What is a devil's triangle?

Hahahahahaha, Brett Kavanaugh in 'likes to drink beer and dreams of banging chicks as a horny 18 year old dude' scandal. That's it, this totally disqualifies him from the SC, LOL. Meanwhile............................Chrissy Ford lies under oath about ever helping a friend beat a polygraph test, totally likes flying and has no problems with confined spaces as per a previous boyfriend. All the while saying she first told her husband about her attack in 2012 when they applied to do house renovations all the while forgetting that those renovations took place in 2008. Whoops!

Welcome Justice k.
 
Hahahahahaha, Brett Kavanaugh in 'likes to drink beer and dreams of banging chicks as a horny 18 year old dude' scandal. That's it, this totally disqualifies him from the SC, LOL. Meanwhile............................Chrissy Ford lies under oath about ever helping a friend beat a polygraph test, totally likes flying and has no problems with confined spaces as per a previous boyfriend. All the while saying she first told her husband about her attack in 2012 when they applied to do house renovations all the while forgetting that those renovations took place in 2008. Whoops!

Welcome Justice k.

It would be totally insane if he were disqualified for drinking beer when he was 18 or by mere accusations of abuses. But he should be disqualified by the position those accusations have put him today. He is not aspiring to a private corporate position. He is aspiring to be a member of a court of justice that have the last decision about each one of the people of his country, including himself. He is legally and ethically proscribed to integrate the supreme court of his country. It's a scandal that he didn't resign yet, because that shows 1) he bought his law degree in Harvard because he ignores basic law principles, or 2) he is a crook.
The above doesn't mean I think for a moment he abused of any person. Even more, I think the mere fact the Senate dared to investigate a sexual abuse that hapened 30 years ago is another scandal.
The problem with USA doing this is that the consequences of these insanities will be suffered by the rest of the world. That's the thing with being one of the biggest countries, when they have a cold someone else will die of pneumonia.
 
It would be totally insane if he were disqualified for drinking beer when he was 18 or by mere accusations of abuses. But he should be disqualified by the position those accusations have put him today. He is not aspiring to a private corporate position. He is aspiring to be a member of a court of justice that have the last decision about each one of the people of his country, including himself. He is legally and ethically proscribed to integrate the supreme court of his country. It's a scandal that he didn't resign yet, because that shows 1) he bought his law degree in Harvard because he ignores basic law principles, or 2) he is a crook.
The above doesn't mean I think for a moment he abused of any person. Even more, I think the mere fact the Senate dared to investigate a sexual abuse that hapened 30 years ago is another scandal.
The problem with USA doing this is that the consequences of these insanities will be suffered by the rest of the world. That's the thing with being one of the biggest countries, when they have a cold someone else will die of pneumonia.

By all accounts looking at his career over the past 30 years he is more than qualified to do this. Being a boozer and and randy teen at university should have zero consequence on his nomination unless it is clear that that teenage behaviour followed him into adulthood which by all accounts it hasn't. It seems like many people (both on the left and right) have found him to be a very consistent excellent judge over many years.
 
god, I wish unsexy people just would stop involving themselves in sex scandals
 
By all accounts looking at his career over the past 30 years he is more than qualified to do this. Being a boozer and and randy teen at university should have zero consequence on his nomination unless it is clear that that teenage behaviour followed him into adulthood which by all accounts it hasn't. It seems like many people (both on the left and right) have found him to be a very consistent excellent judge over many years.

You think rape is "being a randy teen?"
f*** off. You already said your opinion on this numerous times.
 
You think rape is "being a randy teen?"
f*** off. You already said your opinion on this numerous times.
Who did he rape?? Not even Ford says she was raped, now run off to a safe space Anon, afterall Jeff Sessions is dropping the hammer tomorrow regarding the illegal FISA's granted to spy on Trump and Kav will be voted on the SC the day after. Methinks it's going to be a ruff 24 hours in your world. best wrap up and have your meds handy, LOL.
 
Who did he rape?? Not even Ford says she was raped, now run off to a safe space Anon, afterall Jeff Sessions is dropping the hammer tomorrow regarding the illegal FISA's granted to spy on Trump and Kav will be voted on the SC the day after. Methinks it's going to be a ruff 24 hours in your world. best wrap up and have your meds handy, LOL.
There is a Jane Doe who claimed Kavanau raped her twice. I'll see if I can find the article...
 
Who did he rape?? Not even Ford says she was raped, now run off to a safe space Anon, afterall Jeff Sessions is dropping the hammer tomorrow regarding the illegal FISA's granted to spy on Trump and Kav will be voted on the SC the day after. Methinks it's going to be a ruff 24 hours in your world. best wrap up and have your meds handy, LOL.
This is the article that says Kavanaugh successfully raped at least twice.
https://dailym.ai/2RfdKH4
 
"The Senate Should Not Confirm Kavanaugh.Signed, 650+ Law Professors (and Counting).


OCT. 3, 2018

The following letter will be presented to the United States Senate on Oct. 4. It will be updated as more signatures are received.

Judicial temperament is one of the most important qualities of a judge. As the Congressional Research Service explains, a judge requires “a personality that is even-handed, unbiased, impartial, courteous yet firm, and dedicated to a process, not a result.” The concern for judicial temperament dates back to our founding; in Federalist 78, titled “Judges as Guardians of the Constitution,” Alexander Hamilton expressed the need for “the integrity and moderation of the judiciary.”

We are law professors who teach, research and write about the judicial institutions of this country. Many of us appear in state and federal court, and our work means that we will continue to do so, including before the United States Supreme Court. We regret that we feel compelled to write to you, our Senators, to provide our views that at the Senate hearings on Sept. 27, Judge Brett Kavanaugh displayed a lack of judicial temperament that would be disqualifying for any court, and certainly for elevation to the highest court of this land.

The question at issue was of course painful for anyone. But Judge Kavanaugh exhibited a lack of commitment to judicious inquiry. Instead of being open to the necessary search for accuracy, Judge Kavanaugh was repeatedly aggressive with questioners. Even in his prepared remarks, Judge Kavanaugh described the hearing as partisan, referring to it as “a calculated and orchestrated political hit,” rather than acknowledging the need for the Senate, faced with new information, to try to understand what had transpired. Instead of trying to sort out with reason and care the allegations that were raised, Judge Kavanaugh responded in an intemperate, inflammatory and partial manner, as he interrupted and, at times, was discourteous to senators.

As you know, under two statutes governing bias and recusal, judges must step aside if they are at risk of being perceived as or of being unfair. As Congress has previously put it, a judge or justice “shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” These statutes are part of a myriad of legal commitments to the impartiality of the judiciary, which is the cornerstone of the courts.

We have differing views about the other qualifications of Judge Kavanaugh. But we are united, as professors of law and scholars of judicial institutions, in believing that he did not display the impartiality and judicial temperament requisite to sit on the highest court of our land.
Signed, with institutional affiliation listed for identification purposes only, by the following:
"
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...l?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage


1,000+ Law professor's have now signed that letter.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive...nl=top-stories&nlid=62829474ries&ref=headline
 
By all accounts looking at his career over the past 30 years he is more than qualified to do this. Being a boozer and and randy teen at university should have zero consequence on his nomination unless it is clear that that teenage behaviour followed him into adulthood which by all accounts it hasn't. It seems like many people (both on the left and right) have found him to be a very consistent excellent judge over many years.

Please read this, I think you are a smart person. I'm failing to explain you that the problems with this man are not his past conduct nor his experience in the judiciary. The problem is his reaction to the accusations in the present. He should have resigned the same moment the accusation were made if he were honorable or -if not- if he knew the law he is supposed to apply.

You fail to understand, as well as Trump -so you are not alone-, that the conditions required to be a supreme court judge are different from the conditions required to occupy almost any position in the private or public labour force. Is that fair? Maybe not, but life is not fair for 99% of people. The major importance of being a supreme court judge in a republican system can't tolerate to take this kind of risk choosing a slightly questioned person, even when that person is innocent. Because until now he is innocent and probably that will be his status for the rest of his life. Senators don't have to prove he is guilty to discard him for that position.

It's amazing to witness the way this -in every sense- privileged man is defended as if he were being condemned by a crime, when in fact he is merely being denied of the privilege of being a member of the most important vitae republican institution of the western society. All the people have the human right to be free, but it doesn't exist the human right to occupy any public or private position in the world.

It would be nice to listen to Trump defending in the same vehement way the right to live of innocent bombed people, the right to health of patients who can't pay their bills or the rights of immigrant children, who are sistematically violated by his government. Instead, he shouts like a moron defending a rich person who -based on ethical and legal reasons- can't get a better job.
 
if he quits they will do it to the next one, and the next one.
make up stuff from when they were in grade school.o_O

if all these 'terrible' thing ocurred she would have DONE something back then.
said nothing when he was made judge. :rolleyes:
 
So she turns up 35 years late to the party (no pun intended) can't get her story straight about how many people were at this party then when she finally does they question everyone she names and they all deny ever being there, including her best friend, but ummmm................that's enough to make the guy guilty???
1) ITS NOT A TRIAL! GUILT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE PROVEN. Its a job interview and questions of character are rightly fair game.
2) So you remember the head count from parties you went to in 1982 (or if you are too young, from 1992 or even 2002)? Its an amazing skill if you have it. I can't remember head counts from parties I went to in the last two years.
3) What does she have to gain from lying?
4) What about the people coming out of the woodwork who knew him then (e.g., Yale drinking buddies) and say he's lying now? Why is the ABA firmly against him? Thats a huge red flag.
5) Even if she is exaggerating (and I don't believe she is), he has proven he can't keep all of his lies straight. He wouldn't even give direct answers to many of the questions posed by the committee last week. That alone is dodgy as f#ck.
6) Do yourself a favor and read the news then come back with some adult comments.
 

Yeah, this whole investigation is a farce.

But Kavanaugh has been involved with the FBI before.

"This summary asserts that the FBI had “concealed the true facts”, that there had been witness tampering, and that the report had wilfully ignored facts that refuted its own conclusions. There it sits in perpetuity, a strange rebuke for Mr Kavanaugh by his own fellow judges on the federal bench."
https://www.yahoo.com/news/sinister-battle-brett-kavanaugh-over-202425923.html?guccounter=1
 
I know I gotta stop, but gee there is a part of me that worries that if this is now the burden of proof needed to find someone guilty of sexual assault we are all f***ed (pardon the pun.)
ITS NOT A TRIAL! A trial would require burden of proof. This is a job interview that looks at character and qualifications (and ideology) and can assess how the job candidate responds. The committee does not (and cannot) CONVICT anyone.
 
Back
Top Bottom