Legal/scotus thread

I've heard several times that if Kav wasn't confirmed Trump would nominate somebody even more conservative, or worse. How do you get worse than a vicious partisan who lies under oath, openly threatens Dems, is never ever going to side with the liberals on any decision and believes the President (as long as he's Republican) is above the law?
 
Oklahomahawk said:
I just want all the chocolate that was hopefully in there to start with.
Click to expand...

I know you like chocolate. Who doesn't? But I was talking about one of these!

tin-foil-hat_800x.jpg
 
50PoundHead said:
Having been around a legislature (although it is at the state level) all my working life, I have seen the Collins "type" before. Plays hard to get, extracts a meaningless pledge for something or another, and then rolls. But, oh, for those moments when their intentions appear to be in doubt. All eyes are upon them.
Click to expand...

Yep. She always leans into this "maybe I'll cross the aisle" stuff and gets it all over the media and then has to have a televised speech announcing her decision like that Lebron James special a few years ago. She just craves attention.
 
Runnin said:
I've heard several times that if Kav wasn't confirmed Trump would nominate somebody even more conservative, or worse. How do you get worse than a vicious partisan who lies under oath, openly threatens Dems, is never ever going to side with the liberals on any decision and believes the President (as long as he's Republican) is above the law?
Click to expand...

I suspect that progressives would have been more displeased over the next few decades if Hardiman or Barret had been sworn in today. Kavanaugh strikes me as more of the GWB level where those two are more akin to the Tea Party level.
 
Krgrecw said:
Hope you’re trolling. Clinton is a despicable serial woman abuser who should be behind bars. Guess the #metoo movement doesn’t include him
Click to expand...

Well, you do realize it has been proven likely 43 of 45 sitting presidents had mistresses? The exceptions being Carter and Obama.
 
Oklahomahawk said:
Not trying to pick on you k, I promise, it just seems like you always post the last post in a group that I wanted to respond to.

Maybe you guys can help out the old guy with the failing memory. Didn't the Repubs completely believe 100% of the women who accused Bill Clinton? Don't they still? Now today we all know what Bill is/was but back then very few knew for sure, only the ones who accused him. So, what was the difference other than party affiliation? Oh and please none of you respond with "he was guilty of doing all of them". Again none of the Repubs accusing him back then knew the truth, they only knew what they wanted to believe, just like the Dems also did then, just like both Repubs and Dems are doing now.

So, who can help me out here?
Click to expand...

Most of the Clinton stuff was known of for years before he ran for President, and some of it before he ran for Governor. His history of this spanned decades.

Kavanaugh never had any allegations or rumors until the 11th hour of his confirmation process when a lengthy delay would give the opposition the chance to flip the Senate during the delay.

I agree with your basic point that the elected officials of both parties are full of slimy hacks and that their voters are generally manipulated into following them like Irish snakes. I just think WJC fails as a counterpoint to Kavanaugh.
 
As they say electins have consequences and events do too I believe long game today cemented a Dem sweep of both Houses and the Oval over the next three yesrs.
 
Last edited:
I thought the confirmation process was unfair and frankly an investigation into 35 year old events was absurd. I never could support Kavanaugh because of his positions but I don’t think much of character assasination.

Of course I’m still mad the Republicans stole a seat. Garland deserved hearings at the very least and Republicans should have at least had the guts to explain why they were voting against him. Honestly if we win big I hope we add two justices. In the past I would have considered it inappropriate but there are no standards and McConnell held up way too many Obama appoints without reasonable cause. We can play hardball without accusing people of 30 year old crimes.
 
What is political hardball without attacking the opponents character ?

The list of people believing (D) allegations of less than desirable character include the ABA, hundreds,if not thousands of law professors, Yale School of Law. Harvard School of Law and a rstired (R) appointrd Supdeme Court Justice. Seems most everyone whose opinion matters except Fox, Drudge, Washington Examiner and Susan Collins.
Effective politics in my book.

Everyone that had a fence to sit on came out against this nomination.
Unless of course you believe Sasse,Flake and Collins were actually fence sitters. Ever

As far as the court of public opinion the numbers were overwhelming.
remind me the circus surrounding the nomination of John Roberts or Samuel Alito
This is a bad man being seated
 
Last edited:
Jaw said:
Most of the Clinton stuff was known of for years before he ran for President, and some of it before he ran for Governor. His history of this spanned decades.

Kavanaugh never had any allegations or rumors until the 11th hour of his confirmation process when a lengthy delay would give the opposition the chance to flip the Senate during the delay.

I agree with your basic point that the elected officials of both parties are full of slimy hacks and that their voters are generally manipulated into following them like Irish snakes. I just think WJC fails as a counterpoint to Kavanaugh.
Click to expand...

So at least we agree on most of it. I do disagree with you still about Clinton. Yes he was and most likely still is a slime ball and this isn't about K nearly as much as it's about the Repubs and their minions who will literally believe anything the Fox/Talk Radio types tell them to believe while at the same time make fun of the Dems for being mindless followers. Do you actually remember the whole Ken Starr "independent counsel" (LOL) hearings? I do and since I don't know how old you are I had to ask. It was a witch hunt, yes a witch hunt of a guy who was certainly a witch but while there were accusations there wasn't any "proof" until the blue dress "popped up" (no pun intended). Remember how awful the Repubs felt for "those poor women" he molested? Remember the awful things they said about Bill? Now the entire narrative has been reversed and very few seem to even notice the utter hypocrisy going on. If Obama or Bill either had done all the absolute ****ty things the Trump has done and continues to do the Repub talking heads would literally explode but now they're about to give themselves a stroke trying to defend Trump for all his crappy decisions, actions, etc. If there ever was a country who had freedom who also deserved to lose it all, it would be us.
 
Coredor said:
I thought the confirmation process was unfair and frankly an investigation into 35 year old events was absurd. I never could support Kavanaugh because of his positions but I don’t think much of character assasination.

Of course I’m still mad the Republicans stole a seat. Garland deserved hearings at the very least and Republicans should have at least had the guts to explain why they were voting against him. Honestly if we win big I hope we add two justices. In the past I would have considered it inappropriate but there are no standards and McConnell held up way too many Obama appoints without reasonable cause. We can play hardball without accusing people of 30 year old crimes.
Click to expand...

"We simply followed the tradition in America, which is that if you have a party of a different – a Senate of a different party than the president, you don’t fill a vacancy created in a presidential year. That went all the way back to 1888."
 
Eric Umansky
‏Verified account @ericuman
8h8 hours ago

Republicans embraced the politically convenient line that Ford simply misremembered who attacked her.

Except scientists say that’s not a thing.

One researcher “could not recall a single case of a sexual assault victim misremembering a known attacker.”
 
57Brave said:
Eric Umansky
‏Verified account @ericuman
8h8 hours ago

Republicans embraced the politically convenient line that Ford simply misremembered who attacked her.

Except scientists say that’s not a thing.

One researcher “could not recall a single case of a sexual assault victim misremembering a known attacker.”
Click to expand...

Have you never seen Making a Murderer? Have you ever heard of Jennifer Thompson and Ronald Cotton? It happens all the time and any "science" that says unequivocally that it isn't a thing is purely partisan driven.

It can be both be true that rape victims misidentify their attackers all the time, especially after extended periods of time, and that Christine Blasey Ford has correctly identified Brett Kavanaugh.

I don't know one way or another, but the idea that victims never make identity mistakes is just incorrect.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jaw
Simply put, Judge Kavanaugh owes his career on the federal bench to his many years of faithful service as a partisan Republican hatchet man. Prior to his installation on the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals in 2006, the Renate Alumnius was a right-wing warrior who made his bones by doing the GOP’s dirty work across the better part of two decades. From the Ken Starr inquisition of Bill Clinton, to the 2000 Florida recount, to running the judicial selection for his boss George W. Bush, to illicit domestic surveillance, detainee torture, and other dubious dealings, Brett Kavanaugh’s fingerprints were on them all. And if his unseemly background and shockingly ill-temper weren’t sufficiently disqualifying, Judge Kavanaugh pretty much lied about it all
 
57Brave said:
No, I have never seen Making of A Murderer.
Why would I ?
Click to expand...

Because the first case that Steve Avery faced was a direct result of mistaken identity in a sexual assault. So was the other example I mentioned and so are dozens of examples of people in prisons because of mistaken identity. You can think that Kavanaugh is guilty and that Ford's recollection about her assailant is accurate, but that doesn't mean it never happens.
 
Oklahomahawk said:
So at least we agree on most of it. I do disagree with you still about Clinton. Yes he was and most likely still is a slime ball and this isn't about K nearly as much as it's about the Repubs and their minions who will literally believe anything the Fox/Talk Radio types tell them to believe while at the same time make fun of the Dems for being mindless followers. Do you actually remember the whole Ken Starr "independent counsel" (LOL) hearings? I do and since I don't know how old you are I had to ask. It was a witch hunt, yes a witch hunt of a guy who was certainly a witch but while there were accusations there wasn't any "proof" until the blue dress "popped up" (no pun intended). Remember how awful the Repubs felt for "those poor women" he molested? Remember the awful things they said about Bill? Now the entire narrative has been reversed and very few seem to even notice the utter hypocrisy going on. If Obama or Bill either had done all the absolute ****ty things the Trump has done and continues to do the Repub talking heads would literally explode but now they're about to give themselves a stroke trying to defend Trump for all his crappy decisions, actions, etc. If there ever was a country who had freedom who also deserved to lose it all, it would be us.
Click to expand...

I do. The first vote I was able to cast was to reelect WJC. I voted for Al 4 years later, if you can believe such a thing. I even made phone calls for the last of the Blue Dogs, Heath Shuler, prior to his election to Congress.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top