Will Brett Kavanaugh be a fair and impartial judge?

Sorry, but I doubt that is possible. It's okay if you want to blame me. I'm used to it.

 

Hillary seems to be doing okay.

 

That is not what a gentleman would have done. From a certain level of society Kavanaugh came off as a crybaby. Kind of a low class move. It even distracts from the issue of guilt or innocence. It displays an inferior, weak character.

 

Ok then. I see flaimbait is all you’re willing to do. That’s unfortunate. I do still believe you are an intelligent person and that you are occasionally capable of having a reasonable discussion but if you’ve been driven so low by trumps presidency and Kavnanaughs soon ascent to the Supreme Court then I guess you simply fall in the sane category with the rest of your fellow alt leftists on this forum.

 

Oh boo hoo dude. “He was mad therefore he’s GUILTYYYUY!!!” You guys have dragged him through the most disgusting political hit job in history and then you bet sore when he gets mad about it? Pathetic.

 

A truly innocent man defends himself vehemently. I would have lost my ****.

 

Before the hearing they thought Kavanaugh wouldn't be tough enough in defending himself. He showed them he was and why would you expect less from a man with an impeccable record to have his name dragged through the mud?

 

That was before these latest accusations.

 

Obama!

 

Anything that crushes liberals into dust particles is good for America

But just because I would not show mercy to liberal and their political agenda does not mean Kavanagh will be as vendictive

After all he grew up in the liberal culture thst is attacking him now

 

There is no common ground remaining in America between left and right

If you think I’m mean wait till linersls have the power

They will be far worse than anything I am capable

 

Its your fault

Libs created an enemy in Kavanaugh

 

This is he kind of all inclusive, black and white thinking, that make compromise difficult. Are you prepared to swear, under oath, that there are NO Liberals who value the Constitution? ( it was constructed in the past, after all), and that there are no Conservatives who value any progress what-so-ever?

"Liberals want to move society forward" toward what end exactly? 1984?

 

Perhaps, but a gentleman comports himself in a more honorable way. I have no respect for people who acted as Kavanaugh did. I was once falsely accused. Or should I say maliciously accused. Throughout I remained cool, calm, collected, and articulate, polite even. It was my accusers' emotional bumbling that got them mixed up in their lies. We didn't even get all the way through the trial when the judge acquitted me, citing wrong doing on the part of my accusers.

I highly suspect that the FBI investigation will show that Kavanaugh was a heavy drinking party boy in his youth. Possibly involving inappropriate behavior.

 

He got his start digging up dirt on Bill Clinton. He most likely became a judge as a reward for his partisan efforts. He has been an enemy all along.

 

By all accounts he has been, why would he not be on the SCOTUS.

 

The Starr OIC didn't have to dig for dirt on Clinton, it was dumped in their laps. Why should his service on that team disqualify him from serving on the SCOTUS?

 

Speaking of 1984, the primary difference between conservatives and liberals, is that conservatives think that right-wing rhetoric reflects reality. Liberals don't.

 

The whole Starr investigation/Clinton impeachment was a political hatchet job. Paula Jones was cultivated and proven to be so non-credible that the judge threw the case out.

 

Paula Jones had nothing to do with Starr and the Judge did not dismiss her lawsuit because it was not credible. She dismissed it because Jones could not prove tangible harm which at that time the law was interpreted to require. The Burlington decision changed that to the person harassed only had to show a reasonable fear of tangible harm. Jones refiled her lawsuit and Clinton settled for $900,000 dollars. He had no defense. The Starr investigation into the perjury and obstruction of justice in the the Jones federal lawsuit started when evidence the President and another person had conspired to committed perjury and obstruction of justice in that federal lawsuit and then did so. They confirmed the evidence and turned it over to Janet Reno to investigate and prosecute. She turned back over to his office since he was already investigating the President and his associates. Starr didn't go digging for anything.

 

And how do you suppose that's going to happen? Credit card records? Chances are in those days at his age he didn't have one, and if by some miracle I'm wrong about that, I'm all but certain records pertaining to it no longer do. Surveillance video? Ditto.

Eyewitness testimony? That's problematic for a number of reasons. First, ALL of the purported eyewitnesses to date have either outright denied it, or at best (for your allegation) said they have no knowledge about it. Secondly, and perhaps more importantly, after that amount of time, memories have a way of fooling people.

Let me tell you a story. About me. I went to West Point. During that time, I was a member of the drill team. During THAT time, we interacted with and hung out with the Silent Drill Platoon of the USMC. TO THIS DAY, my brain tells me that while they were there, one of their members got sick or injured, and for reasons I can't explain, I was tapped to substitute for him during a half-time performance at the Army football game. Somehow, I knew the routine. Perhaps I fit in his uniform the best. Who knows, you could probably imagine a couple of dozen possible reasons.

But here's the thing. Not so many years ago I randomly ran into a person who back in the day was either a member of that platoon, or was closely affiliated enough to have insider knowledge. Put simply, the idea that I as a West Point Cadet would be "tagged in" to substitute is literally impossible. They have MULTIPLE backups, and in the pert near impossible event that ALL their backups got sick or injured and couldn't perform, they would have cancelled the performance. Under NO circumstances would they have brought in an outsider, even if they knew the routine, even if they fit the uniform, as a substitute.

Now, despite the fact that I now KNOW the events that I can "remember" did not and would never have happened, my brain STILL tells me they did.

Why? I don't know. Perhaps I had a dream that over decades my brain turned into a memory of reality. Maybe we practiced together. Hell, maybe when hanging out, one of them got drunk and told me if I was in the right place at the right time under the right circumstances that it "might" happen. I find that unlikely, but the fact is there is SOMETHING in my psyche that, let me remind you TO THIS DAY insists happened, I know intellectually that it did not.

Conclusion? Decades old memories are all but useless.

 

Yet today Bill Cosby sits in a prison cell based on decades old memories of previously unreported atttacks.
Ditto some priests.
And in those cases there were trials and juries that found them guilty.
No one is putting Kavanaugh on trial but they are questioning his fitness to be the final arbiter in cases that very well may be about high school and college "hijinks". Knowing now what we do about his background can we trust him? Imagine if the "afluenza" case went before him. Would he think "Nothing I didn't do in my youth and I turned out OK" ? There's no one above him. His court is the final and defining court.
After hearing snippets of his testimony I can't help but wonder if Trump helped write his statement. It was one Trumpette talking point after another. Women in America should fear him. The rest of us as well because there is a distinct probability that something from Trump is going to the supreme court soon. When that happens I really want someone a lot more independent than a Trumpette on the court.

 

I would suggest he will be a counter to Ginsberg,

There is no evidence of anything other that the hyper partisan lynching being conducted by the New Democratic Party, and their intellectually vacant acolytes.

 

He worked for the Ken Starr Special Councils office

If thats a lifetime disqualifer for you I cant help that

But it was honest work

 

He has always been so why would he change now. He may have a distaste, and understandably so for some of those in that room, but that doesn't mean he can not be fair and impartial to others.[/QUOTE]