

One is presumed innocent when a defendant in a legal proceeding. The is the legal right; it has not been abrogated in either the case of Moore or Kavanugh.

This is about smearing a man to achieve a political goal.

What due process did you use to reach that conclusions?

 

[LeafByNiggle]

dvdjs:

Fascinating cartoon. Same argument was used to support Moore in Alabama.

Should we preemptively condemn everyone because such judgments are occasionally accurate? This is precisely what your comment suggests: Moore was guilty so Kavanaugh is probably guilty too.

What dvdjs’ comment actually suggests is that drawing a serious conclusion from this cartoon is not possible, since the same cartoon could be applied to Moore. And the charges do not “condemn” Kavanaugh. Being denied a lifetime appointment to the most powerful non-elected position in the most powerful nation in the history of mankind is not a “condemnation.”

Has there been anyone, though, who suggested that the legal rights of Moore or Kavanaugh be set aside?

You mean like the legal right to the presumption of innocence?

That right applies in a criminal trial. Kavanaugh is not charged with a crime and is not on trial in a criminal court. So that right does not apply.

Given there is no possibility that Kavanaugh would ever face legal charges, what legal rights do you refer to?

That is really a question you should answer, since the question of presumption of innocence was cited in your cartoon. What legal rights do you think the cartoon suggests are being set aside?