SCOTUS

Happiness said:
fortune11 said:
Wouldn?t an fbi investigation clear all that in a few days ?
Yes it would but that's not what the Libs want. The Libs want a lengthy FBI investigation. The Libs want to delay the nomination past the November election, not for a few days.

If the FBI did resolve this matter in a few days, the Libs would have to deploy their next pathetic delay tactic. Trust me, the Libs already have a stockpile of delay tactics ready for immediate deployment if Professor Ford fails.

The Anita hill investigation took 3 days !! And this was before the tools the fbi has now

Excuses , excuses ...
 
fortune11 said:
Happiness said:
fortune11 said:
Wouldn?t an fbi investigation clear all that in a few days ?
Yes it would but that's not what the Libs want. The Libs want a lengthy FBI investigation. The Libs want to delay the nomination past the November election, not for a few days.

If the FBI did resolve this matter in a few days, the Libs would have to deploy their next pathetic delay tactic. Trust me, the Libs already have a stockpile of delay tactics ready for immediate deployment if Professor Ford fails.

The Anita hill investigation took 3 days !! And this was before the tools the fbi has now

Excuses , excuses ...

Professor Ford and those like her are just cannon fodder for the Liberal elite. Once the November Blue Wave crests and the GOP no longer has the votes to confirm Kavanaugh, the Libs will discard Ford like a week old newspaper.
 
eyephone said:
morekaos said:
Among the details alleged by Christine Blasey Ford regarding herself and Brett Kavanaugh, she names their classmate Mark Judge as the sole witness. Judge, through his attorney, submitted a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee today regarding his recollections and his willingness to speak before a hearing.

?I have no memory of this alleged incident,? Judge stated. ?Brett Kavanaugh and I were friends in high school but I do not recall the party described in Dr. Ford?s letter. More to the point, I never saw Brett act in the manner Dr. Ford describes.?

That's good enough for me

Why not under oath? To get to the bottom of it.

Because he will say the exact same thing as his statement. Having him there will clear up nothing, but it will waste more time and accomplish the goal of delay.
 
morekaos said:
eyephone said:
morekaos said:
Among the details alleged by Christine Blasey Ford regarding herself and Brett Kavanaugh, she names their classmate Mark Judge as the sole witness. Judge, through his attorney, submitted a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee today regarding his recollections and his willingness to speak before a hearing.

?I have no memory of this alleged incident,? Judge stated. ?Brett Kavanaugh and I were friends in high school but I do not recall the party described in Dr. Ford?s letter. More to the point, I never saw Brett act in the manner Dr. Ford describes.?

That's good enough for me

Why not under oath? To get to the bottom of it.

Because he will say the exact same thing as his statement. Having him there will clear up nothing, but it will waste more time and accomplish the goal of delay.

We don?t know that
 
What's the hurry?  why not just let him be confirmed after the midterms?
be brave my little elephants.  If you believe in democracy, waiting is just fine.
 
?I have no recollection of that.? ? Sept. 14 in the New Yorker (Judge was not named in the piece)
?It?s just absolutely nuts. I never saw Brett act that way.? ? Later on Sept. 14 to the Weekly Standard (which revealed his name)
?I never saw anything like what was described .?.?. Something like that would stick out, which is why I don?t think it would happen.? ? also Sept. 14 to the New York Times
?Now that the anonymous person has been identified and has spoken to the press, I repeat my earlier statement that I have no recollection of any of the events described in today?s Post article or attributed to her letter. Since I have nothing more to say I will not comment further on this matter. I hope you will respect my position and my privacy.? ? Sept. 16 after The Post released an interview with Ford

Nitpicking BS. He is saying the same thing over and over. No new information nor will any be obtained..waste of time.
 
zubs said:
What's the hurry?  why not just let him be confirmed after the midterms?
be brave my little elephants.  If you believe in democracy, waiting is just fine.

Screw that, I want a clearly qualified Justice sitting on the court Day ONE in October.  I love to watch them squirm and the sooner the better, its my little entertainment. ;) ;D >:D
 
Good lord, who cares? I was drinking when I was 15.  If i was prosecuted for every fumbling teenage boob grab from my teen years I would be sitting with Papillon.  The way most of us lost our virginity would today be prosecuted as child molestation.(but i didn't think so).  My generation turned out OK anyway.  Let it go, I understand "different time" but this is ridiculous.  WE ALL have these skeletons, if you don't there something wrong. If this is the new standard then NO ONE will become a judge, cop, politician,  doctor everyone is disqualified, this will backfire
 
zubs said:
What's the hurry?  why not just let him be confirmed after the midterms?
be brave my little elephants.  If you believe in democracy, waiting is just fine.

We don't want another Merrick Garland situation:

1. GOP tries to stall Merrick Garland confirmation until after presidential election.
2. Dems don't push very hard to confirm Garland before the election because they are sure Hillary will win election.
3. Hillary loses.
4. Merrick Garland fucked.


 
Personally, I question the eminent qualifications of a Supreme Court Justice Nominee who is apparently the one and only person working in the Federal Circuit Court system who had no knowledge of the extreme egregious behavior of his boss.
 
This man use to get drunk back @ yale and run a train on drunk girls with his drinking buddies.
The girls were so ashamed of being gang raped while drunk they stayed silent through the years.

Sounds plausible.

I wonder how he explains that to his 2 daughters.

"before I met your mother, daddy was a bad boy..."
 
nosuchreality said:
Personally, I question the eminent qualifications of a Supreme Court Justice Nominee who is apparently the one and only person working in the Federal Circuit Court system who had no knowledge of the extreme egregious behavior of his boss.


The problem with the SCOTUS now is that we are too focused on "qualifications".  Because of that, we now have a SC that consists almost entirely of former Yale Law/Harvard Law/Federal appeals court judges. That is bad because we need justices of diverse backgrounds and life experiences. The court wasn't always like this.

Justice Earl Warren was a Berkeley grad who was the governor of Calfornia. He would not be "quaified" for the court by current standards because he was not Ivy League and had no prior judicial experience. If Earl Warren came up for confirmation today, the Liberals would never allow him on the bench because as governor of California, he was the one that signed the January 1942 order rounding up all Californians of Japanese descent for interment. And yet Warren's court made many landmark civil rights rulings including Brown vs. Board of Education.








 
zubs said:
This man use to get drunk back @ yale and run a train on drunk girls with his drinking buddies.
The girls were so ashamed of being gang raped while drunk they stayed silent through the years.

Sounds plausible.

I wonder how he explains that to his 2 daughters.

"before I met your mother, daddy was a bad boy..."

LOL nice fantasy
 
No,it doesn't sound plausible.  Like the Russia Russia investigation.  No hard proof but tons of speculation, innuendo and rumor. I went to UCLA when one of these "gang rape" accusations occurred,  it as no secret and the three fraternities involved were sanctioned and shamed until further investigation exonerated them.  The damage was done though, one was closed for 2 years and the accused dropped out.  Was a lot like Duke LaCrosse.  Incidents like that do not go unnoticed, even in the '80's.  Yale would be no different.
 
Obviously the democrats are doing all they can to stop this man from becoming a supreme court justice.  Personally I am more concerned about why I can't put this youtube video:

https://youtu.be/xat1GVnl8-k

straight into this TI forum.  It use to work so easily, and show up in front of you.

 
Back
Top