Jump to content

US Supreme Court


Chinahand

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, the stinking enigma said:

You have more dots than letters there woody. Assuming money is the motivation, why would they get more for revealing this now rather than after he was appointed?

 Just join a q anon group stinky!  It's all they ever go on(anon) about!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, the stinking enigma said:

If money was the case then why is it so important to say it about this particular chap? Won't they just replace him with another stooge?  

Maybe “interested” parties are paying them to prevent him getting in. Just a guess 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Lxxx said:

It all stinks. It's clearly a political hit. No evidence, no details, no corroboration just a wild accusation 35 years after the supposed event. Poor bloke and his family. 

But she had reportedly made the allegations to several people going back several years and raised the allegations prior to Kavanaugh being nominated. She raised the allegations privately when he was just one of a fair few on a final short list. It is one hell of a conspiracy to start putting all that in place several years ago, before Trump was elected or his name was in the frame. The leaking of the accusations is and was wrong

I watched all the hearing and I am convinced she believes that it was Kavanaugh's intention to rape her. It was not some poor attempt at coping a dodgy feel. I accept that it may not have been Kavanaugh and after all this time there is little way of knowing but I expect that if you believe that a person had tried to rape you that would stay with you.

I can also accept that Kavanagh, even if he was guilty of the matter, may have no recollection of the matter. It seems generally to be accepted that as a youth he did drink fairly heavily. In fact he has admitted it in the past so it appears that he was not being particularly truthful in some of his evidence. The guy who he allegedly was with is an interesting character and he has written to books about his and his friends drinking habits as teenagers/young adults. One of the stories relates to a Bart Kavanaugh passing out.

I would argue there is plenty of anecdotal or circumstantial evidence in this matter, although I agree not enough to obtain a conviction at a court of law. It would though be enough to dissuade me from selecting such when there was a pool of to choose from who were very similar in views, qualification. That ignores the fact that generally I expect those who set and uphold laws to be of fairly impeccable background and character so they can lead by example. Additionally whatever your views of the matter Kavanaugh's performance when questioned yesterday would alarm me if I was appointing a judge as I would want to be such a person to be able to fairly calm, rational and thoughtful. I appreciate that they do things differently in the states but Kavanaugh did seem not be any of those and appeared to have more the traits of a politician, throwing insults at rivals than an impartial judge. In fact if you did not know better  and were asked based on the performances yesterday which of the two was the a senior judge I expect you would say the woman.

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/17/2018 at 7:23 PM, Chinahand said:

I don't really know what to make about the accusations against Trump's Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh.

A part of me thinks a Supreme Court Justice should be a figure of absolute integrity and so it is right and proper that their entire life is examined for inappropriate behaviour.

Another part thinks that if an event which occurred when they were 17 is going to be used against them when they are being considered for a job in their 50s things are going a little crazy.

The incident sounds nasty - but as the girl managed to pull herself away it is hard to know just how serious it could have become.

His behaviour was highly inappropriate, but at the same time shouldn't some account be taken for his youth.

Is this incident on its own enough to disqualify him from the court?

I guess many more-radically minded democrats will see it as exemplifying an underlying misogyny, but if there are no other incidents over his entire adult career is such poor behaviour really a total disqualification?

Thoughts?

If you commit a serious crime at 17 and don't get caught till you are 50...you should get away with it?

This offence, as alledged and if proven, guarantees jail time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/28/2018 at 2:02 PM, the stinking enigma said:

You have more dots than letters there woody. Assuming money is the motivation, why would they get more for revealing this now rather than after he was appointed?

after appointment very little can be done......

#jobforlife

he seems a right #snowflake to be a judge......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's just the sort of over privileged, spoiled American brat who would have carried out this sort of drunken attack. And that is the sum total of the case against him! No evidence, no rape, a long long time ago and people who say that it wasn't him. Why is this even being given air time?   

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎9‎/‎29‎/‎2018 at 9:35 PM, Albert Tatlock said:

If you commit a serious crime at 17 and don't get caught till you are 50...you should get away with it?

This offence, as alledged and if proven, guarantees jail time.

Any serious offence, if proven, deserves jail time. The issue in this matter is there is no evidence at all. Not a single piece. Just a 35 year old allegation that the defendant was in a certain place at a certain time. We have due process for this very reason, otherwise the whole system collapses. There is much more riding on this than just an appointment to the Supreme Court.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Lxxx said:

Any serious offence, if proven, deserves jail time. The issue in this matter is there is no evidence at all. Not a single piece. Just a 35 year old allegation that the defendant was in a certain place at a certain time. We have due process for this very reason, otherwise the whole system collapses. There is much more riding on this than just an appointment to the Supreme Court.

I'm not betting on him not being voted in. There's prob only one possibility of that I suspect...and that's breaking one of the alledged witnesses...which is unlikely IMO...but one never knows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...