Legal/scotus thread

sturg33 said:
Huh?

She sat on a letter for 8 weeks, doesn't question him under oath, then anonymously releases it as a political stunt, and you think she did the right thing?

Goodness
Click to expand...

Obviously she struggled with it, knowing it would be viewed as "a stunt". Women who went to that school says it sounds right.

Tell us Senator stugg, what you in all your wisdom would have done. Let the free market take care of it?

Dr. Blasey Ford, professor of Palo Alto University! Ouch.
 
Last edited:
sturg33 said:
Ask kavernaugh under oath about it.
Click to expand...


Jeet Heer
‏Verified account @HeerJeet
15h15 hours ago



I want a ven diagram of people willing to argue "Give Kavanaugh a break,

he was only 17" and "Trayvon Martin got what he deserved."
 
[tw]1041751596810559490[/tw]

Given the information available, the only way this answer could be 100% honest is if Kavanaugh never attended a party.
 
Rantt Media
‏ @RanttMedia
8m8 minutes ago

Trump, a president who is implicated in two felonies

and is also an alleged sexual predator, is trying to place Brett Kavanaugh

on the Supreme Court, a judge who stands credibly accused of sexual assault

and believes the president should be above the law.
 
sturg33 said:
Sigh. Impossible to have a reasonable discussion with yall
Click to expand...

41900390_2214839028530546_1568535538401542144_n.jpg
 
weso1 said:
The note said there were 4 boys involved and she claims there were 2.
Click to expand...

She said there were 4 people present, two boys in the room. This was consistent in her 2002 recollection and 2012. You have to be fishing to call that an inconsistently—particularly since it was someone else’s notes on her account.
 
sturg33 said:
Huh?

She sat on a letter for 8 weeks, doesn't question him under oath, then anonymously releases it as a political stunt, and you think she did the right thing?

Goodness
Click to expand...

There’s more too it, though. At that point, it was anonymous complaint, which would’ve been hard to bring up in hearing. The alleged victim was not willing to go on the record. Somebody released it. We don’t even know that it was Feinstein. I’ve heard it speculated that she was going to sit on it. I’m not saying that her conduct was beyond reproach, just that we really don’t know enough to say.

And, big picture, Kavanaugh still hasn’t adequately answered questions about his conduct and finances. If you want to ding the Democrats for delaying tactics, you should at least acknowledge that Rs are trying to improperly fast-track the nomination in an effort to get it done before the election. And it’s worth remembering that McConnell advise trump that Kavanaugh was the least-confirmable of the shortlisted candidates.
 
So I get that in our current political landscape that basically everything is adversarial, but it’s still shocking to see how comfortable some on the right are with making valiantly defending the accused their quasi-official position
 
mqt said:
So I get that in our current political landscape that basically everything is adversarial, but it’s still shocking to see how comfortable some on the right are with making valiantly defending the accused their quasi-official position
Click to expand...

We used to operate under innocent til proven guilty.

I'm not saying the guy is innocent. But I'm not saying the guy is guilty either.

Nobody should unless there is some sort of proof put out there. Have you seen any?
 
Julio3000 said:
She said there were 4 people present, two boys in the room. This was consistent in her 2002 recollection and 2012. You have to be fishing to call that an inconsistently—particularly since it was someone else’s notes on her account.
Click to expand...

I was replying specifically to the claim that the actual notes were proof of something.

I think this is a tough one because it's possible Kavanaugh did it and it's possible he didn't do it. What makes it tough is that it's going to be very difficult to prove what happened either way.
 
Julio3000 said:
There’s more too it, though. At that point, it was anonymous complaint, which would’ve been hard to bring up in hearing. The alleged victim was not willing to go on the record. Somebody released it. We don’t even know that it was Feinstein. I’ve heard it speculated that she was going to sit on it. I’m not saying that her conduct was beyond reproach, just that we really don’t know enough to say.

.
Click to expand...

If the intention was to bring it up later (and it's my opinion that it was), then you can bring it up.

And if the accuser is not willing to go on record, then her accusations shouldn't have been released. You just can't allow an anonymous source to make that accusation with our current political environment.

If you think the release of letter the weekend before the vote was a coincidence and not a political stunt, then I think you are very naive or blinded by your partisanship

Meanwhile, the dems refuse to be involved with the questioning of Rose or Kavanaugh... this is nothing but a political stunt, with no chance of it ever amounting anything provable, and yet a decent chance it ruins a man's life/career.

Worse yet, the accuser is a hardened liberal. Her lawyer is saying it's not up to her to corroborate her story (it is). The details of her account are fuzzy and don't even match the notes her therapist took 5 years ago (the therapist notes would be favored in court, fyi). i'm not saying she is lying, but I am skeptical by the timing of this and the circumstances, and if she is unwilling to do any more than she already has, then the confirmation should proceed.
 
Last edited:
mqt said:
[tw]1041751596810559490[/tw]

Given the information available, the only way this answer could be 100% honest is if Kavanaugh never attended a party.
Click to expand...

His memory is quite good, all of a sudden. Remembers a specific party 35 years ago.
 
Runnin said:
His memory is quite good, all of a sudden. Remembers a specific party 35 years ago.
Click to expand...

Or he remembers not being at such a party.

She wasn't even able to put a date behind it. Her letter says "early 1980's

Hey Runnin - you did something bad in early 80's. Prove me wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top