Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Until 5 days before confirmation? Me thinks Feinstein, as always, is a California nut full of shi*. I say scre* the Democrats, confirm him and don't give them any say, as they have played themselves out of the deal.
It doesn't work this way. The purpose of the meetings, hearings, pre-vote discussion are to identify any issues BEFORE the vote takes place. The truth needs to come out. He needs to take a lie detector test. The other boy present also needs to take a lie detector test.
He needs to testify about going to that party and give explanation on what occurred. He needs to testify about his interaction with the accuser when they were in high school. None if this has been discussed. It's important.
What if he really attempted rape and committed sexual assault. He could be biased in Supreme Court rulings. Let it be investigated further so the truth comes out.
If the GOP allows Kavanaugh's vote to occur before this is investigated and before the accuser is allowed to testify, this could cause a lot of women to vote against the GOP in the November mid-term elections.
So you mean to tell me if Kavanaugh were to commit a serious crime that was discovered after the fact, that there is absolutely, positively no way in which to remove him? I highly doubt that. It may have never been done before, but I'm sure there's a process for it.
Anyway, the "truth" is probably unprovable in this case, given the length of time that has passed to conduct a proper investigation with evidence, witness accounts, forensics etc etc. It could take YEARS to come to the conclusion that its unprovable.
He has already stated that he did not do what she is accusing him of--old friends and colleagues (approximately 65 women) have come forward as character witnesses, and deny the possibility of the allegations. The left does not want the "truth"--they just want the delay in hopes of winning back the House in November and denying him the seat regardless of reason.
You can say what you want,--but imo, this is simply a means of weaponizing the judicial process for political points and to delay his appointment even if he has been falsely accused.
The GOp's best move would be to confirm him while they can--get him in, and lock in the seat. There are a record number of women running for House Dem seats who aren't supporting them anyway--so who cares about how the Dems characterize it.
I had a high school male coach sexually assault me in his office at school decades ago. I was 16. I never told anyone in authority, just my boyfriend who was in college, when it happened and only told a few friends and my parents about it years later. I have no evidence other than sharing the harrowing experience with a few people over the years. It happened.
Let her tell her story. if she is lying she will be found out. If she is not lying, this is not inconsequential information for a potential supreme court judge.
you rape me when we where in High School 37 years ago...I have no witness and told no one at the time....now you prove me wrong...the burden of proof is on you now.........see, I can play the same game all day and ruin your career.
It doesn't work this way. The purpose of the meetings, hearings, pre-vote discussion are to identify any issues BEFORE the vote takes place. The truth needs to come out. He needs to take a lie detector test. The other boy present also needs to take a lie detector test.
He needs to testify about going to that party and give explanation on what occurred. He needs to testify about his interaction with the accuser when they were in high school. None if this has been discussed. It's important.
What if he really attempted rape and committed sexual assault. He could be biased in Supreme Court rulings. Let it be investigated further so the truth comes out.
If the GOP allows Kavanaugh's vote to occur before this is investigated and before the accuser is allowed to testify, this could cause a lot of women to vote against the GOP in the November mid-term elections.
another clueless post......a LIE detector is not admissible in court for valid reasons.
He has denied the allegation.....unless this accuser has any valid evidence or witnesses then it should end here.
you rape me when we where in High School 37 years ago...I have no witness and told no one at the time....now you prove me wrong...the burden of proof is on you now.........see, I can play the same game all day and ruin your career.
Not what I'm saying, Hellion.
Ms. Ford should have the opportunity to tell her story. If she declines to tell her story to the senate committee, I won't believe her accusations. accusations aren't proof.
If Ms. Ford does decide to tell her story to the senate committee, then the senators should weigh the evidence. to me, evidence would include others corroborating she told them what Kavanaugh did to her years before this confirmation process started.
You continue to minimize that Justice Kavanagh is but one constitutional voice, one opinion, among nine. Is there a new math at work out there?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ringo1
If that's the case, why do we even bother with hearing for Supreme Court judges? If no one cares about their past opinions and how they might rule - let's just not waste our time.
OF COURSE, Kavanaugh was chosen for his opinion on presidential power. What other reason would there be?
So, the answer to your question is YES. See below. That's the hurry on pushing Kavanaugh through.
This is what all liberal theory is based on - unprovable attacks. Their policy is to put forth attacks that cannot be proven one way or the other, but which forever undercut the credibility of the person.
I say, call their bluff and confirm him and say '********* Diane Feinstein, you filthy liar'
Agreed.
I say they stick to their guns.
Outside of forensics, interviews, witnesses and facts--this is nothing to move forward with.
The timing and previous desperate attempts to damage his character is highly suspect and make this unbelievable.
So you mean to tell me if Kavanaugh were to commit a serious crime that was discovered after the fact, that there is absolutely, positively no way in which to remove him? I highly doubt that. It may have never been done before, but I'm sure there's a process for it.
There is and I described it earlier. It's the same process as removal of President - impeachment by the House and conviction by the Senate.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
