Merged Kavanaugh/Ford OpinionComment threads for Oct 1

[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.

Then her allegations are meaningless.

They are meaningful only to the person or persons sitting in judgment The judge or judges have subjective opinions in regards witness testimony.

 

[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.

You can't violate your own rights.

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

Ever hear of a secret court called FISA?

Secret court? How do you know their name if it’s a secret? Oh I get it. This is another conspiracy.

 

[jc456]

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.

how?

 

[Auld Phart]

He is not on criminal trial.

after watching that meeting, ya coulda fooled me

 

[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

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!

6 full length FBI investigations have already been conducted, Dufus.

 

[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.

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?

You can't be forced to take a breathalyzer.
You can't be forced to take a drug test.
FISA is not relevant to this.

 

[jc456]

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.

They are meaningful only to the person or persons sitting in judgment The judge or judges have subjective opinions in regards witness testimony.

who is that? there is no evidence kavanaugh did anything. I call ford a victim who is quite confused. obviously you don't think she is a victim. she was exploited by demolosers, released her letter she asked for anonymity to. Only, and I say it louder ONLY a Demoloser had her letter. therefore, ONLY a demoloser could have leaked it. ONLY! When a party really doesn't care about women, that's what a party would do. trrible.

 

[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.

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

Exactly. Her claim, her responsibility to back it up.

 

[WillowTree]

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!

She should give them to the FBI since it is part of her so called evidence that she is telling the truth.

 

[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.

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?

You can't be forced to take a breathalyzer.
You can't be forced to take a drug test.
FISA is not relevant to this.

And when you Refuse there are severe penalties.

 

[jc456]

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?

You can't be forced to take a breathalyzer.
You can't be forced to take a drug test.
FISA is not relevant to this.

And when you Refuse there are severe penalties.

it's called a court order for a blood test.

 

[beautress]

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.

What is it about the FBI investigation already took place that you do not understand.

 

[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.

how?

Fourth Amendment on the Constitutional level.

 

[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.

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.

great. you explain this to the rabid left who are threatening his kids that they need to chill out and wait for the end result first.

sorry - we left common sense behind long ago so don't try to act the fool and then hide behind reason. you don't get to do both.

 

[jc456]

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.

how?

Fourth Amendment on the Constitutional level.

Let me rephrase since you seem lost. The poster made a post, you claimed it violated citizens rights. How?

 

[iceberg]

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.

yea, this isn't making shit up at all, is it?

talk to 'em all. get to the truth. i don't give a shit so your REPUBS DON'T WANT THIS is already shot to hell in a handbasket. but part of getting to this truth is a full analysis of all people. including those who make claims that will change someones life and offer no substantiated evidence.

 

[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.

how?

Fourth Amendment on the Constitutional level.

Once you give up any right, it is no longer a violation of that right.

 

[Defiant1]

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.

The FBI doesn't have subpoena power when conducting background checks.

 

[BuckToothMoron]

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

I understand why she doesn’t want them made public. Look, this woman has serious mental/emotional issues, she is admitted to being unstable. The things she told her shrink are very personal and probably very embarrassing, she never wanted her name made public ( thanks Feinstein). She just wanted somebody in the government to know.

 

[Weatherman2020]

In America the accused get to cross examine their accuser.

Since she refuses, her allegation should be ignored.