Kavanaugh

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

User avatar
pugchief
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2976
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 2:41 pm
Location: suburbs of Chicago, IL

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by pugchief » Sat Oct 06, 2018 7:18 am

Maddy wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 7:03 am
moda0306 wrote:
Fri Oct 05, 2018 11:48 am
She's not asking anyone to believe her wholeheartedly without evidence. She's just asking that her testimony be given as evidence to his character.

If he did what she claims, I think she has every right to come forward whenever she pleases.
Nobody's questioning her right to come forward. Nor has anyone denied her the opportunity to have her evidence considered. (Lordy, how much more attention could she have garnered?)

What you are actually contending, it seems to me, is that she had a right to be believed. Nobody has that right, no matter what's being alleged and no matter when the allegation is made.

Here, the timing of the revelation, the complete absence of corroboration, and the flat-out refuting of her testimony by multiple witnesses (including those she identified) bears strongly on her credibility and raises the unmistakable inference of an ulterior, political, motive. The suggestion that she is entitled, despite all that, to be believed (presumably because she is a woman and because the allegation resonates of "cultural oppression") is just nutty.
Exactly. Whatever happened to 'innocent until proven guilty' ?
User avatar
Tyler
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1775
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 3:23 pm
Contact:

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by Tyler » Sat Oct 06, 2018 9:35 am

No matter where you fall on the spectrum of Kavanaugh opinions, you owe it to yourself to take the time to listen to Susan Collins' full speech where she outlines all of the reasons she is voting for his confirmation. Her tone, reasoning, and genuine sense of professional responsibility are a welcome breath of fresh air in this whole debacle and she definitely earned my respect. Other senators should take note.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lR3WajO-WwI
Mechanical engineer, history buff, treasure manager... totally not Ben Gates
jacksonM
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 364
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2018 1:59 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by jacksonM » Sat Oct 06, 2018 9:44 am

Tyler wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 9:35 am
No matter where you fall on the spectrum of Kavanaugh opinions, you owe it to yourself to take the time to listen to Susan Collins' full speech where she outlines all of the reasons she is voting for his confirmation. Her tone, reasoning, and genuine sense of professional responsibility are a welcome breath of fresh air in this whole debacle and she definitely earned my respect. Other senators should take note.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lR3WajO-WwI
+1

Excellent speech but I don't think any other senators took note, except maybe Manchin.
jacksonM
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 364
Joined: Wed Sep 26, 2018 1:59 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by jacksonM » Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:01 am

pugchief wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 7:18 am
Maddy wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 7:03 am
moda0306 wrote:
Fri Oct 05, 2018 11:48 am
She's not asking anyone to believe her wholeheartedly without evidence. She's just asking that her testimony be given as evidence to his character.

If he did what she claims, I think she has every right to come forward whenever she pleases.
Nobody's questioning her right to come forward. Nor has anyone denied her the opportunity to have her evidence considered. (Lordy, how much more attention could she have garnered?)

What you are actually contending, it seems to me, is that she had a right to be believed. Nobody has that right, no matter what's being alleged and no matter when the allegation is made.

Here, the timing of the revelation, the complete absence of corroboration, and the flat-out refuting of her testimony by multiple witnesses (including those she identified) bears strongly on her credibility and raises the unmistakable inference of an ulterior, political, motive. The suggestion that she is entitled, despite all that, to be believed (presumably because she is a woman and because the allegation resonates of "cultural oppression") is just nutty.
Exactly. Whatever happened to 'innocent until proven guilty' ?
Also the admissibility of hearsay evidence. As I understand it that was what all the 22 or so people the Dems had lined up for the FBI to interview were ready to provide. Not only was it a stalling tactic but they wanted the final report to be sprinkled with "I heard somebody say this or that". They didn't get what they wanted but at least they have their talking point about how the investigation was constrained, even though according to a former FBI investigator I saw on TV, that is what they always do.
User avatar
Cortopassi
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1513
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 2:28 pm
Location: Illinois

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by Cortopassi » Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:08 am

Please read at least parts of this article: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opin ... story.html

My question to everyone is:

Do his almost certainly untruthful descriptions of some of his calendar entries constitute:

1) Lying under oath
2) You believe his descriptions or
3) He shouldn't have ever been subjected to this hearing in the first place and gets a pass because he was trying to save face?

Or something else?
User avatar
sophie
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 3149
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by sophie » Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:20 am

Tyler wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 9:35 am
No matter where you fall on the spectrum of Kavanaugh opinions, you owe it to yourself to take the time to listen to Susan Collins' full speech where she outlines all of the reasons she is voting for his confirmation. Her tone, reasoning, and genuine sense of professional responsibility are a welcome breath of fresh air in this whole debacle and she definitely earned my respect. Other senators should take note.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lR3WajO-WwI
Thank you Tyler!

Not only did my respect for Susan Collins just go up several notches, but it's pretty clear that her position has been badly misrepresented by the media. Did you catch the crazy stuff being printed now about how states should ignore Supreme Court decisions once Kavanaugh is seated on it?
User avatar
moda0306
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7599
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:05 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by moda0306 » Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:24 am

pugchief wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 7:18 am
Maddy wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 7:03 am
moda0306 wrote:
Fri Oct 05, 2018 11:48 am
She's not asking anyone to believe her wholeheartedly without evidence. She's just asking that her testimony be given as evidence to his character.

If he did what she claims, I think she has every right to come forward whenever she pleases.
Nobody's questioning her right to come forward. Nor has anyone denied her the opportunity to have her evidence considered. (Lordy, how much more attention could she have garnered?)

What you are actually contending, it seems to me, is that she had a right to be believed. Nobody has that right, no matter what's being alleged and no matter when the allegation is made.

Here, the timing of the revelation, the complete absence of corroboration, and the flat-out refuting of her testimony by multiple witnesses (including those she identified) bears strongly on her credibility and raises the unmistakable inference of an ulterior, political, motive. The suggestion that she is entitled, despite all that, to be believed (presumably because she is a woman and because the allegation resonates of "cultural oppression") is just nutty.
Exactly. Whatever happened to 'innocent until proven guilty' ?
This isn't a jury trial to throw a man in a cage for the rest of his life.

If that were the case I could understand all the flatulating melodrama.

This is a process (that has been neutered into mostly a faux show anyway) to put a man in one of the most powerful positions in the world. For life. When another person could easily be chosen.

Let's lose the f'kin melodrama.

Those of us who are concerned more with Kavanaugh's terrible position on executive privilege and the 4th Amendment have more clout on that argument than those who decided to care about it for a couple weeks in a very unique case.
User avatar
Xan
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 2281
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 1:51 pm

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by Xan » Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:38 am

Senator Collins addressed that point. Moda, the video is well worth watching. You can crank it up to 2x speed. Really most of the speech isn't about the allegations but about judicial philosophy. It's interesting.

Edit: here's the full transcript:
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/05/us/p ... naugh.html
Some argue that because this is a lifetime appointment to our highest court, the public interest requires that doubts be resolved against the nominee. Others see the public interest as embodied in our long-established tradition of affording to those accused of misconduct a presumption of innocence. In cases in which the facts are unclear, they would argue that the question should be resolved in favor of the nominee.

Mr. President, I understand both viewpoints. This debate is complicated further by the fact that the Senate confirmation process is not a trial. But certain fundamental legal principles—about due process, the presumption of innocence, and fairness—do bear on my thinking, and I cannot abandon them.

In evaluating any given claim of misconduct, we will be ill served in the long run if we abandon the presumption of innocence and fairness, tempting though it may be. We must always remember that it is when passions are most inflamed that fairness is most in jeopardy.

The presumption of innocence is relevant to the advice and consent function when an accusation departs from a nominee’s otherwise exemplary record. I worry that departing from this presumption could lead to a lack of public faith in the judiciary and would be hugely damaging to the confirmation process moving forward.

Some of the allegations levied against Judge Kavanaugh illustrate why the presumption of innocence is so important. I am thinking in particular not of the allegations raised by Professor Ford, but of the allegation that, when he was a teenager, Judge Kavanaugh drugged multiple girls and used their weakened state to facilitate gang rape. This outlandish allegation was put forth without any credible supporting evidence and simply parroted public statements of others. That such an allegation can find its way into the Supreme Court confirmation process is a stark reminder about why the presumption of innocence is so ingrained in our American consciousness.
User avatar
pugchief
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2976
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 2:41 pm
Location: suburbs of Chicago, IL

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by pugchief » Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:41 am

moda0306 wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:24 am
pugchief wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 7:18 am
Maddy wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 7:03 am

Nobody's questioning her right to come forward. Nor has anyone denied her the opportunity to have her evidence considered. (Lordy, how much more attention could she have garnered?)

What you are actually contending, it seems to me, is that she had a right to be believed. Nobody has that right, no matter what's being alleged and no matter when the allegation is made.

Here, the timing of the revelation, the complete absence of corroboration, and the flat-out refuting of her testimony by multiple witnesses (including those she identified) bears strongly on her credibility and raises the unmistakable inference of an ulterior, political, motive. The suggestion that she is entitled, despite all that, to be believed (presumably because she is a woman and because the allegation resonates of "cultural oppression") is just nutty.
Exactly. Whatever happened to 'innocent until proven guilty' ?
This isn't a jury trial to throw a man in a cage for the rest of his life.

If that were the case I could understand all the flatulating melodrama.

This is a process (that has been neutered into mostly a faux show anyway) to put a man in one of the most powerful positions in the world. For life. When another person could easily be chosen.

Let's lose the f'kin melodrama.

Those of us who are concerned more with Kavanaugh's terrible position on executive privilege and the 4th Amendment have more clout on that argument than those who decided to care about it for a couple weeks in a very unique case.
So you're saying that since this isn't an actual jury trial, innocence until proven guilty doesn't apply?! Sorry, the job or its tenure is irrelevant. And, you think your position on that is more valid because of your concerns on the 4th amendment? Sorry, irrelevant again.

edit: While typing this, Xan posted the above quote from Sen. Collins, which I had not yet heard/read, and apparently she agrees with me.
User avatar
moda0306
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7599
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:05 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by moda0306 » Sat Oct 06, 2018 11:22 am

pugchief wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:41 am
moda0306 wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 10:24 am
pugchief wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 7:18 am

Exactly. Whatever happened to 'innocent until proven guilty' ?
This isn't a jury trial to throw a man in a cage for the rest of his life.

If that were the case I could understand all the flatulating melodrama.

This is a process (that has been neutered into mostly a faux show anyway) to put a man in one of the most powerful positions in the world. For life. When another person could easily be chosen.

Let's lose the f'kin melodrama.

Those of us who are concerned more with Kavanaugh's terrible position on executive privilege and the 4th Amendment have more clout on that argument than those who decided to care about it for a couple weeks in a very unique case.
So you're saying that since this isn't an actual jury trial, innocence until proven guilty doesn't apply?! Sorry, the job or its tenure is irrelevant. And, you think your position on that is more valid because of your concerns on the 4th amendment? Sorry, irrelevant again.

edit: While typing this, Xan posted the above quote from Sen. Collins, which I had not yet heard/read, and apparently she agrees with me.
Some level of evidence is probably appropriate for a Supreme Court Nomination. I wouldn't presume to know exactly what. But a few things I do know...

- Kavanaugh is terrible on the 4th Amendment.

- How the powerful treat the masses visavis the 4th amendment and executive power is millions (well, probably more) of times of more importance than how they treat one of their own (another powerful government careerist) in a job interview.

- The knuckle-dragging pro-Trump wing of "the right" is showing again what cucks to power they are... not that this is a surprise... their "anti-establishment" bonafides were pretty much nonexistent anyway. This just serves as a reminder.

This should barely be a part of the national conversation. I agree with the somewhat corny speech by Ben Sasse... This should be about drilling into the principles at stake. Those that are pretending to care about due process as it pertains to a job interview when you hear nary a peep from them on the topic otherwise unless it's their jingo-clown-fascist president being investigated are obviously just cucks to right-leaning power, not principled civil-libertarians.
User avatar
pugchief
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2976
Joined: Tue Jun 26, 2012 2:41 pm
Location: suburbs of Chicago, IL

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by pugchief » Sat Oct 06, 2018 11:49 am

You do realize that phrases like 'knuckle dragging' that you have repeated in quite a few posts in this thread, and other phrases like it, is one of the reasons Trump is in the WH in the first place?
User avatar
moda0306
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7599
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2010 9:05 pm
Location: Minnesota

Re: Kavanaugh

Post by moda0306 » Sat Oct 06, 2018 1:15 pm

pugchief wrote:
Sat Oct 06, 2018 11:49 am
You do realize that phrases like 'knuckle dragging' that you have repeated in quite a few posts in this thread, and other phrases like it, is one of the reasons Trump is in the WH in the first place?
That's funny you would admit to a whole section of the country being so immature as to elect such a clown because some people called them names.

Many types of people get called names.

Only one group has chosen to earn their nickname by electing a stroked-out jingo-clown to head the most powerful killing machine in the history of the world as a backlash. Not just that, but defend him at every turn, no matter what ridiculous thing he does. When feminazis elect Rosie O'Donnel or Kathy Griffin to President I'll unleash a similar barrage of insults towards them.

BTW I give derogatory names to a lot of types of people. Some of my friends are knuckle-dragging trumpists. Some are feminazis. Some are establishment-left or establishment-right power-cucks who will defend anyone with the right letter behind their names. Some (usually the kindest/best ones) don't care for politics and don't like to aggressively defend slimeballs of any sort so I don't have nasty nicknames for them. Few are bitter quasi-anarchists like myself who distrust-dislike anyone who thinks they're important/powerful, but I'm working on them. ;)

As a side-car to good logic/arguments and sound facts, I find solid ad-hominem banter to actually contribute to a half-derailed conversation... not be a detriment to it. When moral outrage is being tossed around like a football over job interview norms for a powerful and anti-freedom judge, I'll feel free to use similar moralist language towards things that are actually important... such as the voting patterns of the 25% of this country who seem to only care about the civil liberties of massively powerful conservatives.
Post Reply