New SCOTUS Judge II: The Wrath of Kavanaugh

Stacyhs said:
That's not fair. While Kav demonstrated during the hearing that he is arrogant, we do not know if he is a drunk. No evidence has been presented that he drinks more than what is considered socially acceptable now.
Click to expand...
ex drunk is the point, but Trump doesn't drink is also the point.
I think he is shaping to calculate he can dump Kavanaugh to political advantage, and I think he should. There are a few women who vote in the country.
 
Samson said:
ex drunk is the point, but Trump doesn't drink is also the point.
I think he is shaping to calculate he can dump Kavanaugh to political advantage, and I think he should. There are a few women who vote in the country.
Click to expand...

I think they will push this vote through ASAP regardless of what the FBI report says. It would not surprise me one bit if Trump and the GOP refuse to make it public if it shows Kav in an even poorer light than now.
 
Meadmaker said:
How do they do it elsewhere? Aren't judges in most of the European and descendants world politically appointed? We have elected judges at many state and most local levels. which is even nuttier.
Click to expand...

They're not elected here, nor appointed by politicians. There is a Judicial Appointments Commission, which is an independent non-political body, which advertises vacancies and interviews the applicants. I have never heard of any controversial appointments to any of our courts, although there is concern that the gender and ethnic minority balance doesn't represent the communities they serve quite well enough yet.
 
MikeG said:
They're not elected here, nor appointed by politicians. There is a Judicial Appointments Commission, which is an independent non-political body, which advertises vacancies and interviews the applicants. I have never heard of any controversial appointments to any of our courts, although there is concern that the gender and ethnic minority balance doesn't represent the communities they serve quite well enough yet.
Click to expand...
Same in New Zealand, I have never seen a word in media concerning any judicial appointment.
In the Supreme court 3 of 7 are women, including chief justice Sian Elias.
 
Stacyhs said:
......... It would not surprise me one bit if Trump and the GOP refuse to make it public if it shows Kav in an even poorer light than now.
Click to expand...

Who are the FBI reporting to? Surely not to the president? Is it to Congress? Why wouldn't they just publish their conclusions?

Again, what sort of system is it that means the president, and the president alone, gets to ask the FBI to do this work?

Here, anyone...literally anyone......can ask the police to investigate something, and it is then up to the police as to whether they do or don't. Many a politician has written to the Metropolitan Police and asked them to investigate this that or the other. And no-one gets to tell the police where they send their reports. If there is any criminality involved (in this case, perjury), they would send a file to the CPS (our prosecutors) who would decide whether to bring a case to court. If these events were in the UK, the chances are high, in my judgement, that Kavannaugh would end up facing criminal charges.
 
The issue is exactly that, officially, no crime is being investigated, hence no prosecutor asking a judge to have law enforcement collect evidence.
It is just a background check for the Senate, and not even one on the level of a Security Clearance check.

But it is very likely that a number of people and organizations might file lawsuits against Kavanaugh for perjury and other transgressions, should he be confirmed.
 
MikeG said:
I have never heard of any controversial appointments to any of our courts, although there is concern that the gender and ethnic minority balance doesn't represent the communities they serve quite well enough yet.
Click to expand...
It bothers me a little that Kavanaugh and Gorsuch graduated from the same elite HS. Of course those on the Supreme Court are going to be elites in some sense, but I'd rather have more diversity of life experience. They almost all graduates of Harvard or Yale.
 
The Great Zaganza said:
........ it is very likely that a number of people and organizations might file lawsuits against Kavanaugh for perjury and other transgressions, should he be confirmed.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't that produce some sort of constitutional crisis, if, say, a Supreme Court judge was convicted of perjury in the process of getting the job? Is there a process for forcing him out in those circumstances?
 
MikeG said:
But criminality may well be uncovered in the course of this background check. What then?
Click to expand...

The FBI will report its findings to the Senate and to Rob Rosenstein, who might select a prosecutor to further investigate.
Or not, since he is a Republican.
 
MikeG said:
Who are the FBI reporting to? Surely not to the president? Is it to Congress? Why wouldn't they just publish their conclusions?
Click to expand...
The WH won't even release 100,000 pages of documents relating to Kavanaugh. GW Bush recommended holding back 27,000 pages, but the Trump folks thought that was way too few.

It seems to me the FBI should be accountable to the Senate, because in a sense the Senate is their client. I'd also like senators to get a look at some of those withheld documents. This is the first time executive privilege has been used to withhold executive branch memos in a Supreme Court confirmation hearing.
 
The Big Dog said:
:rolleyes:

forgot how many people don't have access to google around here.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/01/us/politics/trump-fbi-kavanaugh.html
Click to expand...

The Big Dog, once again, finding the idea of providing evidence and sources simply unconscionable.

Really, you should think of it this way - not everybody has such an amazing lawyerly brain like you do, and so need a little help when it comes to evaluating your sources. I mean, I know you wouldn't post anything that came from a bad source, like some far-right site that was unthinkingly repeating a random anonymous poster on 4chan, or anything like that, but some people for some reason think that that is the kind of thing you'd do. So be a mensch and help their poor little non-lawyerly brains out will you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom