Jump to content


The Courts under Trump - Mega Thread


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, knapplc said:

I don't know anything about the 65 women who signed the pro-Kavanaugh letter. I presume they've been verified to have actually signed it, and that they stand by that?  Has any reporter actually talked to any of those women?

How the hell did the Republicans get a letter and 65 signatures in the 24 hours between the story getting out and the letter being put out? Seems like Feinstein wasn't the only politician sitting on the evidence. The whole lot of them should be investigated.

 

7 minutes ago, Dbqgolfer said:

But my guess is one of the following occurred.

1) The boy being held down told someone (Dr. Ford said she told no one)

2) The boy doing the peeing told someone (Judge Kavanaugh said he didn't do it)

3) The boys holding down the boy told someone (The only other person allegedly in the room, said this didn't happen)

4) Someone else saw it (There are no witnesses in this case)

 

Without one of those four things happening, how can "many people hear about it"?

Other people having heard about it 35 years ago lends credence to the victim's claims regardless of how the information got out.

Link to comment

1 hour ago, Dbqgolfer said:

So, Dr. Ford says she told no one, but "many of them heard about it in School?"  So, to believe both of these ladies, we have to believe that a 17 year old Brett Kavanaugh ran around telling people he did this....doesn't seem likely.

 

Almost all of the teachers who sleep with students are discovered because the boy tells his friends about it.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
3 hours ago, Dbqgolfer said:

Of course the Republicans were honest about what they were doing in following a rule that Joe Biden suggested in 1992 that a President shouldn't nominate a Supreme Court Justice during an election year; and of course it was political maneuvering.

 

The Democrats are pretending to care about an alleged, unreported, misdemeanor assault from 35 years ago, that they knew about 2 1/2 months ago, only to bring it up after the confirmation hearings had concluded, with one purpose, to delay the confirmation.  If Feinstein truly cared about this, she would have asked Kavanaugh about it in her private interviews with him.

 

 

You know your team could just not have nominated this guy. I have a hard time believing your team didn't know about this allegation since I'm sure he was thoroughly vetted by trumps people. But since thing like this are viewed by many on the Republican side as not being a big deal the Republicans have gotten themselves in this mess. I'm sure there are plenty of conservative judges that dont have his baggage.

Link to comment
1 hour ago, LumberJackSker said:

You know your team could just not have nominated this guy. I have a hard time believing your team didn't know about this allegation since I'm sure he was thoroughly vetted by trumps people. But since thing like this are viewed by many on the Republican side as not being a big deal the Republicans have gotten themselves in this mess. I'm sure there are plenty of conservative judges that dont have his baggage.

1) Since I didn't vote for Trump, not sure I have to claim them as "my team".

 

2) If the allegation isn't true, it's not Kavanaughs baggage to be falsely accused of something.

 

3) If the allegation is true,  this is all on Kavanaugh, as my guess would be that no one knew about this before Dr. Ford came forward 

Link to comment

3 hours ago, RedDenver said:

How the hell did the Republicans get a letter and 65 signatures in the 24 hours between the story getting out and the letter being put out? Seems like Feinstein wasn't the only politician sitting on the evidence. The whole lot of them should be investigated.

 

Other people having heard about it 35 years ago lends credence to the victim's claims regardless of how the information got out.

If I recall correctly, Sen. Feinstein had the letter, but didn't share it with anyone on the committee.  There were rumors that the letter contained allegations that would call into question the integrity of Kavanaugh.  Republicans were not sitting on any evidence, because Feinstein wasn't sharing it with anyone.  But they did know that Kavanaugh's integrity was potentially going to be questioned.  In this situation, it is not odd, rare, wrong nor unethical, to have 65 women who have known and/or worked for him for many years, sign a letter vouching for his integrity.

Link to comment
3 hours ago, knapplc said:

 

Almost all of the teachers who sleep with students are discovered because the boy tells his friends about it.

I'm sure that's true, but there's a big difference between telling/bragging to  people you're sleeping with a teacher and running around telling people you assaulted someone.

Link to comment
53 minutes ago, Guy Chamberlin said:

And why would we assume Trump's next judicial nominee would in any way be preferable? 

 

Barack Obama was handed a Supreme Court vacancy with 10 months left in his Presidency. The GOP stonewalled the s#!t out of that, because the ideological direction of our judicial system was at stake. That hasn't changed. 

 

This is where the "This is just about Roe" argument falls short.

 

Plenty of people are incensed and fighting against Kavanaugh's nomination knowing that if or when he withdraws himself, Trump is going to nominate someone with the same judicial mindset. We're going to get a handpicked Heritage conservabot no matter if Kavanaugh steps down or is ultimately confirmed. Trump is too ignorant of a bloke to choose a judge on his own merits, and he outsources the job to Heritage accordingly. This is, and always has been, the grand bargain for Republican politicians who  unceremoniously discarded any shame or spine they once had to continue going to bat for him.

 

Kavanaugh still doesn't deserve to sit on the Supreme Court. His nomination should still be fought by people. And not because we're going to magically change the composition of the Supreme Court. 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
14 minutes ago, Clifford Franklin said:

 

This is where the "This is just about Roe" argument falls short.

 

Plenty of people are incensed and fighting against Kavanaugh's nomination knowing that if or when he withdraws himself, Trump is going to nominate someone with the same judicial mindset. We're going to get a handpicked Heritage conservabot no matter if Kavanaugh steps down or is ultimately confirmed. Trump is too ignorant of a bloke to choose a judge on his own merits, and he outsources the job to Heritage accordingly. This is, and always has been, the grand bargain for Republican politicians who  unceremoniously discarded any shame or spine they once had to continue going to bat for him.

 

Kavanaugh still doesn't deserve to sit on the Supreme Court. His nomination should still be fought by people. And not because we're going to magically change the composition of the Supreme Court. 

I disagree.  The hope here for Democrats is that if they can sink this nomination,  there will not be enough time to confirm a different nominee before the midterms, and if they can win the Senate (Not probable,  but certainly possible) they will have the votes to reject any nominee Trump nominates. 

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Dbqgolfer said:

I disagree.  The hope here for Democrats is that if they can sink this nomination,  there will not be enough time to confirm a different nominee before the midterms, and if they can win the Senate (Not probable,  but certainly possible) they will have the votes to reject any nominee Trump nominates. 

 

Do you think this strategy is in keeping with the better tenets of a Democracy?

Link to comment

30 minutes ago, Dbqgolfer said:

If I recall correctly, Sen. Feinstein had the letter, but didn't share it with anyone on the committee.  There were rumors that the letter contained allegations that would call into question the integrity of Kavanaugh.  Republicans were not sitting on any evidence, because Feinstein wasn't sharing it with anyone.  But they did know that Kavanaugh's integrity was potentially going to be questioned.  In this situation, it is not odd, rare, wrong nor unethical, to have 65 women who have known and/or worked for him for many years, sign a letter vouching for his integrity.

I'm talking about the letter in support of Kavanagh signed by 65 women, which came from the Republicans so Feinstein wouldn't have ever had it. The Republicans claimed they created that letter and got all those signatures in 24 hours. Now that seems extremely unlikely, but if it's like you're suggesting that the letter was created earlier in case of needing to support his integrity, then why is it only signed by women and why only women that knew him in highschool? Seems that the Repubs knew about this already.

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
3 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

Do you think this strategy is in keeping with the better tenets of a Democracy?

Nope. I prefer the days when the Senate, with about 75 of the same Senators, unanimously, or nearly unanimously confirmed both Scalia and Ginsburg to the court, because both sides understood the consequences of losing Presidential elections

 

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Dbqgolfer said:

Nope. I prefer the days when the Senate, with about 75 of the same Senators, unanimously, or nearly unanimously confirmed both Scalia and Ginsburg to the court, because both sides understood the consequences of losing Presidential elections

 

 

And Merrick Garland?

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

I'm talking about the letter in support of Kavanagh signed by 65 women, which came from the Republicans so Feinstein wouldn't have ever had it. The Republicans claimed they created that letter and got all those signatures in 24 hours. Now that seems extremely unlikely, but if it's like you're suggesting that the letter was created earlier in case of needing to support his integrity, then why is it only signed by women and why only women that knew him in highschool? Seems that the Repubs knew about this already.

They knew about the letter Feinstein had but didn't know exact allegations, so began the process of getting their letter written and signed.

Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...