Kavanaugh's Ethics Violations to be Investigated

[Perknose]

Kavanaugh once lobbied for judge now handling ethics complaints against him

Read the article and decide for yourself whether this raises any concerns for you.

I, for one, have severe doubts that the many ethics violations charged against Kavanaugh -- including outright, factually demonstrable beyond the shadow of any doubt, instances of his perjury -- will be investigated in a forthright and, ummmm, ethical manner.

 

[SlowSpyder]

Keep fighting the good fight.

 

[soundforbjt]

Ethics no longer exist in the Republican version of the dictionary, unless you are a Democrat.

 

[Perknose]

Keep fighting the good fight.

Thanks. In spite of your sarcastic and arrogant, a priori dismissiveness, I will, confident that history, ethics and factual reality are on my side.

 

[senseamp]

Another fake investigation. He, OJ and MBS are going to go looking for the real rapists/killers.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Perhaps someone can enlighten me. I had read that ethics investigations were dropped once Kavanaugh assumed office and that ethics violations do not apply to the SCOTUS as they would lower courts as there's no superior set of justices at this point.

I am unsure how this all would work in a punitive sense unless the purpose is otherwise.

 

[UNCjigga]

Perhaps someone can enlighten me. I had read that ethics investigations were dropped once Kavanaugh assumed office and that ethics violations do not apply to the SCOTUS as they would lower courts as there's no superior set of justices at this point.

I am unsure how this all would work in a punitive sense unless the purpose is otherwise.

Pretty sure this is the same Investigation that hit the Chief Justice's desk, and Roberts then punted it to a court of his choosing.

But I can't answer your question on who has purview over SCOTUS ethics Investigations...not sure if Chief Justice has that role spelled out anywhere.

 

[Perknose]

Perhaps someone can enlighten me. I had read that ethics investigations were dropped once Kavanaugh assumed office and that ethics violations do not apply to the SCOTUS as they would lower courts as there's no superior set of justices at this point.

I am unsure how this all would work in a punitive sense unless the purpose is otherwise.

I'd say the purpose it to get at the legal truth of all this, for the record.

And, for the record, the complaints were tendered to the Chief Justice before Kavanaugh was confirmed. But Roberts delayed acting until after his confirmation and then punted it to a judge ideologically sympathetic to and personally beholding to Kavanaugh.

But, HEY, nothing to see here, folks, so move along.

 

[HomerJS]

Democrats will pick this up once they take over the House. They will subpoena his ass so many time his SC seat won't even get warm.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

including outright, factually demonstrable beyond the shadow of any doubt, instances of his perjury --

You have a link?

 

[HomerJS]

You have a link?

He said it so it's true. Trump standards.

 

[imported_tajmahal]

He said it so it's true. Trump standards.

I thought so. Thanks for the clarification.

 

[SlowSpyder]

You have a link?

They're so petty they're looking at a calendar he had from high school pretending they have something.

And it is stupid anyway. Let's say for argument's sake when he was in high school he got drunk and got overly aggressive and did something stupid. He's been a Boy Scout for the last 35 years and shown competency in his profession. If he had a history like Bill Clinton or something I'd understand, but trying to stop Kavanaugh over this alleged situation on its own seems a bit weak to begin with.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

But, HEY, nothing to see here, folks, so move along.

You risk being smacked by a lake trout.

For my part, I'd like to see the facts come out, but this is different from them being actionable. I was wondering if the purpose might have been more than ascertaining the facts but to somehow to challenge the immunity of SCOTUS members legally.

There is no "nothing to see move along" whatsoever in my question.

 

[HomerJS]

They're so petty they're looking at a calendar he had from high school pretending they have something.

And it is stupid anyway. Let's say for argument's sake when he was in high school he got drunk and got overly aggressive and did something stupid. He's been a Boy Scout for the last 35 years and shown competency in his profession. If he had a history like Bill Clinton or something I'd understand, but trying to stop Kavanaugh over this alleged situation on its own seems a bit weak to begin with.

If that's all it was and it is possible why lie about it?

 

[SlowSpyder]

You risk being smacked by a lake trout.

For my part, I'd like to see the facts come out, but this is different from them being actionable. I was wondering if the purpose might have been more than ascertaining the facts but to somehow to challenge the immunity of SCOTUS members legally.

There is no "nothing to see move along" whatsoever in my question.

That is an Asian carp.

 

[SlowSpyder]

If that's all it was and it is possible why lie about it?

What lie(s) in particular?

 

[HomerJS]

What lie(s) in particular?

I'm saying if it happened like you asserted. We already know he lied about things in his yearbook.

 

[soulcougher73]

What lie(s) in particular?

The fun ones are boofing, devils triangle and the alumni woman. There are more but we like these because they are funny. These are known lies.

Granted they are silly and he should have never brought his calender, but he still lied about what took place. Its the small things.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

That is an Asian carp.

Definitely of the North Korean variety.

 

[Lanyap]

Pretty sure this is the same Investigation that hit the Chief Justice's desk, and Roberts then punted it to a court of his choosing.

But I can't answer your question on who has purview over SCOTUS ethics Investigations...not sure if Chief Justice has that role spelled out anywhere.

First part is correct. IIRC more complaints were originally filed but only these 15 were considered for further investigation. Articles talks about what could happen in this situation.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...5875bac0b1f_story.html?utm_term=.8f699bf4c6e5

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. on Wednesday referred more than a dozen judicial misconduct complaints filed recently against Brett M. Kavanaugh to a federal appeals court in Colorado.

The 15 complaints, related to statements Kavanaugh made during his Senate confirmation hearings, were initially filed with the federal appeals court in Washington, where Kavanaugh served for the last 12 years before his confirmation Saturday to the Supreme Court.

The allegations center on whether Kavanaugh was dishonest and lacked judicial temperament during his Senate testimony, according to people familiar with the matter.

Last month, a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit asked Roberts to refer the complaints to another appeals court for review after determining that they should not be handled by judges who served with Kavanaugh on the D.C. appellate court.

 

[tweaker2]

Kavanaugh has the backing of the POTUS of whom is relying on Kavanaugh to keep his ass from prematurely getting kicked out of office.

This deal made in Hell between this matched pair of privileged arrogant miscreants is going to keep Kavanaugh right where he is because the Repub controlled Congress being the pussy whipped thoroughly corrupted cowards that they are is going to give these complaints the same Houdini treatment they gave those accusations of predatory sexual behavior against Kavanaugh at the hearings.

 

[Atreus21]

Kavanaugh once lobbied for judge now handling ethics complaints against him

Read the article and decide for yourself whether this raises any concerns for you.

I, for one, have severe doubts that the many ethics violations charged against Kavanaugh -- including outright, factually demonstrable beyond the shadow of any doubt, instances of his perjury -- will be investigated in a forthright and, ummmm, ethical manner.

Someone submitted ethics complaints because he got overly emotional and angry when he testified?

I mean the "perjury" foolishness constituted at least some straws at which to grasp. But this is just pathetic. "We can call you a gang rapist when you were 15. You cant get angry or we file an ethics complaint."