Donald Trump is the President Mark IV (Read Mod Warning in OP)

weisses

ThomasFlynn wrote: »

Absolutely.

But the person accused doesn't deserve to have his/her life destroyed without a trial or any significant evidence.

And that to me is the dangers of #metoo, people are automatically assumed guilty.

Did you forget what happened to Ford once her name was out in the open.

In this case the person accused was promoted to the highest court in the land without any proper investigation into the evidence.

What became apparent is that during the hearing BK showed he lacks the integrity to be on the SC

SharpshooterTom

weisses wrote: »

Did you forget what happened to Ford once her name was out in the open.

In this case the person accused was promoted to the highest court in the land without any proper investigation into the evidence.

What became apparent is that during the hearing BK showed he lacks the integrity to be on the SC

That's not been the case for the vast majority of men in the past 18 months, certainly not those who work in the media. Al Franken's, whose crimes were quite mild in comparison to BK's, also fell victim.

rossie1977

ThomasFlynn wrote: »

That's not been the case for the vast majority of men in the past 18 months, certainly not those who work in the media. Al Franken's, whose crimes were quite mild in comparison to BK's, also fell victim.

Who in the media has had their lives destroyed due to made up allegations. I can only think of Bill O'Reilly, Roger Ailes and they were guilty as hell as they tried paying off their accusers.

Franken was forced out by the Republicans.

weisses

ThomasFlynn wrote: »

That's not been the case for the vast majority of men in the past 18 months, certainly not those who work in the media. Al Franken's, whose crimes were quite mild in comparison to BK's, also fell victim.

Yup and one has its Political career destroyed and the other who's crimes would be more serious is promoted to the supreme court. All happening in a messed up country where a Purge would do miracles at this stage

SharpshooterTom

rossie1977 wrote: »

Who in the media has had their lives destroyed due to made up allegations. I can only think of Bill O'Reilly, Roger Ailes and they were guilty as hell as they tried paying off their accusers.

Franken was forced out by the Republicans.

No my point was in relation to weisses point who (I think) was suggesting men still keep getting away with it, but in the past 18 months many high profile celebrities (almost all of which are likely guilty) have lost their jobs and haven't returned.

Franken was forced out by democrats as well as republicans, the likes of Gilibrand and Harris were extremely quick to call for his resignation.

oscarBravo

2 Scoops wrote: »

I've been offline for a bit and just catching up, but I notice you never answered my question:

Do you believe that every single word that Kavanaugh said during his Senate testimony was truthful?

ELM327

oscarBravo wrote: »

I've been offline for a bit and just catching up, but I notice you never answered my question:

Do you believe that every single word that Kavanaugh said during his Senate testimony was truthful?

SC Justice Kavanaugh reacted appropriately to unfounded and uncorroborated allegations.
The questions like "do you like beer" are ridiculous.

Water John

The one thing I am sure of, as I saw it, was he didn't react appropriately.
He went on a bizarre partisan rant. That alone disqualified him.

ELM327

Water John wrote: »

The one thing I am sure of, as I saw it, was he didn't react appropriately.
He went on a bizarre partisan rant. That alone disqualified him.

Putting myself in his position, with ridiculous and absurd lines of questioning and unfounded allegations, I would react in a similar way and as such adjudicated his actions as appropriate

26000 Elephants

ThomasFlynn wrote: »

I oppose Kavanaugh's nomination and think the guy is a massive corporate shill, but this tweet from Ariel Dumas, a writer for Stephen Colbert's show, is nothing short of shocking.

I think your sarcasm detector need re-calibration. See earlier post of a smiling Brett being sworn in with the caption "His life is destroyed" to put that tweet in context.

Water John

Then you shouldn't make Supreme Court Justice either. Wholly inappropriate calculated outburst by him in his opening remarks.

ELM327

Water John wrote: »

Then you shouldn't make Supreme Court Justice either. Wholly inappropriate calculated outburst by him in his opening remarks.

That is assuming you meet the criteria to determine SC members.
Let's see:
- POTUS
- American Citizen
- Senate/House member


Now I don't know about #2 but I'm assuming on an Irish board you meet none.




Should he have just accepted the character assasination from the democrats and done nothing? Ridiculous

pixelburp

ELM327 wrote: »

Putting myself in his position, with ridiculous and absurd lines of questioning and unfounded allegations, I would react in a similar way and as such adjudicated his actions as appropriate

Do you think the behaviour is becoming of a man set to occupy the highest court in the land? Whether you or I would behave in such a manner is not really relevant in the slightest, if you remove the issue of the assault claims, Kavaunagh could have simply taken the high road, demonstrated his judicial nous and sailed through the hearings. Instead he ... well, went nuts. No court in any country expects or looks to its judges to be emotional wrecks - the expectation is quite the opposite.

ELM327

pixelburp wrote: »

Do you think the behaviour is becoming of a man set to occupy the highest court in the land? Whether you or I would behave in such a manner is not really relevant in the slightest, if you remove the issue of the assault claims, Kavaunagh could have simply taken the high road, demonstrated his judicial nous and sailed through the hearings. Instead he ... well, went nuts. No court in any country expects or looks to its judges to be emotional wrecks - the expectation is quite the opposite.

What you or I think of his reaction obviously doesnt matter as he's been voted in, by those whose opinions do matter.

pixelburp

ELM327 wrote: »

What you or I think of his reaction obviously doesnt matter as he's been voted in.

Uh, you're talking about it, and nothing we say matter given it's an Irish forum, but you're making the argument that it's OK for a judge to display an emotional fragility in a position that by design demands stoicism. And obvious partisanship to boot.

weisses

ELM327 wrote: »

What you or I think of his reaction obviously doesnt matter as he's been voted in, by those whose opinions do matter.

Well it kinda does matter on a discussion board where his idiotic behavior is discussed I mean you have an opinion about what you would have done ... so apparently you think your opinion does matter

Leroy42

So you came on to a debating forum to tell everyone that you have no opinion since you aren't directly involved.

Great.

Christy42

ELM327 wrote: »

That is assuming you meet the criteria to determine SC members.
Let's see:
- POTUS
- American Citizen
- Senate/House member


Now I don't know about #2 but I'm assuming on an Irish board you meet none.




Should he have just accepted the character assasination from the democrats and done nothing? Ridiculous

It is a discussion board. People come here to discuss these things. We have kind of figured that we can't control the SC but we can put forward opinions as to a candidates suitability. None of the 3 sections you have mentioned are infallible (or anywhere close) and so people are free to question their decisions.


As for character assassination, he did that by himself. No he should not have accepted the allegations. However given he had plenty of time before the hearing to think about the allegations he should have had a chance to compose himself. The fact that he couldn't is worrying for his decision making ability on the court if any topic manages to trigger him.

aloyisious

ELM327 wrote: »

That is assuming you meet the criteria to determine SC members.
Let's see:
- POTUS
- American Citizen
- Senate/House member


Now I don't know about #2 but I'm assuming on an Irish board you meet none.




Should he have just accepted the character assasination from the democrats and done nothing? Ridiculous

There are a few US citizens [of which I am NOT one] actually involved in this debate here.

The character assassination went both ways, with POTUS calling her claims a con job and that was before she had even sat down in the committee room and laid out her case to the senate judicial committee in person. leaving herself and her story open to direct cross-examination by both parties sides of the committee. Now before anyone tries to say POTUS was referring directly to the Dem Senate committee members statements and NOT the Prof, their statements are 100% based on her claims and cannot be split apart for party affiliation purposes.

everlast75

Your opinion or mine doesn't matter....


(Says someone who has posted frequently, disputing opinions of others, until of course they can't defend their own opinion anymore)

ELM327

everlast75 wrote: »

Your opinion or mine doesn't matter....


(Says someone who has posted frequently, disputing opinions of others, until of course they can't defend their own opinion anymore)

Why do I have to "defend my opinion" to anyone, let alone this echo chamber?


It's done, the guy has been confirmed, the allegations were not corroborated, and the democrats failed in their mission to get the nomination postponed until after the midterms.


It's a win for the Trump administration as I mentioned earlier due to the importance of the evangelical vote, and if Trump is reelected in 2020, this move will be a large part of his reelection bid.


Since this is the thread for discussion the Trump presidency, I thought I'd try to discuss Trump directly.

weisses

ELM327 wrote: »

Since this is the thread for discussion the Trump presidency, I thought I'd try to discuss Trump directly.

Problem is that ..... You Didn't

Leroy42

You don't think people are entitled to question the basis on which your opinion is based?

It is not an echo chamber, proven by the fact that people are engaging with you rather than your position of telling people their opinions don't matter

batgoat

ELM327 wrote: »

Putting myself in his position, with ridiculous and absurd lines of questioning and unfounded allegations, I would react in a similar way and as such adjudicated his actions as appropriate

I would expect any sitting judge to be held to a higher standard. This would include not repeatedly lying under oath. This would include not including Clinton conspiracy theories which have no basis in their preprepared testimony. If any democrat behaved as he did, the GOP and people such as yourself would be completely outraged.

amandstu

batgoat wrote: »

I would expect any sitting judge to be held to a higher standard. This would include not repeatedly lying under oath. This would include not including Clinton conspiracy theories which have no basis in their preprepared testimony. If any democrat behaved as he did, the GOP and people such as yourself would be completely outraged.

To what extent has T's being president given license to applicants for the SC to behave in this unjudgely way (during their hearing)?

Is it "in Trumpo veritas"?

batgoat

amandstu wrote: »

To what extent has T's being president given license to applicants for the SC to behave in this unjudgely way (during their hearing)?

Is it "in Trumpo veritas"?

That was disturbing aspect of testimony for me. He behaved pretty similarly to Trump...

oscarBravo

ELM327 wrote: »

SC Justice Kavanaugh reacted appropriately to unfounded and uncorroborated allegations.
The questions like "do you like beer" are ridiculous.

I was specifically directing my question to 2 Scoops, but if you want to answer the actual question I asked, feel free:

Do you believe that every single word that Kavanaugh said during his Senate testimony was truthful?

If you're tempted to reply with another evasive non-answer, please don't bother. I want to hear a straightforward yes or no answer to that simple question from anyone who has self-identified on this thread as a Kavanaugh supporter.

ELM327

oscarBravo wrote: »

I was specifically directing my question to 2 Scoops, but if you want to answer the actual question I asked, feel free:

Do you believe that every single word that Kavanaugh said during his Senate testimony was truthful?

If you're tempted to reply with another evasive non-answer, please don't bother. I want to hear a straightforward yes or no answer to that simple question from anyone who has self-identified on this thread as a Kavanaugh supporter.

I haven't self identified as anyone except someone who doesn't believe that an uncorroborated accusation should be enough to ruin someone's life.


I believe all answers to anything that mattered. I accept he probably lied about drinking or the colour of tea in china or something else but it's not related to the issue at hand and as such I (and obviously the majority of the senate) didn't care.

everlast75

ELM327 wrote: »

I haven't self identified as anyone except someone who doesn't believe that an uncorroborated accusation should be enough to ruin someone's life.


I believe all answers to anything that mattered. I accept he probably lied about drinking or the colour of tea in china or something else but it's not related to the issue at hand and as such I (and obviously the majority of the senate) didn't care.

So you don't believe a potential supreme court justice lying under oath to be a big deal?

Wow

Pa8301

everlast75 wrote: »

So you don't believe a potential supreme court justice lying under oath to be a big deal?

Wow

This poster drives around Ireland with a Trump sticker on his vehicle so that probably gives you an insight into where he's coming from and what he thinks is acceptable.