Politics Kavanaugh Confirmation Hearing, now with New allegations!

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Will Kavanaugh be confirmed?

  • Yes

  • No

  • Burn it all down


Results are only viewable after voting.
Status
Not open for further replies.
I feel though, that term-limit arguments, which isn't up for debate here, tend to focus on the inability, once inside the system, to get someone "voted out". Just as an example, from politics here in FL:

Congress_meem.jpg

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-...ss-has-11-approval-ratings-96-incumbent-re-e/

That's entirely on voters. We have the tools now to vote people out.

barfo
 
An alternate option, given that you "lose" institutional knowledge here - is that the supreme court judges go to re-confirmation every X years, just as senators / congress members go for re-election.

There's a thought that, starting ASAP, you "retire" a judge every 2 years, so that for the next 18 you're cycling in new candidates, basically ensuring that a President will always get to pick 2.
I don't love that the Judiciary should have term limits. In my view of the current events, if Kavanaugh had been confirmed last month without anyone stepping forward with allegations, he'd be sitting on the Court "for life", but able to be impeached if he ran afoul of "good behavior." Again, in my mind, if Dr. Ford came forward at, say, Christmas this year and dropped the allegations and the investigation proved her right, he would be impeached quickly. So I don't know how term limits would solve the problem.
 
Fair enough. I've seen enough of that type spouted that that's where my head immediately went.

You weren't active when we were talking about the "job interview" aspect about 100 posts ago, so I'd be interested in your thoughts on what got brought up. If this was a job interview (I contend it's not, but I get why someone would say that) then he would be under significantly more protections from these allegations than he is. Not to say it shouldn't be brought up or investigated fully, but it cannot legally be a job interview.

Job interviews for SCOTUS are and should be unique.

The guy they were gonna hire instead of Anthony smoked weed.

He wasn't confirmed.

Kennedy's appointment was one of the most vetted EVER.

As it should be.
 
There's a thought that, starting ASAP, you "retire" a judge every 2 years, so that for the next 18 you're cycling in new candidates, basically ensuring that a President will always get to pick 2.
I don't love that the Judiciary should have term limits. In my view of the current events, if Kavanaugh had been confirmed last month without anyone stepping forward with allegations, he'd be sitting on the Court "for life", but able to be impeached if he ran afoul of "good behavior." Again, in my mind, if Dr. Ford came forward at, say, Christmas this year and dropped the allegations and the investigation proved her right, he would be impeached quickly. So I don't know how term limits would solve the problem.

I think term limits would achieve one thing, which would be to eliminate the weird motivation to nominate someone really young (and thus relatively inexperienced) so that they can serve a long time, and at the same time also have people on the court that are really really old, and maybe not thinking as clearly as they did in their prime. If it was term-limited you might get more judges in the prime of their lives.

barfo
 
NBC News is the FBI? And there is nothing there about the FBI concluding that he exposed his junk to her.

Ramirez was interviewed by the FBI. Nothing more.

The FBI has interviewed her and based upon Kavanaugh's cover his ass texts have concluded her statement to be true. He's unraveling.
 
I think term limits would achieve one thing, which would be to eliminate the weird motivation to nominate someone really young (and thus relatively inexperienced) so that they can serve a long time, and at the same time also have people on the court that are really really old, and maybe not thinking as clearly as they did in their prime. If it was term-limited you might get more judges in the prime of their lives.

barfo
Fair point, but I'm not sure. I mean, yeah, I think Clarence Thomas' nomination (I was in HS, then) seemed to just want to get a young-ish conservative African-American into the seat so the wouldn't have to worry about it for a while. He's seemed to be an ok jurist. I don't think Kagan and Sotomayor (and now, Gorsuch) are going to be bad judges because they're only in their 50's. I'd say 30 years or so in the law, especially a decade or so in higher courts, should adequately prepare someone.

Back to the point, if Kavanaugh raped someone he should be hammered. If he drank as a teenager and that's what's supposed to disqualify him, then Thurgood Marshall (who I have a lot of respect for, though I don't like his approach to ruling), who was almost kicked out of college for hazing multiple students. If he's allowed his bias to get into his rulings illegally, he should not be confirmed. But I'd submit that Kagan's biases color her decisions, which is kind of why we have 9 judges, right?
 
I don't think fame and fortune were her objectives.

...stop with the BS damage control/back peddling... you know damn well when first asked about her motive you immediately brought up the gofundme accounts and even exaggerated the amount.
...are you denying that?...I'll gladly repost your quotes if your memory is failing you again.
 
...stop with the BS damage control/back peddling... you know damn well when first asked about her motive you immediately brought up the gofundme accounts and even exaggerated the amount.
...are you denying that?...I'll gladly repost your quotes if your memory is failing you again.

It was stated that she had absolutely nothing to gain and I said she got all this money from the GoFundMe Jesus fucking Christ. I never said it was her motive, but she has stuff to gain. I think her motive is political or she was obsessed with alpha male Brett when she was younger and he didnt know who the fuck she was.
 
Last edited:
that presumed innocence argument is tired and should BE retired.

I also find it interesting that someone who is hyper-attuned to police brutality and perceived systematic injustice wants to "retire" the American judicial concept of innocent until proven guilty.

presumed innocence bullshit argument needs to stop.

Stop. Really. No one wants to argue against all of the red herrings you caught. Throw those bitches back because no one in the history of this country has suggested that.

:blink::rolleyes2:
 
It was stated that she had absolutely nothing to gain and I said she got all this money from the GoFundMe .

...uhhh, that what I said. You were asked "what she had to gain" and you answered by pointing to money and then proceeded to stand by that claim for multiple posts afterwards.
...again, would you like me to repost your quotes for you?
 
...uhhh, that what I said. You were asked "what she had to gain" and you answered by pointing to money and then proceeded to stand by that claim for multiple posts afterwards.
...again, would you like me to repost your quotes for you?

Go ahead. You said motive. Not the same as what she "had to gain"
 
...You said motive. Not the same as what she "had to gain"

...uhhh, that IS motive...in addition to reposting your earlier drivel, would you also like the definition of the word "motive"?

...here you go, no charge;

mo·tive
ˈmōdiv/
noun
  1. 1. a reason for doing something, especially one that is hidden or not obvious.
 
Last edited:
"A friend of Christine Blasey Ford is speaking out publicly for the first time to deny an allegation that Ford lied during testimony when she said she had never given advice on how to take a polygraph.
Monica McLean, a retired FBI agent and friend of Ford, told CNN that the "allegations are completely false."
She told CNN that she is furious that her reputation is now being called into question by a "lie" that has thrust her into the national spotlight. McLean spoke to CNN after a sworn declaration questioning the veracity of Ford's testimony was leaked to Fox News after being provided to the Judiciary Committee."
 
@yankeesince59 , do you have a link to that article? Not saying you're making it up or anything, but I'd like to see what she thinks the leak was. If it's a document with her declaration in it, I don't see how it's an "allegation". If it's something else, good to know.
 
...uhhh, that IS motive...in addition to reposting your earlier drivel, would you also like the definition of the word "motive"?

...here you go, no charge;

mo·tive
ˈmōdiv/
noun
  1. 1. a reason for doing something, especially one that is hidden or not obvious.

You can have something to gain when doing something and that won't be the reason (motive) you do something.

So pretty please, post what I said and show me where i said that money and fame was the reason she came forward. I never said that. It was something to gain, but not the motive.
 
And, for professional development, I'm always stoked to learn new words while reading about current event. In this case, gotterdammerung, which isn't just a Drumpf-ian way of saying "goddamned".
 
@yankeesince59 , do you have a link to that article? Not saying you're making it up or anything, but I'd like to see what she thinks the leak was. If it's a document with her declaration in it, I don't see how it's an "allegation". If it's something else, good to know.

I think she means the boyfriends letter, not hers. It isn't clear to me the boyfriends letter ever went to judiciary, the news reports just said that Fox had obtained it. But maybe it did.

barfo
 
You can have something to gain when doing something and that won't be the reason (motive) you do something.

So pretty please, post what I said and show me where i said that money and fame was the reason she came forward. I never said that. It was something to gain, but not the motive.


...Jesus tap dancing Christ...as I just posted, "something to gain" is the same as "motive".

...you're simply now arguing for the sake of arguing and saving face...when it's clear you're full of shit.
 
...Jesus tap dancing christ...as I just posted, "something to gain" is the same as "motive".

...you're simply now arguing for the sake of arguing and saving face...when it's clear you're full of shit.


If you run a marathon and get a free t-shirt at the end and a medal, the medal and the t-shirt is something that you gain however it's not the motive you do the marathon
 
If you run a marathon and get a free t-shirt at the end and a medal, the medal and the t-shirt is something that you gain however it's not the motive you do the marathon

Speak for yourself.

I mean, free t-shirt, come on.

barfo
 
If you run a marathon and get a free t-shirt at the end and a medal, the medal and the t-shirt is something that you gain however it's not the motive you do the marathon

...that just has to be the worst analogy I've ever heard....and a very weak one to boot.

...here ya go, Mensa...read from here ;#1559

...a few posts later you said "she gained fame and fortune by doing this despite what people claim to the contrary." (money from gofundme account)




...you're welcome.
 
...that just has to be the worst analogy I've ever heard....and a very weak one to boot.

...here ya go, Mensa...read from here ;#1559

...a few posts later you said "she gained fame and fortune by doing this despite what people claim to the contrary." (money from gofundme account)

...you're welcome.

And I never said it was her motive. And I am correct, as usual.

But misinterpretation and jumping to conclusions ahead of time seems to be you and your side's forte.

Just more Trump Derangement Syndrome
 
And I never said it was her motive. But misinterpretation and jumping to conclusions ahead of time seems to be you and your side's forte.

Just more Trump Derangement Syndrome

...lol..pretty much what I thought...you have nothing. ...so you are flat out saying "having something to gain" and "motive" are not the same thing?
 
...lol..pretty much what I thought...you have nothing. ...so you are flat out saying "having something to gain" and "motive" are not the same thing?

Yes. Motive is the reason for doing something, and having something to gain is just having something to gain. Its stated she has nothing to gain but she did she had money and fame almost a million bucks and that's only the money we know about. I do think that the reason she came forward was either as I stated before that she is so deranged and anti Trump that she will stop at anything to stop anything he does or that she was infatuated with Kavanaugh and this is her way of getting back at him many years later
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top