New SCOTUS Judge II: The Wrath of Kavanaugh

Meadmaker said:
That's a good point. The Republicans went lower than low on the Benghazi/email/whatever else they were yapping about. Now the Democrats are joining them at the bottom of the barrel.


U...S...A..!
Click to expand...


It's the kind of world we made for ourselves!

So get your Speedo™ on and prepare to jump into the Mud Pit™. Two go in, one comes out.*


*Of the Mud Pit™, I mean, not the Speedo™. Ewww.
 
Silly Green Monkey said:
Perhaps someone who lies to make himself look better and is blatantly partisan shouldn't be given a lifetime appointment to a panel of impartial judges?
Click to expand...

Hence the quandary.

I'm not crazy about the guy, for all the reasons cited and yet, absent the allegations, he would have been confirmed. Ok. Along come the allegations. They are pretty serious allegations. Sexual assault? Even a long time ago? What sort of sexual assault? Just a little grope at 17? Oh......hand held over the mouth to prevent screaming sort of assault. Yeah, that's pretty serious.


Ok. If he lied about that, throw the bum out. You can see me saying that if your were to search these threads for posts on Wednesday of last week. On Thursday, they asked him about immature comments in a high school yearbook, and how much he drank in college. They used the hearing as an opportunity to dig up anything embarrassing that they could. That's scummy. It doesn't represent the sort of society I want to live in.

That's why I have a hard time deciding which is the lesser evil. Confirming Kavanaugh or rewarding the Democrats. If there was a way to do neither, that's what I would want to happen.
 
Last edited:
Meadmaker said:
Do you honestly believe that a question about whether he was blackout drunk on a bus trip as a senior (or was it grad student?) at Yale was an attempt to elicit information that would help them determine whether or not he sexually assaulted a girl in high school? Or exposed himself to a girl freshman year of college?
Click to expand...

YES! He could have sucked it up and just told the truth about all the drinking if he's innocent of the assault, and his inability to do so is telling.
 
Silly Green Monkey said:
Perhaps someone who lies to make himself look better and is blatantly partisan shouldn't be given a lifetime appointment to a panel of impartial judges?
Click to expand...

Rule 1.2: Promoting Confidence in the Judiciary

A judge shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence,* integrity,* and impartiality* of the judiciary, and shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.​

I think he's failed in this regard spectacularly.
 
acbytesla said:
And by the way, did you see Hillary Clinton during the Ben Ghazzi hearings? She was brilliant during them.
Click to expand...

She had this crazy tactic she used, called "telling the truth".

I strongly dislike her, but it was obvious she was just telling the truth.
 
Meadmaker said:
Sexual assault? Even a long time ago? What sort of sexual assault? Just a little grope at 17? Oh......hand held over the mouth to prevent screaming sort of assault. Yeah, that's pretty serious.
Click to expand...

I had no idea you went to Yale, Mead.
:boggled:
 
Elagabalus said:
Golly. Imagine that! I wonder who started that trend?
Click to expand...

acbytesla said:
You're just full of false equivalences. They aren't remotely similar. No one would be investigating Kavanaugh unless he was up for a lifetime position on the Supreme Court. And by the way, did you see Hillary Clinton during the Ben Ghazzi hearings? She was brilliant during them.
Click to expand...


I love it when this happens, and it happens so often. Someone makes a comparison, and then someone else follows up on the comparison, and then a third person doesn't like the followup, so he criticizes the second person for the comparison, even though it was the first person who made it. Happens all the time on this forum.

However, Elagabalus did not actually make an equivalency, but he did make a comparison, and I don't think it was false.
 
Kavanaugh had to lie to keep Trump on his side: any side of weakness, of admitting to anything, might have cost him the support of the White House, dooming his nomination even if the Committee supported him.
That is why Graham pretends he is outraged, because he is part of Trump' effort to change the narrative.

These are games we saw in the election, and most days of the week from Trump by now.

But no one in America should be so dishonest when it comes to finding a new Supreme Court Justice: character matters more than ideology.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
Kavanaugh had to lie to keep Trump on his side: any side of weakness, of admitting to anything, might have cost him the support of the White House, dooming his nomination even if the Committee supported him.
That is why Graham pretends he is outraged, because he is part of Trump' effort to change the narrative.

These are games we saw in the election, and most days of the week from Trump by now.

But no one in America should be so dishonest when it comes to finding a new Supreme Court Justice: character matters more than ideology.
Click to expand...

It's more than character. Kavanaugh made it abundantly clear that he wasn't going to be impartial. No that watched his whiny man-child display could honestly believe that someone Kavanaugh thought was a Democrat was going to get a fair hearing standing before his bench.
 
It's sad that Kavanaugh turns out to be Trump's doppleganger. Scary to have this guy on SCOTUS, it will erode the rights of millions of citizens.
 
thaiboxerken said:
It's sad that Kavanaugh turns out to be Trump's doppleganger. Scary to have this guy on SCOTUS, it will erode the rights of millions of citizens.
Click to expand...

I don't think he is.
Not at all.
He was pretending to be so he could dodge questions.


Kavanaugh is much worse in that he has a cause as well as ambitions.
 
Last edited:
Meadmaker said:
Because I still think a question about a "boofing" comment written in a high school yearbook is irrelevant, and, more than that, only meant to embarrass the candidate based on his behavior at age 17, or catch him in a lie.
Click to expand...

Again, you can only be caught in a lie... if you lie!
 
Kavanaugh threw himself under the bus the minute he tried to paint himself as an innocent choir boy who never did anything untoward throughout his entire youth.

Then to make matters worse for himself, he later tried to backpeddle that proclamation by stating (and I'm paraphrasing here):

"Okay okay, maybe I did a little drinking back then and maybe I did get drunk a few times. And it makes me cringe when I think about it."

Sorry but lying and then trying to move the goalposts just doesn't cut it for someone who's to spend the rest of their working life sitting as a supreme court justice deciding on the fate of the entire country.
 
Last edited:
The dude lied about the drinking age, or he's ignorant of what the law was at the time. Both are disqualifying IMO.
 
dmaker said:
CNN is reporting that Flake told 60 Minutes that if Kavanaugh lied, the nomination is over.
Click to expand...
That’s:

A) encouraging, because Boofy the Devil-Triangulator certainly lied like there was no tomorrow.

B) discouraging, because, by using the word “if,” the good senator seems to be saying he has not grasped A).
 
Kavanaugh said he was of drinking age at the time.
What about everyone else at the party?
Did he witness underage drinking and not report it?

Supposedly, that kind of thing is relevant for judging Ford.
 
Meadmaker said:
Hence the quandary.

I'm not crazy about the guy, for all the reasons cited and yet, absent the allegations, he would have been confirmed.
Click to expand...
No, absent his past behavior which he wouldn't own up to, and absent his un-judge-like partisanship he would have been confirmed, like Gorsuch was.


Meadmaker said:
Ok. Along come the allegations. They are pretty serious allegations. Sexual assault? Even a long time ago? What sort of sexual assault? Just a little grope at 17? Oh......hand held over the mouth to prevent screaming sort of assault. Yeah, that's pretty serious.


Ok. If he lied about that, throw the bum out. You can see me saying that if your were to search these threads for posts on Wednesday of last week. On Thursday, they asked him about immature comments in a high school yearbook, and how much he drank in college. They used the hearing as an opportunity to dig up anything embarrassing that they could. That's scummy. It doesn't represent the sort of society I want to live in.
Click to expand...
So confirmation bias then, you agree the charges are serious and possibly disqualifying, then you look for reasons to discount the charges.

Meadmaker said:
That's why I have a hard time deciding which is the lesser evil. Confirming Kavanaugh or rewarding the Democrats. If there was a way to do neither, that's what I would want to happen.
Click to expand...
So you just can't stand it they might actually have a case against confirming Kav because what? You can't stand to have the Democrats get a political win even if it is a legit win?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom