Merged Kavanaugh/Ford OpinionComment threads for Oct 1

[AzogtheDefiler]

Confirm Kav. Investigate. If additional evidence comes out that shows he was guilty. Impeach him. If nothing new is found. Put Feinstein and Avenatti in jail or fine them?

Fair?

 

[EL Rich]

Confirm Kav. Investigate. If additional evidence comes out that shows he was guilty. Impeach him. If nothing new is found. Put Feinstein and Avenatti in jail or fine them?

Fair?

I think Sen. Flake just came up with a better solution. Push the nomination to the floor of the Senate with the understanding that a vote would be held after a week long (at longest maybe shorter) limited investigation by FBI on current accusations. Then my hope would be Kavanaugh’s nomination would either be withdrawn if any compelling evidence is discovered or he would be confirmed 100-0 if nothing new is added to accusations.

 

[EL Rich]

Confirm Kav. Investigate. If additional evidence comes out that shows he was guilty. Impeach him. If nothing new is found. Put Feinstein and Avenatti in jail or fine them?

Fair?

Not saying your proposal is in any way unfair, I just don’t believe our democracy is healthy enough right now to deal with the impeachment of a sitting Supreme Court justice and the subsequent trial.

 

[HenryBHough]

Civility is dead.

New rule: "Do unto others before they do unto you"

Let the civil war begin!

 

[EL Rich]

Civility is dead.

New rule: "Do unto others before they do unto you"

Let the civil war begin!

Out last civil cost us around 620,000 American lives and that was with a fairly clear physical dividing line and fought mostly with rifles. I have to believe one fought today would create so much bloodshed that the only winners would be the arms manufacturers.

 

[Weatherman2020]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general, and especially much more information about the therapy sessions in which, by her own account, “she came to understand the incident as a trauma with lasting impact on her life.”

If you are in the process of derailing a Supreme Court nominee based on otherwise unsubstantiated allegations of sexual misconduct thirty-six years ago, and in that process giving the nominee a reputation as a rapist, it seems to me you have the moral obligation to either turn over all relevant evidence, or withdraw your allegation. In the absence of that evidence and any corroboration beyond her say-so, if I were a Senator I would ignore the allegations.

Rachel Mitchell Memo Lists Weaknesses in Ford Claim: READ | Heavy.com

 

[Camp]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general,

Your subjective opinion carries no legal weight and violates a multitude of citizen rights.

 

[iceberg]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general,

Your subjective opinion carries no legal weight and violates a multitude of citizen rights.

you mean like the right to face your accuser?
the right to be innocent until proven guilty?

funny...the left only gives a fuck about rights when it suits their purposes.

 

[deanrd]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general, and especially much more information about the therapy sessions in which, by her own account, “she came to understand the incident as a trauma with lasting impact on her life.”

If you are in the process of derailing a Supreme Court nominee based on otherwise unsubstantiated allegations of sexual misconduct thirty-six years ago, and in that process giving the nominee a reputation as a rapist, it seems to me you have the moral obligation to either turn over all relevant evidence, or withdraw your allegation. In the absence of that evidence and any corroboration beyond her say-so, if I were a Senator I would ignore the allegations.

Rachel Mitchell Memo Lists Weaknesses in Ford Claim: READ | Heavy.com

You want her to turn over such private documents yet Republicans refuse to unleash the FBI into a real investigation? God talk about two faced hypocrites. Typical!

 

[iceberg]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general, and especially much more information about the therapy sessions in which, by her own account, “she came to understand the incident as a trauma with lasting impact on her life.”

If you are in the process of derailing a Supreme Court nominee based on otherwise unsubstantiated allegations of sexual misconduct thirty-six years ago, and in that process giving the nominee a reputation as a rapist, it seems to me you have the moral obligation to either turn over all relevant evidence, or withdraw your allegation. In the absence of that evidence and any corroboration beyond her say-so, if I were a Senator I would ignore the allegations.

Rachel Mitchell Memo Lists Weaknesses in Ford Claim: READ | Heavy.com

You want her to turn over such private documents yet Republicans refuse to unleash the FBI into a real investigation? God talk about two faced hypocrites. Typical!

in this instance, her mental stability goes into the issue. if you want the FBI to do a REAL investigation, guess what documents are fair play?

you want people to believe you w/o proof but having more documentation on kavanaugh than the last 5 appointments combined but it not being enough is typical leftist bullshit. but you don't see that, do you?

fucking ID mentality.

 

[The Original Tree]

Three Words:

Sub

Peen

Ahhh

 

[Weatherman2020]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general,

Your subjective opinion carries no legal weight and violates a multitude of citizen rights.

Then her allegations are meaningless.

 

[Camp]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general,

Your subjective opinion carries no legal weight and violates a multitude of citizen rights.

you mean like the right to face your accuser?
the right to be innocent until proven guilty?

funny...the left only gives a fuck about rights when it suits their purposes.

Kavanaugh has not been charged with a crime, hence, his legal rights are not being jeopardized or challenged. He is, in fact, being given the opportunity to challenge allegations made by his accuser even though there is no real law to protect a person from another citizens allegations of wrongdoing other than civil actions. Kavanaugh is applying for a job. He is not on criminal trial. If he was applying for a job as a landscaper and someone told you to keep your doors locked because he was a thief, you would not have to prove he was a thief. You could decide not to hire him based on the comment and allegation of one person. Your subjective opinion would suffice legally to deny the applicant a job.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

She put herself out there and now we need to challenge her credibility as well. Sucks but true.

 

[Pop23]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general,

Your subjective opinion carries no legal weight and violates a multitude of citizen rights.

Not really, once you reference them in sworn statements, you voluntarily give up that right to privacy.

 

[Defiant1]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general,

Your subjective opinion carries no legal weight and violates a multitude of citizen rights.

You can't violate your own rights.

 

[deanrd]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general,

Your subjective opinion carries no legal weight and violates a multitude of citizen rights.

Not really, once you reference them in sworn statements, you voluntarily give up that right to privacy.

Now you’re just making stuff up.

 

[Pop23]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general,

Your subjective opinion carries no legal weight and violates a multitude of citizen rights.

Not really, once you reference them in sworn statements, you voluntarily give up that right to privacy.

Now you’re just making stuff up.

If you claim that the notes are false in the testimony, and those documents are held by you, you then obligate to providing the evidence.

 

[The Original Tree]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general,

Your subjective opinion carries no legal weight and violates a multitude of citizen rights.

You can't violate your own rights.

Sure you can. Ever been forced to take a Breathalyzer?

Have you ever been required to take a drug test for a job?

Ever hear of a secret court called FISA?

 

[deanrd]

Three Words:

Sub

Peen

Ahhh

Which Republicans won’t do. They don’t want people to know the truth. Look at all the classmates of Kavanaugh. Republicans want desperately to keep them quiet.