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
SuaveSocialist said:
NightlyPoe said:

Not really.  The term "investigating" is a misnomer.  

Federal Bureau of _____________ (full in the blank)

That is not as persuasive an argument as you likely believe.



Around the Network
NightlyPoe said:
SuaveSocialist said:

Federal Bureau of _____________ (full in the blank)

That is not as persuasive an argument as you likely believe.

Go on. Fill it. I believe in you. I’ll give you a hint: it’s the “I” in “FBI”.



The bitch is clearly lying. I think this will be the point where this metoo crap finally dies. It may have started with good intentions but as with everything third wave feminists just ruin it. Too many innocent men have been dragged into this and have had their reputations ruined.



Zucas said:
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 feel like I can be of help on this notion. For those that don't have a legal background, there is actually no explicit guarantee of "innocent until proven guilty" established in the US Constitution. Instead case law and precedent from the Supreme Court have established the notion as a combined part of the 5th, 6th, and 14th Amendment. There is no dispute in American legal precedent that there is presumption of innocence.

However, this doesn't mean the idea isn't misinterpreted. Presumption of innocence is ONLY a guarantee for criminal defendants. To better place that in the wording of the Constitution, such manners of due process are only guaranteed when life, liberty, or property are at stake. Finally, it must be a government actor that seeks to seize life, liberty, or property.

In Judge Kavanaugh's case, he is not a criminal defendant nor is a government actor seeking to seize his life, liberty, or property. Judge Kavanaugh is not owed this presumption. Frankly, as a Judge, he knows in this setting he isn't owed much of anything. However, Senate committee rules due try to provide some forms of due process to have a fair hearing when questioning nominees. 

 

For a lot of good reasons which I wont' get into here, presumption of innocence has little worth outside of the criminal context. Civil cases do not have this presumption for instance. Really it is meant to be a check on the executive branch to prevent unfair trials and proceedings where the government already enjoys more power. 

You might be right about that, but it is still wrong and morally bankrupt to condemn someone when there is no evidence that they did something wrong, especially this serious.



Switch friend-code: 6700-1526-7903

PSN: melbye82

I'm surprised that this thread has been (so far) so civil and even more surprised at the support shown for Kavanagh. I live in Europe so the idea of a new supreme court justice who will support the power of the president and overturn a woman's right to choose is not exactly appetising to me. That said, the guy seems qualified for the role and there aren't many people on earth who can do the job. If he were (still) a sexual predator we'd know by now and they wouldn't need to go back to his high school behavior to turn up something against him.

If I were guessing I'd say Kavanagh doesn't seem like he was a very nice young man. If the FBI can turn something up that merits prosecution then all bets will be off, but with the standard of proof needed for charges to be brought, I doubt anything will come of it. He should certainly be allowed to go ahead to a vote on the floor of the Senate absent a lot more evidence. I think the extra week's vetting was a sensible compromise.



Around the Network
SuaveSocialist said:
NightlyPoe said:

That is not as persuasive an argument as you likely believe.

Go on. Fill it. I believe in you. I’ll give you a hint: it’s the “I” in “FBI”.

You think you're being clever, but you're really making yourself look bad.

Just because the word investigation is in their title, does not mean they are performing that function now.  Again, there will be no conclusions drawn and no recommendations made.



NightlyPoe said:
SuaveSocialist said:

Go on. Fill it. I believe in you. I’ll give you a hint: it’s the “I” in “FBI”.

investigation

Congratulations!  I knew you could do it.



Sordel said:
If the FBI can turn something up that merits prosecution then all bets will be off, but with the standard of proof needed for charges to be brought, I doubt anything will come of it.

There's no standard of proof possible.  The statute of limitation expired 35 years ago.

I live in Europe so the idea of a new supreme court justice who will support the power of the president and overturn a woman's right to choose is not exactly appetising to me.

Kavanaugh is more likely to curtail the power of the president and the administrative agencies to construct policy.  Without getting a bit into the weeds, the court has shown a desire to reexamine the concept of Chevron deference lately.

As for abortion, the Supreme Court's granting of that right rested on very shaky reasoning.  And it's hurt the court as an institution ever since, probably more than any case in its history.  You can draw a direct line between Roe to why the composition of the court is so hotly contested.  Without that ruling judicial history would be much less divisive, the rise of originalism would be nowhere near as prominent, and abortion itself would likely be a lot less hotly contested because it would have been settled by state governments in a less all-or-nothing manner.



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.

Thanks for not Banning me over my opinion. Resetera did so and called it trolling a sensitive topic. Everyone in there was defending Ford so I defended Kavanaugh. I hope that site implodes if he's elected. 



3DS: 5429-9952-3189  Add me if you wish!

I honestly believe (can't prove 100%) that Ford is lying. However, the biggest losers are the Democrats. Using this as a way to postpone the vote for their own benefit is really screwed up.