Kavanaugh accuser breaks silence about sexual misconduct allegations, UPDATE 9/26 5th ACCUSER & MORE
- Thread starter lightbright
- Start date
Jeez you been sleeping ...… for months too....they just made her an MSNBC contributor today.....think she works on the editorial board of the NYT....
.
She is all kinds of Chocolate goodness.
Mara Gay
She sounds and looks just like this chick that I went out with in College
No not really if the FBI report comes back funny that will give cover to flake, the check from Alaska and Collins
Mara Gay
She sounds and looks just like this chick that I went out with in College
Imagine her and Jemelle Hill on a weekly political show?
The U.S. has been using disparate convictions of crime to gain slave labor since the Civil War. This comes from the 13th Amendment which is baked into the DNA of the country. They conjoined the freeing of slaves with prison labor for a reason.
This would be like asking a Jewish person that descended from a Holocaust survivor if euthanizing criminals and retarded people was okay. When you use the criminal justice system for nefarious purposes it calls into doubt its legitimacy.
If I was a Senator, I would be supporting his confirmation despite these unproveable allegations.
HOLY FUCKING SHIT...... THE ACLU stepped in. WOW
And they pinned this tweet to their page.
And they pinned this tweet to their page.
People need to understand...
The ACLU never does this. I think this is like the third time in 100 years have they stepped into politics. They are apolitical.
They have definitely been more active lately...
The ACLU never does this. I think this is like the third time in 100 years have they stepped into politics. They are apolitical.
They have definitely been more active lately...
I was gonna make a thread…..like three or four months ago with all these new pundants and contributors....but changed my mind figuring no one would be interested....
.
The ABA , Yale law review and now these cats ain’t fuckin with him lolDamn the American Jurist Review.. Put out an Editorial saying that only are they withdrawing their endorsement but his nomination should be withdrawn. Jesus... how can he even go back to to the bench.
The Editors: It is time for the Kavanaugh nomination to be withdrawn
Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee today clearly demonstrated both the seriousness of her allegation of assault by Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh and the stakes of this question for the whole country. Judge Kavanaugh denied the accusation and emphasized in his testimony that the opposition of Democratic senators to his nomination and their consequent willingness to attack him was established long before Dr. Blasey’s allegation was known.
Evaluating the credibility of these competing accounts is a question about which people of good will can and do disagree. The editors of this review have no special insight into who is telling the truth. If Dr. Blasey’s allegation is true, the assault and Judge Kavanaugh’s denial of it mean that he should not be seated on the U.S. Supreme Court. But even if the credibility of the allegation has not been established beyond a reasonable doubt and even if further investigation is warranted to determine its validity or clear Judge Kavanaugh’s name, we recognize that this nomination is no longer in the best interests of the country. While wepreviously endorsed the nomination of Judge Kavanaughon the basis of his legal credentials and his reputation as a committed textualist, it is now clear that the nomination should be withdrawn.
If this were a question of establishing Judge Kavanaugh’s legal or moral responsibility for the assault described by Dr. Blasey, then far more stringent standards of proof would apply. His presumption of innocence might settle the matter in his favor, absent further investigation and new evidence. But the question is not solely about Judge Kavanaugh’s responsibility, nor is it any longer primarily about his qualifications. Rather it is about the prudence of his nomination and potential confirmation. In addition to being a fight over policy issues, which it already was, his nomination has also become a referendum on how to address allegations of sexual assault.
Somewhere in the distant past, at least before theword “Borked” was coinedto describe a Supreme Court nomination defeated by ideological opposition, Senate confirmation hearings might have focused on evaluating a nominee’s judicial character or qualifications as a legal thinker. But that time is long past. Many cases decided by the Supreme Court itself and thus also presidential nominations to that body (and the Senate hearings that follow) are now thoroughly engaged in deciding “policy by other means.” Neither the country nor the court are well served by this arrangement, but refusing to recognize it does nothing to help reverse it.
When Republican leaders in the Senate refused even to hold hearings on the nomination of Judge Merrick Garland, they were not objecting to his qualifications or character but to the likely outcome of his vote on the court were he to be confirmed. When Senate Democrats were mostly united in opposition to Judge Kavanaugh well in advance of any hearings (and before any rumor of Dr. Blasey’s accusation was known), they were using the same calculus. While regrettable in both cases, such results are,as we have said before, the predictable outcome of the fact that “fundamental questions of social policy are increasingly referred to the court for adjudication as constitutional issues.”
What is different this time is that this nomination battle is no longer purely about predicting the likely outcome of Judge Kavanaugh’s vote on the court. It now involves the symbolic meaning of his nomination and confirmation in the #MeToo era. The hearings and the committee’s deliberations are now also a bellwether of the way the country treats women when their reports of harassment, assault and abuse threaten to derail the careers of powerful men.
While nomination hearings are far from the best venue to deal with such issues, the question is sufficiently important that it is prudent to recognize it as determinative at this point. Dr. Blasey's accusations have neither been fully investigated nor been proven to a legal standard, but neither have they been conclusively disproved or shown to be less than credible. Judge Kavanaugh continues to enjoy a legal presumption of innocence, but the standard for a nominee to the Supreme Court is far higher; there is no presumption of confirmability. The best of the bad resolutions available in this dilemma is for Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination to be withdrawn.
If Senate Republicans proceed with his nomination, they will be prioritizing policy aims over a woman’s report of an assault. Were he to be confirmed without this allegation being firmly disproved, it would hang over his future decisions on the Supreme Court for decades and further divide the country. Even if one thinks that Dr. Blasey's allegations are not credible, demonstrating them not to be would require further investigations and testimony. This would include calling additional witnesses and assessing further allegations against Judge Kavanaugh from other women, to which Republicans on the committee have been unwilling to commit and which would be divisive in any case.
There are many good reasons to support the nomination of a qualified judge who is committed to a textualist interpretation of the Constitution to the Supreme Court. Over time, such an approach may return the question of abortion to the states, where it belongs given the Constitution’s silence on the matter, and where a more just and moral outcome than is currently possible under Roe v. Wade may be achieved. Restoring such a morally complex question to the deliberation of legislators rather than judges may also bring the country closer to a time when confirmation hearings can truly focus on the character and qualifications of the nominee rather than serving as proxy battles over every contentious issue in U.S. politics.
We continue to support the nomination of judges according to such principles—but Judge Kavanaugh is not the only such nominee available. For the good of the country and the future credibility of the Supreme Court in a world that is finally learning to take reports of harassment, assault and abuse seriously, it is time to find a nominee whose confirmation will not repudiate that lesson.
https://www.americamagazine.org/pol...ors-it-time-kavanaugh-nomination-be-withdrawn
Not that the White House of Congressional leaders ever listen to common sense, but this dude has become legitimately toxic. They could push through out of spite or desperation (and I still wager that they will try), but this doesn't really end well for them if they do. Especially when there really is no legitimate reason they can't pump the brakes or just dump him for someone else.
Do you want to know why the Senators who are on the cusp or going to vote for Kavanaugh?
Because the other three candidates armoire conservatively pro-life than Kavanaugh. Collins and murkowski believe that Kavanaugh is their best bet to preserve Roe v Wade. Go look at the track records of the other three candidates especially the two females they are staunchly pro-life.
In Collins and murkowski believe there is no doubt in their mind that they not Kavanaugh would overturn Roe v Wade.
Most of the women who know him feel that he is no threat to Roe v WadeIn fact he has no legal decisions in that area but the others doSo it's the old saying the devil you know or the devil you don't knowAnd I'd love to hear 36 year old allegations how about one of these women assaulting a woman at a party for being drunk come out. America needs an even greater
They are not letting the FBI talk to Swvetik, just Ramirez and Ford. They been given a list of who they can interview. More GOP fuckery.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna915061
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna915061
This is really their dream scenario. The GOP, for decades, has wanted nothing more than a true conservative SC.... and everyone talked about Scalia being far right..and Clarence Thomas being the most conservative justice on the court, both Gorsuch and Kavanaugh are WAY more right than them..... true right wing controlled SC is the dream for them... they're not going to let a little toxicity and rapes get in the way
More obstruction..
They really think Avenatti is bullshitting with them... I think he got tapes and pictures
Trump supposed a probe by the Federal Bureau of Investigation may actually be a blessing:
“Having the FBI go out and do a thorough investigation, whether it’s three days or seven days — I think it’s going to be less than a week — but having them do a thorough investigation, I actually think will be a blessing in disguise. It’ll be a good thing.”
“Having the FBI go out and do a thorough investigation, whether it’s three days or seven days — I think it’s going to be less than a week — but having them do a thorough investigation, I actually think will be a blessing in disguise. It’ll be a good thing.”
Man this shit is the craziest shit that I’ve seen.. like they aren’t even trying to hide it.
Why would you avoid Michael’s client... what’s the harm in talking to her.
A right wing operative said that didn't he?
You know why they avoiding MA’s client, The WH and GOP scared shitless of MA
Similar threads
