Supreme Court Justice Kennedy to Retire

[RandyForRubio]

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

I mean...they’re interviewing him again about this, and interviewing both of them next week in a public hearing. I don’t think it’s fair to say they don’t care.

Now maybe if they had this letter for a couple months and never brought it up, then you could say they didn’t care.

 

[Zombie]

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.

It's actually a completely fine idea. I don't get the notion that this guy or anyone is owed a Supreme Court seat simply because he was nominated. There are plenty of other qualified people that could be nominated.

I don't think you really grasp how much women risk who come forward in situations like this. The women that I know with a history of sexual violence against them find it very difficult to talk about in private. It takes a lot of bravery and strength to do so publicly. That's proof enough for me.

And like I said, I didn't find him deserving of the seat for other factors as well. I didn't think he was honest during the congressional hearings, and I don't like his position on presidential authority, essentially placing the president above the law.

 

[Zombie]

I mean...they’re interviewing him again about this, and interviewing both of them next week in a public hearing. I don’t think it’s fair to say they don’t care.

Now maybe if they had this letter for a couple months and never brought it up, then you could say they didn’t care.

Since people keep bringing it up, Feinstein has been in communication with Ford's lawyer since she received the letter at the end of July. Her 'not bringing it up' was in line with the Fords desire to remain anonymous.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cn...nstein-brett-kavanaugh-allegations/index.html

 

[RandyForRubio]

Well hell man, I don’t like a lot of the justifies views on a lot of things. A difference of opinion does not disqualify somebody being on the court. That’s uhh...incredibly partisan. Which our courts should not be. Even Ruth Bader agrees with that!


Were he guilty of perjury, I assure you, with all this **** going on, somebody would have brought it up. And I’ll be honest, assuming somebody is guilty with nothing but an accusation is vile and wrong. I’m not saying he’s guilty, I’m not saying he’s innocent, I’m saying we don’t know enough. But we can’t just disqualify people because they’re accused of something! That goes against every human right we have in judicial system.

 

[RandyForRubio]

Since people keep bringing it up, Feinstein has been in communication with Ford's lawyer since she received the letter at the end of July. Her 'not bringing it up' was in line with the Fords desire to remain anonymous.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cn...nstein-brett-kavanaugh-allegations/index.html

Which makes absolutely no sense.

She doesn’t want it brought up, so she writes a letter to Feinstein? For what purpose? And Feinstein still ended up releasing it, which I completely agree with. This is a very important position, and if Feinstein knew about this and still neglected to do anything about it, then that is a serious negative against her.

 

[Zombie]

Well hell man, I don’t like a lot of the justifies views on a lot of things. A difference of opinion does not disqualify somebody being on the court. That’s uhh...incredibly partisan. Which our courts should not be. Even Ruth Bader agrees with that!


Were he guilty of perjury, I assure you, with all this **** going on, somebody would have brought it up. And I’ll be honest, assuming somebody is guilty with nothing but an accusation is vile and wrong. I’m not saying he’s guilty, I’m not saying he’s innocent, I’m saying we don’t know enough. But we can’t just disqualify people because they’re accused of something! That goes against every human right we have in judicial system.

There's a lot to unpack here. Of course difference in opinion is enough for disqualification. How else do you think justices get voted in? My opinion has absolutely no bearing on whether he will actually be confirmed of course, but if I was a senator who disagreed with a judge's opinion on Roe v Wade for example, I would find that disqualifying and would vote no. That's literally how the system is supposed to work. There's nothing partisan about that.

As for the justice system, that's pretty irrelevant here. He doesn't have any more right to a Supreme Court seat than I do.

 

[Douchebag K]

why are your supreme court judges appointed for life ?

 

[RandyForRubio]

There's a lot to unpack here. Of course difference in opinion is enough for disqualification. How else do you think justices get voted in? My opinion has absolutely no bearing on whether he will actually be confirmed of course, but if I was a senator who disagreed with a judge's opinion on Roe v Wade for example, I would find that disqualifying and would vote no. That's literally how the system is supposed to work. There's nothing partisan about that.

As for the justice system, that's pretty irrelevant here. He doesn't have any more right to a Supreme Court seat than I do.

Right. Which is why the majority of Democrats voted No on Clarence Thomas, and the majority of Republicans votes no on Ruth Bader-Ginsburg.

 

[RandyForRubio]

why are your supreme court judges appointed for life ?

Believe the idea is so that they don’t have to be biased by elections, political parties, etc.

They can do what they want without worrying about the people back at home voting for them. Which isn’t a bad idea
For that position, tbh.

 

[Zombie]

Right. Which is why the majority of Democrats voted No on Clarence Thomas, and the majority of Republicans votes no on Ruth Bader-Ginsburg.

What? Thomas was voted in on a narrow vote, but it wasn't strictly on party lines. RBG was voted in like 97-3. I'm not sure what your point is.

 

[Zombie]

Which makes absolutely no sense.

She doesn’t want it brought up, so she writes a letter to Feinstein? For what purpose? And Feinstein still ended up releasing it, which I completely agree with. This is a very important position, and if Feinstein knew about this and still neglected to do anything about it, then that is a serious negative against her.

It's hard to say, and it's something that will probably be explored next week when she is asked to testify. Off the top of my head maybe she wrote the letter in the hope that Feinstein would share the accusation with the fence sitting democrats to urge them to vote no, and that that would be enough to keep him from being confirmed.

 

[RandyForRubio]

What? Thomas was voted in on a narrow vote, but it wasn't strictly on party lines. RBG was voted in like 97-3. I'm not sure what your point is.

Bah. I’m tired! Scalia and RBG.

My mistake on Thomas. I meant Scalia.

 

[Zombie]

Bah. I’m tired! Scalia and RBG.

My mistake on Thomas. I meant Scalia.

OK, and?

 

[Stoked]

Bah. I’m tired! Scalia and RBG.

My mistake on Thomas. I meant Scalia.

You’re still wrong on Ginsburg. She received only 3 no votes and one senator not voting.

 

[Gameface]

why are your supreme court judges appointed for life ?

Supposed to make them non-partisan. They are supposed to be unbiased in their dedication to our Constitution.

It isn't like that anymore really (ever), but judges have been more moderate than they likely would have been if it was a political position up for review/reaffirmation.

 

[infection]

I don't think you really grasp how much women risk who come forward in situations like this. The women that I know with a history of sexual violence against them find it very difficult to talk about in private. It takes a lot of bravery and strength to do so publicly. That's proof enough for me.

Ok, that’s great and all, but women have come forward for many years, before this current movement, who have alleged much worse of those in power much higher. I will take you at your word that the coming forward is proof enough for you and that that guiding principle would play itself out in a multitude of situations for you, but for the rest of us whose minds are more clouded by partisan politics, what is a rubric to which we can securely adhere that would safeguard us in the future against crafting exception to this standard when it is no longer politically expedient?

 

[Zombie]

Ok, that’s great and all, but women have come forward for many years, before this current movement, who have alleged much worse of those in power much higher. I will take you at your word that the coming forward is proof enough for you and that that guiding principle would play itself out in a multitude of situations for you, but for the rest of us whose minds are more clouded by partisan politics, what is a rubric to which we can securely adhere that would safeguard us in the future against crafting exception to this standard when it is no longer politically expedient?

Uhhh.... What?

 

[Stars Fan]

Ok, that’s great and all, but women have come forward for many years, before this current movement, who have alleged much worse of those in power much higher. I will take you at your word that the coming forward is proof enough for you and that that guiding principle would play itself out in a multitude of situations for you, but for the rest of us whose minds are more clouded by partisan politics, what is a rubric to which we can securely adhere that would safeguard us in the future against crafting exception to this standard when it is no longer politically expedient?

No one wants to validate a smear job. Where ugly accusations are used to undermine an honorable character. That said, not all accusations are smears. Dr Blassy_Ford is, to me, a credible witness. Several things make me believe that.
1. Her initial disclosure was not to the media or even to the Senator. Hey initial disclosure was to a marriage counselor in 2012.
2. She puts a third person in the room who could verify or discredit her account. And that third person is a friend of the guy she is accusing.
3. Her willingness to stand up for her accusations publicly. She initially asked the Senator to keep her name confidential. That is consistent with most trauma victims. Once the committee had outed her, she was willing to put her name to it and stand behind it. Together, those facts make me think she is credible.

Im not sure if a drunken grope at a teenage beer bash is an indictment that should totally discredit the judge though. But if he lies about it, and the friend corroborates it... what does that say about his current character. There are plenty of teenage foibles that people grow out of. However, to take the offensive against the accuser is more worrisome. Own it and apologize. Or stand your ground. Which would you prefer the judge do?

Presume he is guilty. What should he do?

Now presume he is innocent. What should he do?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using JazzFanz mobile app

 

[RandyForRubio]

You’re still wrong on Ginsburg. She received only 3 no votes and one senator not voting.

You misunderstood. She overwhelmingly was approved, and just said in not so many words that were her confirmation today, it would not have been so. RBG things what is currently going on is way too partisan. The vast majority of what has been going on with Kavanaugh is partisan ******** by both sides, and it’s wrong and a sad sign of where we are going.

Now I’m not talking about the rape accusation, which I have said I think needs to be investigated. Rather I’m talking the perjury accusations, “I am Spartacus”, etc etc. I’m not even saying that Kavanaugh should be overwhelmingly voted in, just that this whole process has been obviously partisan and it’s bad for all of us.

 

[Stoked]

You misunderstood. She overwhelmingly was approved, and just said in not so many words that were her confirmation today, it would not have been so. RBG things what is currently going on is way too partisan. The vast majority of what has been going on with Kavanaugh is partisan ******** by both sides, and it’s wrong and a sad sign of where we are going.

Now I’m not talking about the rape accusation, which I have said I think needs to be investigated. Rather I’m talking the perjury accusations, “I am Spartacus”, etc etc. I’m not even saying that Kavanaugh should be overwhelmingly voted in, just that this whole process has been obviously partisan and it’s bad for all of us.

Oh ok, then I did misunderstand.