Supreme Court Justice Kennedy to Retire

[Stoked]

https://reason.com/blog/2018/09/16/...-christine-ford/amp?__twitter_impression=true

Good article imo.

Needs to be investigated. It’s really awful Feinstein is bringing this up now. This could, and should have been settled by now. But it absolutely needs to be checked out before he can be confirmed.

Even from a purely political sense I don’t understand Feinstein’s choice. Releasing this earlier would have led to a much longer and harsher cry imo. With time to find details.

With the professor coming forward the accusation carries far more weight imo.

 

[The Thriller]

Dude, conservatives who don't like Trump are probably perfectly happy with Kavanaugh. I've said it to you before, these SC nominees are the payoff for electing Trump. The idea that he might get to replace RBG if he gets reelected is probably the strongest argument in favor of re-electing him.

But a lot of conservatives also don’t find justices like this to justify Trump and this toxic senatorial process. I’m sure many are on our board. This is why decent people everywhere who want some semblence of normalacy need to vote out every republican possible. Send a message that Trumpism needs to go away.

 

[colton]

Even from a purely political sense I don’t understand Feinstein’s choice. Releasing this earlier would have led to a much longer and harsher cry imo. With time to find details.

With the professor coming forward the accusation carries far more weight imo.

Fwiw one of my Facebook friends knows the lady personally, and finds her credible.

 

[Zombie]

Even from a purely political sense I don’t understand Feinstein’s choice. Releasing this earlier would have led to a much longer and harsher cry imo. With time to find details.

With the professor coming forward the accusation carries far more weight imo.

I think people are really overplaying the political calculations of Diane Feinstein here. As long as the woman didn't want to make her accusation public I don't think the Democrats were willing to use the letter in the hearings. In any case, how long Diane Feinstein had the letter is a footnote in history compared to the gravity of another conservative justice with a sexual assualt accusation getting named to the Supreme Court. Especially considering how this tilts the courts when it comes to decisions impacting women's health.

 

[Stoked]

I think people are really overplaying the political calculations of Diane Feinstein here. As long as the woman didn't want to make her accusation public I don't think the Democrats were willing to use the letter in the hearings. In any case, how long Diane Feinstein had the letter is a footnote in history compared to the gravity of another conservative justice with a sexual assualt accusation getting named to the Supreme Court. Especially considering how this tilts the courts when it comes to decisions impacting women's health.

Fair enough.

As for Fienstiens involvement, I have no faith in her beyond politics. But I’m provenly biased there lol

 

[RandyForRubio]

Kavanaugh will speak to judiciary committee staffers at 5:30 regarding the allegations.

None of the Democrat members of the committee plan to participate.

That’s uhhh...odd.

 

[RandyForRubio]

And it sounds like Kavanaugh and Ford will have a public hearing next week. That’s very good.

 

[RandyForRubio]

Feinstein keeps on saying that there are things we don’t know, but I don’t understand why she doesn’t tell us what those things are?

If she has other knowledge, proof, or facts, she should be telling the other Senators so that we aren’t wasting time or money here.

 

[Harambe]

Feinstein keeps on saying that there are things we don’t know, but I don’t understand why she doesn’t tell us what those things are?

If she has other knowledge, proof, or facts, she should be telling the other Senators so that we aren’t wasting time or money here.

You don't think it's pretty clear the Republicans saw a violent crime coming? "Why doesn't X tell us" swings both ways. The timing on this is just as suspect as withholding documents illustrating perjury.

 

[RandyForRubio]

You don't think it's pretty clear the Republicans saw a violent crime coming? "Why doesn't X tell us" swings both ways. The timing on this is just as suspect as withholding documents illustrating perjury.

Wut?

 

[RandyForRubio]

If we’re going to say that people shouldn’t qualify because of doing awful things as young people, and showing poor judgment (which I agree with btw)...then one would think Beto O’Rourke would get a lot more flak for getting a DUI while hitting another vehicle and attempting to flee the accident.

Good thing he was a rich white kid who had a judge of a Dad who could get him out of things.

Ironically, he sounds like the stereotypical caricature of a republican by the Democrats these days.

 

[Zombie]

If we’re going to say that people shouldn’t qualify because of doing awful things as young people, and showing poor judgment (which I agree with btw)...then one would think Beto O’Rourke would get a lot more flak for getting a DUI while hitting another vehicle and attempting to flee the accident.

Good thing he was a rich white kid who had a judge of a Dad who could get him out of things.

Ironically, he sounds like the stereotypical caricature of a republican by the Democrats these days.

I think people owning up to their behavior and showing remorse goes a long way. Not that drunk driving isn't serious, but it's in a different ballpark than attempted rape in terms of youthful indiscretion.

 

[framer]

I think people owning up to their behavior and showing remorse goes a long way. Not that drunk driving isn't serious, but it's in a different ballpark than attempted rape in terms of youthful indiscretion.

Except one actually happened and the other, so far, has no evidence.

 

[RandyForRubio]

I think people owning up to their behavior and showing remorse goes a long way. Not that drunk driving isn't serious, but it's in a different ballpark than attempted rape in terms of youthful indiscretion.

Except he never mentioned hitting a car and fleeing until people dig...so how much did he own up?

And if we’re being honest, him driving drunk at that age doesn’t bother me. That’s a common youthful mistake. It’s that whole hitting somebody and trying to run away. That is very different than just driving drunk. But I do agree, people should get the opportunity to change. And attempted rape is much more serious.



I’m curious to what you want to come out if this. I think all of us hope that justice is served, that the truth is revealed. But it’s a 30 year old case, and we don’t seem to have any proof. Should we not nominate him because he was accused? Because it seems like it’s going to end with just an accusation...so I’m curious, outside of justice (because that’s the obvious and easy answer), what do you want to see here?

 

[One Brow]

Except one actually happened and the other, so far, has no evidence.

In what court of law does eyewitness testimony not count as evidence?

 

[Gameface]

Except one actually happened and the other, so far, has no evidence.

Witness testimony is considered evidence.

Edit: Didn't see OBs response.

 

[Zombie]

Witness testimony is considered evidence.

Edit: Didn't see OBs response.

Yeah, I was about to say...

 

[Zombie]

Except he never mentioned hitting a car and fleeing until people dig...so how much did he own up?

And if we’re being honest, him driving drunk at that age doesn’t bother me. That’s a common youthful mistake. It’s that whole hitting somebody and trying to run away. That is very different than just driving drunk. But I do agree, people should get the opportunity to change. And attempted rape is much more serious.



I’m curious to what you want to come out if this. I think all of us hope that justice is served, that the truth is revealed. But it’s a 30 year old case, and we don’t seem to have any proof. Should we not nominate him because he was accused? Because it seems like it’s going to end with just an accusation...so I’m curious, outside of justice (because that’s the obvious and easy answer), what do you want to see here?

What I want to see hasn't changed since these allegations came out, his nomination should be withdrawn or he should be voted down. There are plenty of other concerning things about Kavenaugh that make me think he is neither qualified or deserving of a lifetime appointment to the supreme court.

 

[RandyForRubio]

What I want to see hasn't changed since these allegations came out, his nomination should be withdrawn or he should be voted down. There are plenty of other concerning things about Kavenaugh that make me think he is neither qualified or deserving of a lifetime appointment to the supreme court.

So he should be disqualified because of an accusation for which we have no proof of yet?

That seems like a very bad idea for the future. Kinda like approving the nuclear option and only needing 51 votes.

 

[Stoked]

What I want to see hasn't changed since these allegations came out, his nomination should be withdrawn or he should be voted down. There are plenty of other concerning things about Kavenaugh that make me think he is neither qualified or deserving of a lifetime appointment to the supreme court.

And they won’t happen either. Well, a narrow loss might happen but that’s iffy. The Rs don’t care about this allegation. I bet many of them think it’s a lie.

Smh