- Mar 18, 2014
- 38,117
- 34,056
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Christian
- Marital Status
- Married
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
I never considered Feinstein to be such but ok.The Bible has a saying about being aware of ravening wolves in sheep's clothing.
Tell that to Clarence Thomas.Because it's heinous?
If Kavanaugh were black, we wouldn't even be having this debate.
Oh baloney, the FBI has already done a background check and found nothing. These allegations stand or fall on their own merits. This is all they got, I say baloney.Investigate the allegations as part of the background check on Kavanaugh.
I directed White House nominations. Of course the FBI can check Kavanaugh again.
All President Trump needs to do is ask for the bureau to continue its background investigation.
Oh baloney, the FBI has already done a background check and found nothing. These allegations stand or fall on their own merits. This is all they got, I say baloney.
Because it's heinous?
If Kavanaugh were black, we wouldn't even be having this debate.
But we would be having it--it just would be about something else, like maybe he smoked weed at a party when he was high school.I think it's more like "if Kavanaugh were liberal, we wouldn't be having this debate".
Sometimes we have to have faith in the system of justice.Well, it's not baloney. But I'll tell you what, I'd rather have a baloney sandwich than eat up the bullcrap Trump has served up about this. He's made the most truly ignorant & inane comments about this & I'm glad folks who possess an actual clue about FBI investigations have called him out on it, as in the article I gave to you.
The FBI has reopened investigations when new information has come to light. Trump of course has a history of not caring about integrity but other folks involved in this ought to show their integrity, push for the investigation. If the FBI determines there's no merit, then Kavanaugh can proceed with integrity. This has to do with the integrity of the Supreme Court of the country.
Dude that is so 80s. It is quite evident everyone in DC is smoking something.But we would be having it--it just would be about something else, like maybe he smoked weed at a party when he was high school.
If he is guilty of this then he should not confirmed by the Senate. However, one thing about this bothers me--the last I heard Ford was demanding that the committee agree to not to have Kavanaugh present during her testimony. Our Constitution requires that a defendant be given the opportunity to face his accuser. Granted that this is not a criminal case, but shouldn't that same standard apply here?
No 2000 years of Western jurisprudence demands the accused has a right to face their accuser. And the accused always testifies after the accused presents their allegations.Not necessarily. According to the reports about her therapist sessions, she has experienced ongoing trauma over the attack. She surely has some right to be protected in that regard...?
And yes, it’s not a criminal case...
Depends on what he did. If he raped her then no he shouldn’t be on the court. All I’ve heard is he is accused of ‘sexual assault’ or ‘attempting to force himself on her’ which could mean anything.
Maybe all he did was attempt to put his arm around her, that’s all it would take for a 5th wave feminist to cry sexual assault. But if he did a serious sexual crime then Trump should appoint someone else.
If he didn’t do anything, should his accuser be allowed to keep her job? Pretty serious accusations, and this drunken party girl lifestyle that was embraced by her Alma mater is quite damaging to her credibility. This whole thing just stinks of more leftist fabrication to me.
Does the detailed account include the actual year and month of the alleged assault?Then you haven’t “heard” much...
She gives a detailed account of what Kavanaugh allegedly did to her. It would constitute attempted rape...
Ah, searching for the Todd Akin “legitimate rape” scenario, are we...?
Nice smearing...you must be proud...
No 2000 years of Western jurisprudence demands the accused has a right to face their accuser. And the accused always testifies after the accused presents their allegations.
Does the detailed account include the actual year and month of the alleged assault?
So says you. Everyone regardless of setting had a right to face their accusers and hear the allegations against them before responding.In a court of law. Again, this is a hearing to determine suitability for appointment, not a criminal case...jurisprudence need not apply...
Total failure there. If she gave a detailed account she should at least remember the year. I can see forgetting an address after 35 years (or so) and an exact day.Not that I’m aware...why should that matter? The question was about the nature of the assault, not its date and location.
Well our society revolves around jurisprudence and has since the Roman Empire. It is what kept mob justice a la guilty until proven innocent out of our founding.Those who argue about "process" are usually not on the winning side of an issue.
Ringo
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?