Supreme Court of the United States

[senorsheep]

Dems are so coordinated and desperate, but they didn't target the guy who got the stolen seat. Chance you're embarrassing yourself.

You can't think of the obvious political reason why the Dems would disrupt this nomination, but not the previous one? If not, it is you who should be embarrassed.

[DMT]

You can't think of the obvious political reason why the Dems would disrupt this nomination, but not the previous one? If not, it is you who should be embarrassed.

There was an obvious political reason to try to disrupt the last one as well. They didn't, because they had nothing to go on. With Kavanaugh, they do. But if you'd rather default to "the accusers are lying", then feel free.

[senorsheep]

There was an obvious political reason to try to disrupt the last one as well. They didn't, because they had nothing to go on. With Kavanaugh, they do. But if you'd rather default to "the accusers are lying", then feel free.

Try this one: This nomination can be logistically stalled past the next election to give the Democrats leverage to oppose it. The previous one couldn't.

As for your last shot... don't put words in my mouth. That's beneath you, and you really should be embarrassed for that.

[Sour Masher]

I think baldriff already asked this, but can't both things be true--that Kavanaugh did bad things and should not be appointed, and Dem politicians are using the allegations for political gain and care more about blocking the appointment than they do about Kavanaugh's victims?

I don't get those dismissing the allegations against Kavanaugh because the Dems are using those allegations for political gain. That seems really unfair to his accusers who deserve an investigation. And it seems absurd to want to appoint someone who should not be appointed, just because the Dems are playing politics with these issues. You want to put a guy in who maybe tried to rape a woman, just to spite the Democrats for holding the allegations back till it was most politically expedient? No investigation, lets ram this through? Really?

[baldgriff]

I think baldriff already asked this, but can't both things be true--that Kavanaugh did bad things and should not be appointed, and Dem politicians are using the allegations for political gain and care more about blocking the appointment than they do about Kavanaugh's victims?

I don't get those dismissing the allegations against Kavanaugh because the Dems are using those allegations for political gain. That seems really unfair to his accusers who deserve an investigation. And it seems absurd to want to appoint someone who should not be appointed, just because the Dems are playing politics with these issues. You want to put a guy in who maybe tried to rape a woman, just to spite the Democrats for holding the allegations back till it was most politically expedient? No investigation, lets ram this through? Really?

Yes - I actually said that it is possible that Kavanaugh may/or may not have done what he accussed of - and that it can also be a political tool.

It may be the first one - it definitely is the 2nd.

[Teenwolf]

Yes - I actually said that it is possible that Kavanaugh may/or may not have done what he accussed of - and that it can also be a political tool.

It may be the first one - it definitely is the 2nd.

Thank you!!!

[B-Fly]

I think baldriff already asked this, but can't both things be true--that Kavanaugh did bad things and should not be appointed, and Dem politicians are using the allegations for political gain and care more about blocking the appointment than they do about Kavanaugh's victims?

I don't get those dismissing the allegations against Kavanaugh because the Dems are using those allegations for political gain. That seems really unfair to his accusers who deserve an investigation. And it seems absurd to want to appoint someone who should not be appointed, just because the Dems are playing politics with these issues. You want to put a guy in who maybe tried to rape a woman, just to spite the Democrats for holding the allegations back till it was most politically expedient? No investigation, lets ram this through? Really?

Yes, absolutely. The Dems are playing politics, and yet these accusations should be investigated and considered, regardless.

And the accusers should be treated with the dignity and sensitivity we should show to all women reporting sexual abuse absent evidence of malicious falsehood.

And the accused should be treated with the dignity and sensitivity we should show anyone so accused pending assessment of the allegations and the evidence.

It shouldn't be that hard for everyone to be more decent. Why is it so hard?

[baldgriff]

Yes, absolutely. The Dems are playing politics, and yet these accusations should be investigated and considered, regardless.

And the accusers should be treated with the dignity and sensitivity we should show to all women reporting sexual abuse absent evidence of malicious falsehood.

And the accused should be treated with the dignity and sensitivity we should show anyone so accused pending assessment of the allegations and the evidence.

It shouldn't be that hard for everyone to be more decent. Why is it so hard?

It's so hard because this "case" is being tried in the court of public opinion. The accuser has alleged that something happened to her while both of them were minors - and he apparently was a fall down drunk. So he has really no way to defend himself from this accusation. Once the allegation was made - quite simply much of the media coverage went straight to "how can he be fit". He was guilty before he ever had a chance to even know who it was that was making an allegation or even what the allegation was.

One should be assumed "innocent until proven otherwise". Whether he get appointed or not - this was a political hit job. At least with Clarence Thomas we got to hear that he was placing pubic hairs on pop cans.... Here we have "He was drunk" "I dont know where it happened" and others that "were there" saying either "they werent there" or it "didnt happen".

I will agree that something may have happened 30+ years ago but:
- there isnt enough evidence
- its past the statute of limitations

This wouldnt fly in a court of law. The mere notion that something "may" have happened - is not sufficient enough "evidence" to continue dragging this on an on.

So to your post - The accuser has been granted more dignity and sensitivity than our courts of law would provide. The accused on the other hand has been judged guilty by who knows what percentage of the country - guilty meaning "unfit to serve" - when our legal system wouldnt even sniff this shit because there is NO EVIDENCE with a hashtag #METOO behind it.

Any investigation done at this point isnt going to clear anyone - its just a way for the Dems to have the FBI canvass the nation looking for another possible something.

Its a political hit job - no matter how you slice it.

[senorsheep]

Yes, absolutely. The Dems are playing politics, and yet these accusations should be investigated and considered, regardless.

And the accusers should be treated with the dignity and sensitivity we should show to all women reporting sexual abuse absent evidence of malicious falsehood.

And the accused should be treated with the dignity and sensitivity we should show anyone so accused pending assessment of the allegations and the evidence.

It shouldn't be that hard for everyone to be more decent. Why is it so hard?

Because the reveals of the accusations has been purposefully timed such that it's very difficult, if not impossible, to be fair to both the accusers and the accused at this point. Republicans understandably want a confirmation vote before the elections. Democrats understandably want a confirmation vote after the elections. Only one is going to get what they want. The accusers aren't going to get a fair shake in a rushed confirmation. The accused isn't going to get a fair shake in a delayed confirmation.

If either side chooses to be decent, they will lose this high stakes zero sum game. That's why it's so hard.

[DMT]

Because the reveals of the accusations has been purposefully timed such that it's very difficult, if not impossible, to be fair to both the accusers and the accused at this point. Republicans understandably want a confirmation vote before the elections. Democrats understandably want a confirmation vote after the elections. Only one is going to get what they want. The accusers aren't going to get a fair shake in a rushed confirmation. The accused isn't going to get a fair shake in a delayed confirmation.

If either side chooses to be decent, they will lose this high stakes zero sum game. That's why it's so hard.

If one side chose to be decent, this seat would be going to Gorsuch and none of us would know of Brett Kavanaugh.

[chancellor]

Because the reveals of the accusations has been purposefully timed such that it's very difficult, if not impossible, to be fair to both the accusers and the accused at this point. Republicans understandably want a confirmation vote before the elections. Democrats understandably want a confirmation vote after the elections. Only one is going to get what they want. The accusers aren't going to get a fair shake in a rushed confirmation. The accused isn't going to get a fair shake in a delayed confirmation.

If either side chooses to be decent, they will lose this high stakes zero sum game. That's why it's so hard.

Not to mention there's plenty of evidence of malicious falsehood.

[senorsheep]

If one side chose to be decent, this seat would be going to Gorsuch and none of us would know of Brett Kavanaugh.

I believe the forum has determined that going back in time to establish intellectually consistent standards now constitutes "what-aboutery," so... tough titty.

[B-Fly]

Because the reveals of the accusations has been purposefully timed such that it's very difficult, if not impossible, to be fair to both the accusers and the accused at this point. Republicans understandably want a confirmation vote before the elections. Democrats understandably want a confirmation vote after the elections. Only one is going to get what they want. The accusers aren't going to get a fair shake in a rushed confirmation. The accused isn't going to get a fair shake in a delayed confirmation.

If either side chooses to be decent, they will lose this high stakes zero sum game. That's why it's so hard.

I think it's decent to hold a hearing that ends by mid-October at the latest, and that treats both Dr. Ford's allegation and Judge Kavanaugh's denial with dignity and respect. We can't control the talking heads or the internet chatter. The Senate should model dignity and compromise and decency.

[Teenwolf]

Not to mention there's plenty of evidence of malicious falsehood.

How about the 2nd case where he whipped his member out and forced it into the face of a girl at a party when he was 21? For this one, Ronan Farrow found a corroborating witness who told the same exact story the victim told, and said he was thinking about the incident a lot recently. Because it happened.

Journalists found the 2nd accuser because they heard about the rumour, then found both the victim and at least 1 corroborating witness.

Your conspiracy theories cannot escape the realities of this case.

[DMT]

I believe the forum has determined that going back in time to establish intellectually consistent standards now constitutes "what-aboutery," so... tough titty.

Lol consistency got it.