Sniffling wrote:
Sick and Tired of this wrote:
There already been an FBI investigation, Ford can make a formal accusation in Maryland if she likes and Maryland police can investigate but she hasn't done so.
There has been no FBI investigation of the sexual allegations. Do try to keep up.
Moron. The FBI doesn't investigate cases of sexual assault. I'm not even asking you to keep up. Just keep.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Reith wrote:
This actually is a reasonably good litmus test for intelligence. IF you believe Brett Kavanaugh you are not gifted with high intelligence. Of course those who disagree by definition are not aware of it.
No, you are a useful idiot. The Democrats need voters like you.
I rest my case...
exactly! wrote:
Hardloper wrote:
We don't need "likable" Supreme Court justices. We need ones who read the Constitution and rule based on its meaning and not what maximizes facebook likes.
Then you shouldn't want K. This hearing showed that he is completely biased and political and wouldn't do anything based on reading the constitution.
Yeah, but Trump is the one doing the appointing, and we all know what he wants-- a bagman who puts loyalty first, and let's be honest, morality is a hindrance in being a bagman.
K did it
He kept saying the 4 people AT THE EVENT deny that it happened
He did it and his friend became an alcoholic out of guilt
to me, one thing is clear, and one is probable: BK used to be one of those entitled frat boys, and probable he also committed sexual assault. the last thing cannot be proven anymore, so it should not count.
the first thing is bad enough, reminds me of the frat boys here on campus who only a couple years ago marched with slogans like "no means yes, yes means anal". now they're banned. BK was one of them. great family man you're getting yourselves there as supreme court justice. that's exactly the behavior I would expect from Trump's GOP. Good night America.
Reith wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
No, you are a useful idiot. The Democrats need voters like you.
I rest my case...
Kavanaugh confirmed.
800 dude wrote:
lawyerguy wrote:
But K sure doesn't seem like any judge I've ever been in front of in both temperament and bias
Anyone who practices in the D.C. Circuit knows that there are no issues with Kavanaugh's judicial temperament. There are a lot of big personalities on that court and a lot of judges who really like to throw bombs, both at litigants and occasionally at each other. Kavanaugh is not one of them. He's one of the easiest federal judges to argue before. He never tries to embarrass counsel, even when you can tell he disagrees. It's more like he actually wants to help them put on the best possible case so that the issues are crystallized. He's like a kindly professor.
He also gets along very well with his colleagues (and court staff, and clerks from other chambers). There is something to the characterization of him as a "go it alone" type, but that has more to do with his perfectionism. He writes solo opinions at a very high rate. They tend to be extremely long, scholarly, yet surprisingly readable. Every judge has their own threshold for when they feel it's necessary to write a solo opinion (either concurrence or dissent). Kavanaugh's is fairly low, but that's not necessarily a bad thing, especially since he is typically quite respectful of his colleagues' opinions.
A judge allows witnesses interrupt questioners? A judge blames a party for a giant conspiracy? The guy is a politician not a judge. All of his experience as a lawyer is in partisan capacities. This is why he barely got confirmed as a DC judge. He doesn't belong on the bench
Look at all these gross right wingers trying to defend a rapist. Ford had nothing to gain by doing this, NOTHING. No wonder women don't report rapes when you've got people like the idiots on letsrun running their mouths acting like fools with no souls.
Stirring wrote:
800 dude wrote:
Anyone who practices in the D.C. Circuit knows that there are no issues with Kavanaugh's judicial temperament. There are a lot of big personalities on that court and a lot of judges who really like to throw bombs, both at litigants and occasionally at each other. Kavanaugh is not one of them. He's one of the easiest federal judges to argue before. He never tries to embarrass counsel, even when you can tell he disagrees. It's more like he actually wants to help them put on the best possible case so that the issues are crystallized. He's like a kindly professor.
He also gets along very well with his colleagues (and court staff, and clerks from other chambers). There is something to the characterization of him as a "go it alone" type, but that has more to do with his perfectionism. He writes solo opinions at a very high rate. They tend to be extremely long, scholarly, yet surprisingly readable. Every judge has their own threshold for when they feel it's necessary to write a solo opinion (either concurrence or dissent). Kavanaugh's is fairly low, but that's not necessarily a bad thing, especially since he is typically quite respectful of his colleagues' opinions.
A judge allows witnesses interrupt questioners? A judge blames a party for a giant conspiracy? The guy is a politician not a judge. All of his experience as a lawyer is in partisan capacities. This is why he barely got confirmed as a DC judge. He doesn't belong on the bench
Of course that runs counter to the view of the American Bar Association and anyone that has worked with him.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Stirring wrote:
A judge allows witnesses interrupt questioners? A judge blames a party for a giant conspiracy? The guy is a politician not a judge. All of his experience as a lawyer is in partisan capacities. This is why he barely got confirmed as a DC judge. He doesn't belong on the bench
Of course that runs counter to the view of the American Bar Association and anyone that has worked with him.
I'm a member of the aba. There was no vote
Stirring wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Of course that runs counter to the view of the American Bar Association and anyone that has worked with him.
I'm a member of the aba. There was no vote
You better bone up on you profession:
https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/uncategorized/GAO/Web%20rating%20Chart%20Trump%20115.authcheckdam.pdfdouglas burke wrote:
Even if he did it, it was 36 years ago, can't a person redeem himself, I mean everyone considers Malcolm X a hero, and was a pimp, a drug dealer, he robbed houses etc, yet he redeemed himself and is considered a national hero. Why the Double Standard.
I mean Kavanaugh probably has a cleaner record than over 80% of the people on this thread, I have made mistakes in the past, how come the media is not talking about the wrongs I have done, as much as Kavanaugh is being accused of, I HAVE ACTUALLY DONE WRONG BEFORE, not just accused of, I actually DID SOME BAD THINGS in my life, I know most wont believe me and I have no proof, But yes I have done wrong before, WHY AM I NOT SCRUTINIZED AS MUCH AS KAVANAUGH for the wrongs I did 36 or so years ago, are they going to hold what I have done wrong and not allow me to work?
I believe in EQUALITY, and I see Kavanaugh being held to a higher standard than me or even Malcolm X, EVERYONE HAS TO BE HELD TO THE SAME STANDARD.
Dougie, you’ve been posting here for YEARS and now you’re admitting you’re a RAPIST!!!
Reith wrote:
This actually is a reasonably good litmus test for intelligence. IF you believe Brett Kavanaugh you are not gifted with high intelligence. Of course those who disagree by definition are not aware of it.
Add this what you call cognitive dissidence, one person litterally can say exactly what he was doing every day and weekend 30+ years ago. The other doesn’t recall any date or even that she actual can fly, which a week ago she couldn’t remember
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Stirring wrote:
I'm a member of the aba. There was no vote
You better bone up on you profession:
https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/uncategorized/GAO/Web%20rating%20Chart%20Trump%20115.authcheckdam.pdf
Oh you mean the opinion of a committee of 15 Republicans
Stirring the pot wrote:
K did it
He kept saying the 4 people AT THE EVENT deny that it happened
He did it and his friend became an alcoholic out of guilt
I noticed that too.
Also, he said the 4 "witnesses" denied that it happened. Huh???
How could they be witnesses if it didn't happen??? The 4 witnesses, to what???
You can tell by his lies what the truth is.
Psyc Major wrote:
Reith wrote:
This actually is a reasonably good litmus test for intelligence. IF you believe Brett Kavanaugh you are not gifted with high intelligence. Of course those who disagree by definition are not aware of it.
Add this what you call cognitive dissidence, one person litterally can say exactly what he was doing every day and weekend 30+ years ago. The other doesn’t recall any date or even that she actual can fly, which a week ago she couldn’t remember
You are a LIAR.
Stirring wrote:
A judge allows witnesses interrupt questioners? A judge blames a party for a giant conspiracy? The guy is a politician not a judge. All of his experience as a lawyer is in partisan capacities. This is why he barely got confirmed as a DC judge. He doesn't belong on the bench
He was extremely rude, angry and aggressive today, especially to the women.
It is easy to see him being a serial rapist, a deranged psychopath who has zero regard for the well being of others, especially women.
Stirring wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
You better bone up on you profession:
https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/uncategorized/GAO/Web%20rating%20Chart%20Trump%20115.authcheckdam.pdfOh you mean the opinion of a committee of 15 Republicans
Oh you mean you're a blatantly partisan lawyer
dunes runner wrote:
Stirring wrote:
A judge allows witnesses interrupt questioners? A judge blames a party for a giant conspiracy? The guy is a politician not a judge. All of his experience as a lawyer is in partisan capacities. This is why he barely got confirmed as a DC judge. He doesn't belong on the bench
He was extremely rude, angry and aggressive today, especially to the women.
It is easy to see him being a serial rapist, a deranged psychopath who has zero regard for the well being of others, especially women.
were the women particularly hostile or did they behave inhuamanely towards him? do you see more than what your ideology allows for?
Runningart2004 wrote:
partially so wrote:
Remember Mike Pence stating he makes it a point to never dine alone with a woman who is not his wife, or attend events where alcohol might be served without her there. And how everyone laughed and criticized him that he couldn't control himself, etc?
Seems like a pretty smart guy now.
Any of you guys who will ever have consensual sex with a woman who may later become pissed off at you, or who may someday go through a contentious divorce, or may be in a future battle for a hotly contested promotion...good luck to you. All it will take is an accusation of sexual misconduct and your a$$ is toast.
According to research about 2-10% sexual assault claims are false. 66% of sexual assaults are never reported.
You act like false accusations are sooooo common.
Alan
I can't believe how widely believed this bad science is 6-10% of sexual assault claims are not false; 6-10% are capable of being shown to be false. The conviction rate is something like 5%, and the case is only strong enough to bring to court in ~33% of cases. That means most cases devolve into impossible to prove, either way. A lot of those are false allegations, and a lot of those are only subjectively true (the accuser thinks it is, but it isn't). I don't know how this very stupid statistic keeps getting thrown around.