Supreme Court Nominee #2

[jjenny]

If it's in msm, then I believe it can be discussed. Aren't those the rules? If somebody makes an accusations, and then articles about that somebody are published in msm, and we couldn't discuss issues regarding that somebody's credibility, how would that make any sense?

 

[Deleted member 39678]

I think I have made myself abundantly clear in all my posts over the past few days. In summary:

1. A right wing judge WILL be appointed to the SC, and Dems have never believed otherwise.

2. I don't like any of the nominees on the short list, neither do Dem Senators. Many on the short list are actually even MORE radically right than K. Knocking out K would actually increase the odds
of getting one of those righter-thans on the SC.

3. I love the law. I believe in our judiciary system, and I believe that democracy ends when citizens lose faith in our institutions, but especially in the judiciary. For me, maintaining the legitimacy of the SC is more important than ANY nominee, either repub or dem nominated.

4. My opposition to K is based on my belief that he is a partisan, has engaged in dirty tricks, and has perjured himself-- all this before anyone ever heard Dr. Ford's name.

5. Any other trump nominee would cause real damage to the nation, imo, but NOT to the SC itself.

Lets say Kavanugh doesn't get confirmed and Trump has to pick another candidate.

That candidate will face the same opposition from the democrats and go through the same FBI background investigation that many have said is inadequate.

Maybe there should be a "complete" investigation of that candidate that lasts at least until the end of January. JMO

 

[Mica]

I missed this what is it about??

Read this article...

Julie Swetnick has extensive legal history

 

[Deleted member 39678]

If it's in msm, then I believe it can be discussed. Aren't those the rules? If somebody makes an accusations, and then articles about that somebody are published in msm, and we couldn't discuss issues regarding that somebody's credibility, how would that make any sense?

I'm not sure what's allowed. I know that all accusers are considered to be victims and that means you cannot "casts aspersions" against any of them.

Cast aspersions to me includes this. "you are questioning their abilities or doubting them." I'm not sure if this apply's to WS or not. I never got an answer when I asked. JMO

aspersion - Dictionary Definition

 

[oceanblueeyes]

So it's extremely important to stop another conservative from being on the Supreme Court for the reasons you listed.

Isn't this same claim made everytime a conservative has been nominated ?

At one time I was a registered Democrat now an independent but I remember that being the same claim made over and over again.

However it never happened so after decades of listening to the 'sky is falling' and it never happened ..I finally dismissed it as being political fearing mongering.

I do agree Roe vs. Wade may not matter to many but every liberal politician I have seen in the media since another conservative has been nominated to the SC has said it matters to them and all their voters.

The way they have said this is what matters to them the most along with their voters and say it will the driving force in the upcoming election.

So being able to get abortions seems to be a top priority right now for democrats rather than the economy... national security or working toward world peace with countries who have threatened to do us grave harm.

Jmo

 

[CARIIS]

So it's extremely important to stop another conservative from being on the Supreme Court for the reasons you listed.

He is on board (carefully) with pre existing coming back into play? Would that be a problem for you guys -- it would for me.

 

[human]

He is on board (carefully) with pre existing coming back into play? Would that be a problem for you guys -- it would for me.

I cannot imagine anyone who does not have preexisting. Having had children, having the flu, allergies, broken bones, surgery of any kind.

 

[CARIIS]

During Thursday’s hearing, Kavanaugh said, “Mark Judge has provided sworn statement saying this didn’t happen.” That sentence isn’t true. Judge discussed the allegations not in a sworn statement but in a letter from his lawyer. He doesn’t say that the assault didn’t happen but that he had “no memory of the alleged incident.” Judge submitted another signed letter Thursday night repeating the statement.

'Boofing' and 'ralphing' and other doubts about Kavanaugh's testimony

 

[CARIIS]

same link

One of Judge’s ex-girlfriends has said she is willing to testify that Judge once told her of an incident where he and other unnamed boys took turns having sex with a drunken woman. Per a Washington Post report, Judge is currently hiding out at a Delaware beach house.

 

[CARIIS]

“devil’s triangle” as a sexual encounter consisting of two men and one woman.

Certainly matches with Judges hopping aboard does it not?

Sure makes sense that he had better not remember any of this -- its a crime and you go to jail for it

moo

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

Kevin Jackson Fired: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know | Heavy.com

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

bumping

To quote @sillybilly from thread #1:

In answer to a query upthread ...

Unless Tricia decides otherwise, Kavanaugh is the accused and his accusers are considered the victims in this matter. They are to be discussed according to Websleuths victim friendly policies.​

and @sillybilly here: Supreme Court Nominee

It's the standard Websleuths TOS ... you may discuss what is said in MSM about the main case players. If there is information about, or statements by the accusers in MSM, that may be discussed.

from The Rules: Etiquette & Information

What you cannot do is speculate negatively about or cast aspersions against the victims.

Any questions, please send a private message to WS staff.
​

 

[Mica]

During Thursday’s hearing, Kavanaugh said, “Mark Judge has provided sworn statement saying this didn’t happen.” That sentence isn’t true. Judge discussed the allegations not in a sworn statement but in a letter from his lawyer. He doesn’t say that the assault didn’t happen but that he had “no memory of the alleged incident.” Judge submitted another signed letter Thursday night repeating the statement.

'Boofing' and 'ralphing' and other doubts about Kavanaugh's testimony

Kavanaugh denies allegations by woman who says he tried to force himself on her in the 1980s

In a statement released by the White House, Kavanaugh said: “I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time.”

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

Amy Klobuchar: I was 'really stunned' by Brett Kavanaugh's behavior at hearing - CNNPolitics

 

[Boodles]

I saw it. Funny. "Brett" blamed Clintons, George Soros, and Ronan Sinatra.

Fantastic cold opening! Matt Damon starting with “WHAT!!!” I thought his portrayal was far more mild than Kavanaugh’s actual behavior.

And the viral video of the Pulp Fiction character with Kavanaugh is on point, too. “I went to Yale.”

I’m glad both took Kavanaugh to task. If he had any dignity, he’d withdraw from consideration.

 

[mickey2942]

Kevin Jackson Fired: 5 Fast Facts You Need to Know | Heavy.com

Interesting. He probably thought Fox news had no values when it comes to trashing women.

 

[Boodles]

I was watching live when that was said. I thought there was a lot of questionable things said in that hearing and I thought that was one of them. They have gaslighting down to a science. Just look at the back and forth with DJT and the restrictions (or not) on the FBI investigation today. Someone asked earlier if we aren't exhaused. Yes I am tired of being gaslighted. I feel like I am in an abusive relationship.

^^^^^^Yes, this!

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

sounds like a sham to me ... bbm

FBI narrows focus into Kavanaugh investigation

The investigation is the result of a dramatic day in Washington on Friday that by all appearances began with quick movement towards Kavanaugh’s confirmation and ended with a pause in the process while the FBI steps in. Following the agreement for the FBI to investigate Kavanaugh, the focus has moved to how the probe will be handled, its ultimate findings and whether it will put to rest fears about a lack of due diligence over the nominee for the nation’s highest court.

A source with knowledge of the investigation say the FBI will interview a handful of people and only take direction from the White House, not the Senate.

Kavanaugh’s drinking history, which has come up in the allegations, is not part of the probe.​

 

[Hope4More]

That's not what I said. I hope you don't think I'm stupid.

That's not what I said. I hope you don't think I'm stupid.

And I hope you remember past trials and threads we were both on where I made it clear I thought you anything but.

This just seems to be one of those subjects where opinions are most often so deeply held, and based on a solid foundation of other so deeply held opinions, that communicating across the chasm sometimes seems almost impossible.


I asked those questions in good faith. I am trying to understand what objective, factual information IF FOUND, could change a K supporter's mind.

---------------

Isn't this same claim made everytime a conservative has been nominated ?

At one time I was a registered Democrat now an independent but I remember that being the same claim made over and over again.

However it never happened so after decades of listening to the 'sky is falling' and it never happened ..I finally dismissed it as being political fearing mongering.

I do agree Roe vs. Wade may not matter to many but every liberal politician I have seen in the media since another conservative has been nominated to the SC has said it matters to them and all their voters.

The way they have said this is what matters to them the most along with their voters and say it will the driving force in the upcoming election.

So being able to get abortions seems to be a top priority right now for democrats rather than the economy... national security or working toward world peace with countries who have threatened to do us grave harm.

Jmo

Just on the last point. Evangelical leaders & many hoi ploi evangelicals are on record as saying that they voted for a president they did not like or trust or even think was fit for office, but that they did so because he had promised to only appoint SC justices who would overturn Roe v Wade.

So, no, that dog don't hunt.

 

[rosemadderlake]

Isn't this same claim made everytime a conservative has been nominated ?

At one time I was a registered Democrat now an independent but I remember that being the same claim made over and over again.

However it never happened so after decades of listening to the 'sky is falling' and it never happened ..I finally dismissed it as being political fearing mongering.

I do agree Roe vs. Wade may not matter to many but every liberal politician I have seen in the media since another conservative has been nominated to the SC has said it matters to them and all their voters.

The way they have said this is what matters to them the most along with their voters and say it will the driving force in the upcoming election.

So being able to get abortions seems to be a top priority right now for democrats rather than the economy... national security or working toward world peace with countries who have threatened to do us grave harm.

Jmo

Bbm: economy and world peace are items that effect all people and are variables. Roe v Wade targets and effects one half of the people. Women's rights like civil rights are hard fought battles. The ship on overturning or repealing these landmark rights is not going down without a fight.

Do I think these concerns are an undercurrent in the current SC nomination? Yes, but Kavanaugh presents other concerns as well. And like the saying goes be careful what you wish for.

The midterm elections will reflect how strongly people feel about rights. I think it's going to be a huge turnout.