Did Judge Kavanaugh

[cytg111]

Won't SOMEONE think of the CHILDREN?!?!!?

Please seek mental help lol


View attachment 41238

This is my point. He aint even funny anymore, just full on slow-script.

 

[hal2kilo]

So much for turning over complaints about Kavanaugh the FBI collected, then just turned over to the Trump admin.

Of course Trump stalled the Brett Kavanaugh probe: Republicans never cared about #MeToo | Salon.com

The idea that Kavanaugh is the victim of overzealous feminists and opportunist Democrats has less to do with a belief that he's innocent and more about a belief that it shouldn't matter if men do things like this. It's all tied up with the ongoing outrage on the right about "cancel culture" and "wokeness." The anger flows from a conservative sense of entitlement to do and say awful things without having to face any consequences for it. You see a similar dynamic in the fights over what the right falsely describes as "critical race theory." Few deny that the U.S. has a history of slavery, segregation, or lynching. Conservatives just want liberals to quit talking about it, because, ultimately, they don't see why it should matter. And, in fact, they're annoyed that "woke" people keep insisting that these things do matter.

 

[nakedfrog]

So much for turning over complaints about Kavanaugh the FBI collected, then just turned over to the Trump admin.

Of course Trump stalled the Brett Kavanaugh probe: Republicans never cared about #MeToo | Salon.com

The idea that Kavanaugh is the victim of overzealous feminists and opportunist Democrats has less to do with a belief that he's innocent and more about a belief that it shouldn't matter if men do things like this. It's all tied up with the ongoing outrage on the right about "cancel culture" and "wokeness." The anger flows from a conservative sense of entitlement to do and say awful things without having to face any consequences for it. You see a similar dynamic in the fights over what the right falsely describes as "critical race theory." Few deny that the U.S. has a history of slavery, segregation, or lynching. Conservatives just want liberals to quit talking about it, because, ultimately, they don't see why it should matter. And, in fact, they're annoyed that "woke" people keep insisting that these things do matter.

Well, yeah, they've done that sort of thing for so long, it really stings to have it taken away.

 

[HomerJS]

The AG should finish the investigations and make the findings public. Boof can't be impeached now but the American people deserve the truth.

 

[interchange]

The AG should finish the investigations and make the findings public. Boof can't be impeached now but the American people deserve the truth.

Why can't he be impeached?

 

[Moonbeam]

Why can't he be impeached?

2/3 of the Senate Required so he can and can’t be impeached.

 

[interchange]

2/3 of the Senate Required so he can and can’t be impeached.

Technicalities (actually just like President House majority for impeachment and 2/3 Senate vote to convict). But I took @HomerJS to mean it wasn't legally possibly.

 

[Moonbeam]

Technicalities (actually just like President House majority for impeachment and 2/3 Senate vote to convict). But I took @HomerJS to mean it wasn't legally possibly.

That is certainly how it sounds like it should imply but since I didn't myself know and it took only a minute to inform myself I figured he must have done the same leaving only the 2/3 problem for conviction and they couldn't convict Trump who committed treason before our very eyes.

 

[interchange]

That is certainly how it sounds like it should imply but since I didn't myself know and it took only a minute to inform myself I figured he must have done the same leaving only the 2/3 problem for conviction and they couldn't convict Trump who committed treason before our very eyes.

I agree he would not be convicted in this political climate barring something more substantial like something being caught on tape or criminal charges, and neither of those things makes any sense to me to suddenly materialize at this point in time. I do think it needs to be considered whether it makes sense to pursue impeachment regardless (presuming an investigation finds grounds). I am in favor of that mostly on moral and good governance grounds.

 

[HomerJS]

Technicalities (actually just like President House majority for impeachment and 2/3 Senate vote to convict). But I took @HomerJS to mean it wasn't legally possibly.

I meant politically. But let the record come out to mute this prick

 

[darkswordsman17]

Kavanaugh could rape one of the other Supreme Court Justices and Republicans would laud him as a hero, so yeah there's not gonna be enough political will to oust him. Would be interesting to see what exactly the FBI was prevented from investigating though.

 

[Moonbeam]

I agree he would not be convicted in this political climate barring something more substantial like something being caught on tape or criminal charges, and neither of those things makes any sense to me to suddenly materialize at this point in time. I do think it needs to be considered whether it makes sense to pursue impeachment regardless (presuming an investigation finds grounds). I am in favor of that mostly on moral and good governance grounds.

This thread has been the caused of some guilty self reflection. I have thought back to a time when I had fallen down drunk and looking up asked for help. I can't begin to understand why I find it so very shameful that I actually asked for help fron a position of near helplessness, or how ashamed I am to have put myself there. Well I have an obvious theory. Never been drunk like that again. But could I ever consider myself to have judicial temperament based on that one example. I can't think of a job I would never want to have than being a judge. Way way too judgmental for that. Which brings me to another topic:

I made a cutting remark about Clarence Thomas earlier in this thread, ( edit: Actually #8 in the FFRF thread. ) referring to a can of coke and a pubic hair. Then, as it happened I watched an interview of Clarence Thomas, one I now have lost track of as a link. But it was rather long and personal, the latter being the catch. I judged this man without knowing the first thing about him as a real person rather than what I had heard from others, namely the left, about him and I was forced to see something else. I saw a man bound by his grandfather to a strict moral code when faced with indignities, of the kind I cast on him. I saw a man brought up in a strict authoritarian environment, one that demanded a very hard self restraint, one that in the face of endless racial injustice and indignity demanded of Thomas that he had an obligation to succeed given the openings granted by racial progress to seize those new privileges offered.

Anyway I judged a man and I am sorry I did. I took a stand on he said she said to make a glib remark.

Now I have a better understanding of a man I believe is trapped in a profoundly moral code of ethics but one belonging to the past. I think I know how I would argue with him. He was molded to seize the opportunities of new privileges opening up in society. I ran away from all those I was automatically granted and had aplenty to become a nobody. All of it felt as if it had no meaning and I had to find out if anything did. Perhaps the story of the Princess and the Pea.

 

[uclaLabrat]

Current political climate aside, no way McConnell let's that vote happen; biden and a dem senate would undo his garland disappearing trick and that's one of his greatest accomplishments.