Quantcast
Should Brett Kavanaugh SCOTUS Nomination Continue?

Forums - Politics Discussion - Should Brett Kavanaugh SCOTUS Nomination Continue?

Should Brett Kavanaugh SCOTUS Nomination Continue?

Yes 53 47.32%
 
No 41 36.61%
 
Trump should pick a new canidate 18 16.07%
 
Total:112
jason1637 said:

If you're not aware whats going on a few months ago Trump nominated Brett Kavanaugh to the supremem court. The senate has had hearing throughout this and last week and soon there will be a vote to decide if he becomes a supremem court justice. But a women named Christen Ford accused him of raping her when they were 17 years old (36 years ago). Two other women have come foward also accusing Kavanaugh of rape. A lot of people have been saying that because of these allegation the vote should be delayed. Those defending Kavanaugh have said that that no solid evidence have been put foward and that it would be wrong to not go foward with the confirmation because there is a pssibility that he did not do it. Some have even claimed that this is a setup by the Democrats because they had recieved word of the accusation over twenty days ago and did not act on it til weeks later.

So Trump recently ordered the FBI to investigate these accusation but instead of waiting for the investigation to happen Mitch McConnel is moving foward with the nomination.

Do you think the nomination should be postponed or should it continue?

I just find really suspicious that just now she is reporting the rape, instead of doing it 36 years ago.  Why now?? maybe because he is nominated as supremem, the "anti Trump people with power" just want to stop this from happening.

Also, even in the extreme case that the rape indeed occur, you can not prove it actually occurred 36 years after the event happened.

This is just basically a case that "I will frame you with rape" so that your image is tarnished, and since it was soooooo long ago it may or it may not be true; so the woman cant be considered "liar" by public opinion.

Having said this; the nomination must continue.



Around the Network
Snoopy said:
Should continue. Sorry women, but you're not going to ruin someone's life without proof.

I agree.



PwerlvlAmy said:
Absolutely continue. Innocent until proven guilty. No evidence that he's guilty(thus far). Vote should happen by mid next week as it passed the committee earlier today to send it to the floor and the 7th FBI check will be pretty quick.

I agree.



Signalstar said:
No it should not continue. Kavanaugh proved he is a vengeful, partisan hack with his responses yesterday. He blamed democrats and the left for conspiring against him. He will be a judge for all Americans but he showed his animus to half the country. He only did this because he knows he only needs 51 votes rather than 60. The lower threshold means he only has to appeal to the conservative base. Trump should pick another conservative judge.

Just because you don't like him, it does not mean that the reason which is on topic ("rape that occurred 36 years ago, and she did not say a thing back then") should be considered as an excuse to remove him from the nomination.



COKTOE said:
Wyrdness said:

Not really the picture for some reason some how symbolises how this thread is turning out.

I though it was great moment the photographer captured there. Lots of good "looks on faces" The blonde woman frowning and grimacing was my favorite.

The best thing about that photo is that those people are actually his family and friends.  Family on the left side of the photo, friends on the right side.



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

Around the Network
Heavenly_King said:

I just find really suspicious that just now she is reporting the rape, instead of doing it 36 years ago.  Why now?? maybe because he is nominated as supremem, the "anti Trump people with power" just want to stop this from happening.

Also, even in the extreme case that the rape indeed occur, you can not prove it actually occurred 36 years after the event happened.

Regardless of her motives in bringing it up now, I suspect the reason she didn't report it at the time was because back then, the vast majority of rape cases boiled down to nothing more than one person's word against another, with convictions generally only occurring in instances where the rapist was either dumb enough to carry out the attack in a place where they could be easily caught, or had enough of a conscience to confess to the crime. Hence, a lot of rape victims never reported what happened to them. It was only in the mid-late 90s that being able to prove an attack via DNA evidence and the like really became a widespread thing.



SpokenTruth said:
COKTOE said:

I though it was great moment the photographer captured there. Lots of good "looks on faces" The blonde woman frowning and grimacing was my favorite.

The best thing about that photo is that those people are actually his family and friends.  Family on the left side of the photo, friends on the right side.

Oh wow. Lol. Didn't know that.



Chinese food for breakfast

 

Heavenly_King said:
Signalstar said:
No it should not continue. Kavanaugh proved he is a vengeful, partisan hack with his responses yesterday. He blamed democrats and the left for conspiring against him. He will be a judge for all Americans but he showed his animus to half the country. He only did this because he knows he only needs 51 votes rather than 60. The lower threshold means he only has to appeal to the conservative base. Trump should pick another conservative judge.

Just because you don't like him, it does not mean that the reason which is on topic ("rape that occurred 36 years ago, and she did not say a thing back then") should be considered as an excuse to remove him from the nomination.

Not ONE word in my post makes reference to the attempted sexual assault allegation. I do not think it can be definitively proven to have happened or not happened. I err on the side of believing he is innocent in tthe absence of concrete evidence.

 

HOWEVER in defending himself from the allegation he displayed an unbelievable and unacceptable amount of partisan bias and hatred for the opposing side for someone who wants a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court  It's not a matter of me liking him or not (I don't) but I cannot trust him to be ffair in his rulings based on his incoherent and rambling screed. I am not alone iin my concern.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F1gWECYYOSo

Please Watch/Share this video so it gets shown in Hollywood.

Signalstar said:
Heavenly_King said:

Just because you don't like him, it does not mean that the reason which is on topic ("rape that occurred 36 years ago, and she did not say a thing back then") should be considered as an excuse to remove him from the nomination.

Not ONE word in my post makes reference to the attempted sexual assault allegation. I do not think it can be definitively proven to have happened or not happened. I err on the side of believing he is innocent in tthe absence of concrete evidence.

 

HOWEVER in defending himself from the allegation he displayed an unbelievable and unacceptable amount of partisan bias and hatred for the opposing side for someone who wants a lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court  It's not a matter of me liking him or not (I don't) but I cannot trust him to be ffair in his rulings based on his incoherent and rambling screed. I am not alone iin my concern.

I second this exact concern.



Massimus - "Trump already has democrat support."

Voting happening this week. Hype.



NND: 0047-7271-7918 | XBL: Nights illusion | PSN: GameNChick