Is his wife leaving him? Did his kids disown him? Did he get fired from his current job? Is he being registered as a sex offender? Did he have to move his family due to death threats?
His life is intact.
And is Clarence Thomas known as the “nationally known rapist?”
Is his wife leaving him? Did his kids disown him? Did he get fired from his current job? Is he being registered as a sex offender? Did he have to move his family due to death threats?
His life is intact.
And is Clarence Thomas known as the “nationally known rapist?”
Clarence Thomas was cleared by evidence. There is no national consensus on Kavanaugh, yet.
And you have no idea what his life is actually like right now, let's be honest.
I agree with @deltago on this. I could imagine forgiving him if he'd admitted what he did was wrong, but that he didn't understand the seriousness of his actions. I'm not convinced he's guilty, but if he is I am convinced he should not be a judge.
The only way to get a better view of his guilt or innocence is to have a proper investigation - his statement that the best way to do that would have been to have had a Senate investigation the day after the allegations were made is farcical given he'd just been talking about the need for due process.
There have been a number of references to depositions made by other witnesses, which Kavanaugh says support his position. I'm presuming that those have not been made public, which makes it difficult to assess their credibility.
I'm off to bed now, but the first couple of questions to Kavanaugh following his statement have been about - whether he would want Mark Judge to testify - whether he would want an FBI investigation Frankly his answers to both of those have been terrible and gone a long way to undermine the impressions he was trying to create in his opening statement.
Is his wife leaving him? Did his kids disown him? Did he get fired from his current job? Is he being registered as a sex offender? Did he have to move his family due to death threats?
His life is intact.
And is Clarence Thomas known as the “nationally known rapist?”
Clarence Thomas was cleared by evidence. There is no national consensus on Kavanaugh, yet.
And you have no idea what his life is actually like right now, let's be honest.
I can assume it is stressful. For himself and his family, but everything I said is still intacted.
I am wondering why, if someone was not guilty, they would object to being investigated by the FBI. Wouldn't you embrace this as something that could possibly clear you? Unless he's afraid that they are going to find something...
That's what really gives me pause here. More than just the number of believable people stepping forward to talk about Brett Kavanaugh. The fact that his accusers welcome investigation, and Kavanaugh does not. To me, there seems to be something not right about that.
I am wondering why, if someone was not guilty, they would object to being investigated by the FBI. Wouldn't you embrace this as something that could possibly clear you? Unless he's afraid that they are going to find something...
That's what really gives me pause here. More than just the number of believable people stepping forward to talk about Brett Kavanaugh. The fact that his accusers welcome investigation, and Kavanaugh does not. To me, there seems to be something not right about that.
"But but my calendar, I didn't write that i tried to rape someone on my calendar!"
I am wondering why, if someone was not guilty, they would object to being investigated by the FBI. Wouldn't you embrace this as something that could possibly clear you? Unless he's afraid that they are going to find something...
That's what really gives me pause here. More than just the number of believable people stepping forward to talk about Brett Kavanaugh. The fact that his accusers welcome investigation, and Kavanaugh does not. To me, there seems to be something not right about that.
It could very well be that he's afraid (as are most Republicans) that a delay may see the R's lose the Senate and any chance of him getting in. FBI investigations aren't known for their speed.
I am wondering why, if someone was not guilty, they would object to being investigated by the FBI. Wouldn't you embrace this as something that could possibly clear you? Unless he's afraid that they are going to find something...
That's what really gives me pause here. More than just the number of believable people stepping forward to talk about Brett Kavanaugh. The fact that his accusers welcome investigation, and Kavanaugh does not. To me, there seems to be something not right about that.
It could very well be that he's afraid (as are most Republicans) that a delay may see the R's lose the Senate and any chance of him getting in. FBI investigations aren't known for their speed.
Oh wouldn’t that Karma be a bitch?
And Kavanaugh not answering any questions makes him lose all credibility here. He took advice from Trump and it’s going to cost him IMO.
I’m seeing a bunch of pseudo-lawyer speak on my Facebook feed. I just want to clarify a few things.
1. The Kavanaugh hearing is not a criminal prosecution; it's a fancy job interview.
2. Kavanaugh is not entitled to a legal presumption of innocence. No one has to prove anything “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
3. Kavanaugh is not entitled to any “due process” during these confirmation hearings. The term “due process” refers to the general principal the that United States government can’t take away your rights or property without a legal proceeding—i.e. notice and a hearing. Here, the United States is not attempting to take away Kavanaugh’s rights or property. They’re not trying to take away anything at all. Rather they are determining whether to BESTOW upon Kavanaugh the highest legal position in the country. Kavanaugh has no implicit right to this position. He is not entitled to fair hearing. He is not entitled to any hearing at all.
4. Kavanaugh’s life won’t be “destroyed” by this confirmation process. At worst, he’ll remain a Federal Judge on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. Ford’s testimony may trigger a subsequent criminal or impeachment process, but those are both different sets of proceedings, with higher standards of proof and more legal protections for Kavanaugh.
5. The Rules of Evidence do not apply. Senators can ask whatever they want. Neither Kavanaugh nor Ford is entitled to any of the protections typically given to fact witnesses.
6. Some Senators, like Lindsey Graham, are using the standards of the criminal/civil justice system as a talking point. The argument is that, there isn’t enough evidence to convict Kavanaugh; there isn’t enough evidence to obtain a warrant; there isn’t enough evidence to justify a civil charge; therefore, Kavanaugh should be confirmed. This argument misstates the standard. The only question which the Judiciary Committee must answer is whether Kavanaugh is “fit” to be a Supreme Court Justice. That’s it.
Now, let’s say I was going to hire a guy to cut my lawn. But then, I got a call from three separate women claiming that this guy had sexually assaulted them all. I’d be deeply concerned. Maybe there's a chance that these three women had engaged in a coordinated and nefarious effort to wrongly discredit the guy. And sure, maybe the guy had never been convicted of any form of sexual assault.
But I STILL probably wouldn’t hire the guy. There’s plenty of other people who are perfectly qualified to cut my lawn.
Issues of due process, and considering whether declining to hire the guy would “destroy” his life wouldn't be a part of my decision at all.
For my part, I say put him on the seat pending the results of an investigation and if found guilty beyond reasonable doubt remove him and charge him.
Clarence Thomas probably did it. They did not find that Anita Hill made false allegations, that is wrong. At best there wasn't conclusive evidence found. That doesn't mean it was false allegations. Republicans confirmed him anyway.
Thomas' FBI investigation took 3 days - it didn't find anything apparently (don't have that in front of me). It didn't find proof that it happened nor proof it didn't. So it was pretty worthless.
Now Republicans want to jam through another Supreme Court nominee. But this time without even the tiny step cursory FBI investigation. You can't make this stuff up.
For my part, I say put him on the seat pending the results of an investigation and if found guilty beyond reasonable doubt remove him and charge him.
I think that maybe in the cards. I wouldn’t put it past the Democrats to impeach him for perjury if they win both the house and senate... doing this before they impeach trump.
For my part, I say put him on the seat pending the results of an investigation and if found guilty beyond reasonable doubt remove him and charge him.
I think that maybe in the cards. I wouldn’t put it past the Democrats to impeach him for perjury if they win both the house and senate... doing this before they impeach trump.
He deserves that but it requires 67 votes in Senate doesn't it? Might have to wait until 2020 when more Republicans are on the ballot and can face a reckoning for their support of Trump and 'governing.'
A Supreme Court Justice impeachment is incredibly unlikely, to the point of being nearly impossible.
As to the totality of today, the eye and ear test is fairly simple to judge. Professor Ford came off as an impeccable witness and Judge Kavanaugh is dodging questions left and right while barely controlling his fury. It's not a close call.
A Supreme Court Justice impeachment is incredibly unlikely, to the point of being nearly impossible.
Nobody thought a reality TV pretend successful businessman guy who went bankrupt six times, ran a scam University, and was on tape saying he had successfully "grabbed women by the" hooha and could get away with it because he's famous would be elected president either.
I am also watching most of it right now. The rape accusations are probably not possible to decide one way or another after this time (thought an investigation would not hurt).
But it seems very likely and probably provable by conducting a number of additional interviews that he is lying about black-outs while being drunk and the meaning of the whole Regina Alumni thing. Neither of those two would be disqualifying after all this time, but lying about it is.
Republicans are masters at winning elections. They are incompetent clowns once they get in power.
Because the Carter, Clinton and Obama years were flawlessly executed masterful examples of Democrat superiority. I certainly recall fondly how well the government worked in those years...
Kavanaugh's dancing around the drinking questions reminds me of Clinton and his "I never inhaled" statement. It's hilarious how no matter how much things change over the years, in many ways they stay the same.
I remember SNL did a skit on Clinton when he was in college and his nickname was 'Captain Toke'. I laughed my ass off when I saw that 30 years ago. They should do a skit about Kavanaugh along those same lines. I might even watch them for the 1st time in 30 years...
Republicans are masters at winning elections. They are incompetent clowns once they get in power.
Republican politicians are great at being whining snowflakes on their moral high horse.
They play great at being the victim of: minorities, taxes, women, the anthem, "family values", the war on Christmas, or whatever. They peddle fear - brown people are coming for your minimum wage job, the gays are getting married omg, hillary Clintons emails! etc.
Their main coherent policy objectives tends to be: cut taxes on the rich and businesses. They are hopelessly corrupt in the pocket of big oil & big business donors. When they are in charge their reverse Robin Hood policies of take from the poor and give to the rich doesn't really play well because the rich are already at a huge advantage. There's only so many yachts you can enjoy
When Dems are in charge Republicans just complain and clutch their pearls of aggrevievement. Look it's easy to complain but hard to create. They are basically the party of backseat drivers.
I feel Kavanaugh's behavior here is also disqualifying. I mean, the way he goes from raging to crying...? I don't want a robot on the Supreme Court. An adult, however, would be nice. I didn't like his smirk in earlier testimony, either.
But, that's just me. Similar to my problems with Trump, I want actual adults in power, not screaming, crying manbabies.
I feel Kavanaugh's behavior here is also disqualifying. I mean, the way he goes from raging to crying...? I don't want a robot on the Supreme Court. An adult, however, would be nice. I didn't like his smirk in earlier testimony, either.
But, that's just me. Similar to my problems with Trump, I want actual adults in power, not screaming, crying manbabies.
But I thought it was OK for men to show their feelings now.
I feel Kavanaugh's behavior here is also disqualifying. I mean, the way he goes from raging to crying...? I don't want a robot on the Supreme Court. An adult, however, would be nice. I didn't like his smirk in earlier testimony, either.
But, that's just me. Similar to my problems with Trump, I want actual adults in power, not screaming, crying manbabies.
But I thought it was OK for men to show their feelings now.
It's okay to show feelings - unless they make you look like a lunatic. If he'd stuck to onething like the crying that'd be fine but the seasawing around isn't great. And when you show emotions you are supposed to be honest - not filibustering and lying.
Wasn't the lady from AZ brought to question both Kav and Ford? Then all the Republicans didn't let her question Kav only Ford. Bunch of lying scumbags.
I feel Kavanaugh's behavior here is also disqualifying. I mean, the way he goes from raging to crying...? I don't want a robot on the Supreme Court. An adult, however, would be nice. I didn't like his smirk in earlier testimony, either.
But, that's just me. Similar to my problems with Trump, I want actual adults in power, not screaming, crying manbabies.
But I thought it was OK for men to show their feelings now.
It's okay to show feelings - unless they make you look like a lunatic. If he'd stuck to onething like the crying that'd be fine but the seasawing around isn't great.
Wasn't the lady from AZ brought to question both Kav and Ford? Then all the Republicans didn't let her question Kav only Ford. Bunch of lying scumbags.
Arizona lady was completely useless. I'm sure it was our tax money that paid for her services too. More of my money well spent...
Republicans are masters at winning elections. They are incompetent clowns once they get in power.
Because the Carter, Clinton and Obama years were flawlessly executed masterful examples of Democrat superiority. I certainly recall fondly how well the government worked in those years...
Certainly better in some ways. Democratic presidencies have had the strongest economies in the last 30 years, and Obama is the only reason I or my family had healthcare for 7 years.
I feel Kavanaugh's behavior here is also disqualifying. I mean, the way he goes from raging to crying...? I don't want a robot on the Supreme Court. An adult, however, would be nice. I didn't like his smirk in earlier testimony, either.
But, that's just me. Similar to my problems with Trump, I want actual adults in power, not screaming, crying manbabies.
But I thought it was OK for men to show their feelings now.
It's okay to show feelings - unless they make you look like a lunatic. If he'd stuck to onething like the crying that'd be fine but the seasawing around isn't great.
Wasn't the lady from AZ brought to question both Kav and Ford? Then all the Republicans didn't let her question Kav only Ford. Bunch of lying scumbags.
Arizona lady was completely useless. I'm sure it was our tax money that paid for her services too. More of my money well spent...
Everyone knows the Republican Senators were hiding behind her. It was shameful. They should of at least had the balls to do their job and have the courage of their convictions. I think you would certainly agree with this sentiment. Today the main takeaway from me was Lindsey Graham reminding everyone just what a partisan hack he is, despite his coasting on McCain's reputation as a moderate.
Comments
Is his wife leaving him?
Did his kids disown him?
Did he get fired from his current job?
Is he being registered as a sex offender?
Did he have to move his family due to death threats?
His life is intact.
And is Clarence Thomas known as the “nationally known rapist?”
And you have no idea what his life is actually like right now, let's be honest.
The only way to get a better view of his guilt or innocence is to have a proper investigation - his statement that the best way to do that would have been to have had a Senate investigation the day after the allegations were made is farcical given he'd just been talking about the need for due process.
There have been a number of references to depositions made by other witnesses, which Kavanaugh says support his position. I'm presuming that those have not been made public, which makes it difficult to assess their credibility.
I'm off to bed now, but the first couple of questions to Kavanaugh following his statement have been about
- whether he would want Mark Judge to testify
- whether he would want an FBI investigation
Frankly his answers to both of those have been terrible and gone a long way to undermine the impressions he was trying to create in his opening statement.
That's what really gives me pause here. More than just the number of believable people stepping forward to talk about Brett Kavanaugh. The fact that his accusers welcome investigation, and Kavanaugh does not. To me, there seems to be something not right about that.
*cries*
*blubbering*
*Screams*
".... Hillary Clintons emails!"
Democrats last time they pulled a false sexual assault charge against a Supreme Court nominee: FBI investigations are meaningless.
Can't make this stuff up.
https://mobile.twitter.com/Cernovich/status/1044761664866766849
For my part, I say put him on the seat pending the results of an investigation and if found guilty beyond reasonable doubt remove him and charge him.
And Kavanaugh not answering any questions makes him lose all credibility here. He took advice from Trump and it’s going to cost him IMO.
I’m seeing a bunch of pseudo-lawyer speak on my Facebook feed. I just want to clarify a few things.
1. The Kavanaugh hearing is not a criminal prosecution; it's a fancy job interview.
2. Kavanaugh is not entitled to a legal presumption of innocence. No one has to prove anything “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
3. Kavanaugh is not entitled to any “due process” during these confirmation hearings. The term “due process” refers to the general principal the that United States government can’t take away your rights or property without a legal proceeding—i.e. notice and a hearing. Here, the United States is not attempting to take away Kavanaugh’s rights or property. They’re not trying to take away anything at all. Rather they are determining whether to BESTOW upon Kavanaugh the highest legal position in the country. Kavanaugh has no implicit right to this position. He is not entitled to fair hearing. He is not entitled to any hearing at all.
4. Kavanaugh’s life won’t be “destroyed” by this confirmation process. At worst, he’ll remain a Federal Judge on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals. Ford’s testimony may trigger a subsequent criminal or impeachment process, but those are both different sets of proceedings, with higher standards of proof and more legal protections for Kavanaugh.
5. The Rules of Evidence do not apply. Senators can ask whatever they want. Neither Kavanaugh nor Ford is entitled to any of the protections typically given to fact witnesses.
6. Some Senators, like Lindsey Graham, are using the standards of the criminal/civil justice system as a talking point. The argument is that, there isn’t enough evidence to convict Kavanaugh; there isn’t enough evidence to obtain a warrant; there isn’t enough evidence to justify a civil charge; therefore, Kavanaugh should be confirmed. This argument misstates the standard. The only question which the Judiciary Committee must answer is whether Kavanaugh is “fit” to be a Supreme Court Justice. That’s it.
Now, let’s say I was going to hire a guy to cut my lawn. But then, I got a call from three separate women claiming that this guy had sexually assaulted them all. I’d be deeply concerned. Maybe there's a chance that these three women had engaged in a coordinated and nefarious effort to wrongly discredit the guy. And sure, maybe the guy had never been convicted of any form of sexual assault.
But I STILL probably wouldn’t hire the guy. There’s plenty of other people who are perfectly qualified to cut my lawn.
Issues of due process, and considering whether declining to hire the guy would “destroy” his life wouldn't be a part of my decision at all.
https://www.facebook.com/notes/liz-georges/innocent-until-proven-guilty/10156776555837148/
Thomas' FBI investigation took 3 days - it didn't find anything apparently (don't have that in front of me). It didn't find proof that it happened nor proof it didn't. So it was pretty worthless.
Now Republicans want to jam through another Supreme Court nominee. But this time without even the tiny step cursory FBI investigation. You can't make this stuff up.
As to the totality of today, the eye and ear test is fairly simple to judge. Professor Ford came off as an impeccable witness and Judge Kavanaugh is dodging questions left and right while barely controlling his fury. It's not a close call.
Believe in the impossible lol.
But it seems very likely and probably provable by conducting a number of additional interviews that he is lying about black-outs while being drunk and the meaning of the whole Regina Alumni thing. Neither of those two would be disqualifying after all this time, but lying about it is.
I remember SNL did a skit on Clinton when he was in college and his nickname was 'Captain Toke'. I laughed my ass off when I saw that 30 years ago. They should do a skit about Kavanaugh along those same lines. I might even watch them for the 1st time in 30 years...
They play great at being the victim of: minorities, taxes, women, the anthem, "family values", the war on Christmas, or whatever. They peddle fear - brown people are coming for your minimum wage job, the gays are getting married omg, hillary Clintons emails! etc.
Their main coherent policy objectives tends to be: cut taxes on the rich and businesses. They are hopelessly corrupt in the pocket of big oil & big business donors. When they are in charge their reverse Robin Hood policies of take from the poor and give to the rich doesn't really play well because the rich are already at a huge advantage. There's only so many yachts you can enjoy
When Dems are in charge Republicans just complain and clutch their pearls of aggrevievement. Look it's easy to complain but hard to create. They are basically the party of backseat drivers.
But, that's just me. Similar to my problems with Trump, I want actual adults in power, not screaming, crying manbabies.
Wasn't the lady from AZ brought to question both Kav and Ford? Then all the Republicans didn't let her question Kav only Ford. Bunch of lying scumbags.