SURVEY: Is Brett Kavanaugh suitable for the Supreme Court?

[Kieran00001]

2 minutes ago, TunnelRat69 said:

quite obvious she was lying under oath.  I watched it several times, and she was mostly reading from a script, testimony others wrote does not come off as sincere to me.  When asked a direct question, she would look left first, then right to her lawyers first, then answer..........not a believable witness.

 

Your analysis is tripe, checking with lawyers is what people are asked to do, it says nothing about their honesty.

 

If you want to see the actual body language of a liar then check out 3:46:24–3:46:47 of Brett's testimony, note how when questioned whether he sexually assaulted Ford he repeatedly nods his head while saying no, normally our verbal and non-verbal communication complement each other, however when we lie there is often a disparity, Brett nodding while saying no would be indicative of him lying.

 

As far as I can see from Google searches, all body language experts except for one YouTube 'expert' of Sandy Hook denial fame, concur that Ford was being honest while Brett was lying.

[Blue bruce]

I voted no but he still got appointed

[Kieran00001]

13 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

Google is your friend:

 

con·nec·tion

kəˈnekSH(ə)n/

noun

noun: connection; plural noun: connections; noun: connexion; plural noun: connexions

1.

a relationship in which a person, thing, or idea is linked or associated with something else.

"the connections between social attitudes and productivity"

synonyms:link, relationship, relation, interconnection, interdependence, association; More

the action of linking one thing with another.

"connection to the Internet"

the placing of parts of an electric circuit in contact so that a current may flow.

a link between pipes or electrical components.

"it is important to ensure that all connections between the wires are properly made"

synonyms:attachment, joint, fastening, coupling

"a poor connection in the plug"

a link between two telephones.

"she replaced the receiver before the connection was made"

an arrangement or opportunity for catching a connecting train, bus, aircraft, etc.

"ferry connections are sporadic in the off season"

a connecting train, bus, etc.

"we had to wait for our connection to Frankfurt"

people with whom one has social or professional contact or to whom one is related, especially those with influence and able to offer one help.

"he had connections with the music industry"

synonyms:contact, friend, acquaintance, ally, colleague, associate;More

2.

INFORMAL•NORTH AMERICAN

a supplier of narcotics.

"she introduced Jean to a number of her male drug connections"

a narcotics sale or purchase.

3.

HISTORICAL

an association of Methodist churches.

 

Read my statement again, reading comprehension is important. Glad I can help laymen out.

 

Let me be blunt: if you are seriously contending that Kavanaugh is guilty of perjury under the scenario you set forth, you clearly know absolutely nothing about the law and are merely parrotting political drivel. I find that amusing.

 

What did you post that for?  I would have thought you'd have wanted to support your claim that connection is a term of art in law instead of just copying everything from your dictionary which could only serve to demonstrate that you haven't the faintest idea of what you are talking about.  Connection is not a term of art in law.

 

Did you think this was the term of art?

Quote

people with whom one has social or professional contact or to whom one is related, especially those with influence and able to offer one help.

 

Edited October 7, 2018 by Kieran00001

[Nyezhov]

15 minutes ago, TunnelRat69 said:

Bill Clinton was impeached, but was allowed to stay in office...........

no he wasnt "convicted" would be the way to phrase it.

 

Articles of Impeachment

Impeachment

Judgement of Impeachment 

thats how it goes iirc. no judgement against billy

[MyFriend You]

12 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Your analysis is tripe, checking with lawyers is what people are asked to do, it says nothing about their honesty.

 

If you want to see the actual body language of a liar then check out 3:46:24–3:46:47 of Brett's testimony, note how when questioned whether he sexually assaulted Ford he repeatedly nods his head while saying no, normally our verbal and non-verbal communication complement each other, however when we lie there is often a disparity, Brett nodding while saying no would be indicative of him lying.

 

As far as I can see from Google searches, all body language experts except for one YouTube 'expert' of Sandy Hook denial fame, concur that Ford was being honest while Brett was lying.

I'll take your word for it, this was not a trial, I have no dog in this fight, but I didn't believe her.  If my any of my sisters had done this I wouldn't have believed them either.........its just  based on her mannerisms and practiced speech gave me suspect.  The other guy started out with a bang, then as soon as he came to speaking about his family and how they are affected, he started breaking down.............you could say both of them are telling the truth - as they believe it to be.  and as another posted says, a celebrated sex crime prosecutor doesn't believe her either and has tried hundreds of sex crime cases..............so nam na

Edited October 7, 2018 by TunnelRat69

[Nyezhov]

3 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

Connection is not a term of art in law.

Did I say it was? Are you arguing for the sake of arguing, or trying to win a war to satisfy your ego needs?

 

Perhaps the latter as evidenced by your tone and thinly veiled ad hominems.

 

Justice Kavanaugh did not commit perjury regarding his "connection" statement and no reasonable thinking person with the slightest knowledge of US law would say otherwise. Its so flimsy its not even Sol's famous ham sarnie.

 

Lavrentii used to say: Show me the man and I will show you the crime. Carry on and Take care

[Kieran00001]

3 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

Did I say it was? Are you arguing for the sake of arguing, or trying to win a war to satisfy your ego needs?

 

Perhaps the latter as evidenced by your tone and thinly veiled ad hominems.

 

Justice Kavanaugh did not commit perjury regarding his "connection" statement and no reasonable thinking person with the slightest knowledge of US law would say otherwise. Its so flimsy its not even Sol's famous ham sarnie.

 

Lavrentii used to say: Show me the man and I will show you the crime. Carry on and Take care

You said

Quote

"Connections" is a term of art in the English language especially in the context of his statement

 

Your, "Term of art in the English language" is something you have already been asked to explain, however you have failed to do so.  There is a term called Term of Art in law, which means a specific legal term applied to a term that could have other meanings in common use.

 

Connections, is not a term of art, and yes you did say it was.  It is actually the opposite, it is a term that is not defined in law and so there is a degree of ambiguity, however it is clear that he was using it to mean "people with whom one has social or professional contact or to whom one is related".

 

You continue to make claims about what other people would say, unfortunately you are let down by your inability to provide any reasoning.

 

[quandow]

I really am saddened to see the ignorant posts supporting Crybaby Kavanaugh. And I say ignorant because they are either unaware or intentionally ignoring the truth of why Trump needed THIS PARTICULAR <deleted> for his nominee. 

WATCH how Crybaby Kavanaugh votes on Gamble vs USA. What this decision comes down to is, if Trump is charged with a crime then pardons himself, he could STILL be indicted at the state level after his term in office. This decision PROTECTS him. WAKE UP!!!

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/gamble-v-united-states/

[theonetrueaussie]

Lol you guys are still at it...End of the day it came down to common sense and the people making the allegations against him did not pass the common sense test. Ford lied on multiple occasions and only agenda was to try and postpone the vote till after the midterm elections, she couldn't remember anything that could corroborate her story but I think the main reason was so that her story could not be proven false. When you show up with 2 democrat lawyers who's sole purpose is to push the democrat agenda at any cost does not really make you believable.

As for the other accusations we are supposed to believe that these rape parties happened every weekend back in the day and no one told their parents, their friends or the police about them. Not 1 witness could be found to corroborate that it happened but most unbelievable is that the woman was so terrified and so scared that it could happen to her but she kept going back every weekend.....

Anybody with a shred of common sense would take a look at those allegations and see that there was no truth behind them and that is most likely what the FBI did too.   

[Jingthing]

38 minutes ago, theonetrueaussie said:

Lol you guys are still at it...End of the day it came down to common sense and the people making the allegations against him did not pass the common sense test. Ford lied on multiple occasions and only agenda was to try and postpone the vote till after the midterm elections, she couldn't remember anything that could corroborate her story but I think the main reason was so that her story could not be proven false. When you show up with 2 democrat lawyers who's sole purpose is to push the democrat agenda at any cost does not really make you believable.

As for the other accusations we are supposed to believe that these rape parties happened every weekend back in the day and no one told their parents, their friends or the police about them. Not 1 witness could be found to corroborate that it happened but most unbelievable is that the woman was so terrified and so scared that it could happen to her but she kept going back every weekend.....

Anybody with a shred of common sense would take a look at those allegations and see that there was no truth behind them and that is most likely what the FBI did too.   

Common sense? 

I think not.

More like politically convenient absurd junk theories of false identity.

The supreme court is supreme no more.

It has now lost ALL legitimacy. 

The USA is truly going down the drain thanks to the evil demagogue "trump" movement which makes Joseph McCarthy look like Mary Poppins in comparison.

Hasn't been this divided since the civil war, and it's going to get even worse.

 

Quote

 

The junk science Republicans used to undermine Ford and help save Kavanaugh

...

Like other researchers, she could not recall a single case of a sexual assault victim misremembering a known attacker — save for rare instances in which people, often children, were coached into falsely accusing friends and family members.

 

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2018/10/07/republicans-who-believed-ford-doubted-her-memory-relied-junk-science-researchers-say/?utm_term=.b09682b72199

Edited October 7, 2018 by Jingthing

[Becker]

2 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

Did I say it was? Are you arguing for the sake of arguing, or trying to win a war to satisfy your ego needs?

 

Perhaps the latter as evidenced by your tone and thinly veiled ad hominems.

 

Justice Kavanaugh did not commit perjury regarding his "connection" statement and no reasonable thinking person with the slightest knowledge of US law would say otherwise. Its so flimsy its not even Sol's famous ham sarnie.

 

Lavrentii used to say: Show me the man and I will show you the crime. Carry on and Take care

"Did I say it was? Are you arguing for the sake of arguing, or trying to win a war to satisfy your ego needs?" 

LOL, just love the way the man-child supporters insist on being the pot that calls the kettle black! 

 

"Lavrentii used to say: Show me the man and I will show you the crime."

Here's a piece of advice. Your infatuation/obsession with old Soviet henchmen is not exactly a sign of a healthy mind. Maybe you should tone it down. 

[dundas]

I think a supreme court judge should be measured, non-partisan and objective. I didn't see any of these attributes in Brett K's appearances at all. 

 

More to the point, the 'take no prisoners, we are at war' mentality of right vs left in the US is reaching the point where IMO it's destroying the country's institutions and will eventually weaken the country. 

[simple1]

9 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

Alternatively, one could say the vitriol spewed by those who hate President Trump underlines the damage being done to the American polity by folks who are still not willing to accept the results of the election.

Rubbish. A divisive meme repeated by trump and his supporters. Dislike and criticism of Trump is a direct result of his own words and actions.

[UncleTouchyFingers]

Hes absolutely suitable for the Supreme Court, and the fact that the Dems did every filthy thing they could to try and stop him and he still made it through is just icing on the cake. He was pretty conservative before all this crap, and now I hope he leans even further right in his rulings/opinions just out of spite. 

 

Next up is RBG's seat, and Amy Coney Barrett will do nicely. 

 

Trumps presidency is turning out even better than I had ever hoped, and I couldn't care less what any unhinged liberal thinks. It should serve as a reality check for them. Conservatism is on the rise, and this latest show from the Dems just multiplied it. 

 

Man I cant wait until some of these unconstitutional gun laws hit the desk of the Supreme Court now. Time for new precedent. 

[simple1]

3 hours ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

Hes absolutely suitable for the Supreme Court, and the fact that the Dems did every filthy thing they could to try and stop him and he still made it through is just icing on the cake. He was pretty conservative before all this crap, and now I hope he leans even further right in his rulings/opinions just out of spite. 

 

Next up is RBG's seat, and Amy Coney Barrett will do nicely. 

 

Trumps presidency is turning out even better than I had ever hoped, and I couldn't care less what any unhinged liberal thinks. It should serve as a reality check for them. Conservatism is on the rise, and this latest show from the Dems just multiplied it. 

 

Man I cant wait until some of these unconstitutional gun laws hit the desk of the Supreme Court now. Time for new precedent. 

This post demonstrates exactly why the majority of the US public were against Kavanaugh's appointment. The rise of hard right authorianism promoted by trump will prove to be to the detriment of the USA.

Edited October 7, 2018 by simple1

[Kelsall]

5 hours ago, UncleTouchyFingers said:

Hes absolutely suitable for the Supreme Court, and the fact that the Dems did every filthy thing they could to try and stop him and he still made it through is just icing on the cake. He was pretty conservative before all this crap, and now I hope he leans even further right in his rulings/opinions just out of spite. 

 

Next up is RBG's seat, and Amy Coney Barrett will do nicely. 

 

Trumps presidency is turning out even better than I had ever hoped, and I couldn't care less what any unhinged liberal thinks. It should serve as a reality check for them. Conservatism is on the rise, and this latest show from the Dems just multiplied it. 

 

Man I cant wait until some of these unconstitutional gun laws hit the desk of the Supreme Court now. Time for new precedent. 

Agree on all points and let's not forget President Trump is packing the lower federal courts with conservative judges.  President Trump's impact will be felt for generations. And he has six years to go!

[Nyezhov]

9 hours ago, quandow said:

WATCH how Crybaby Kavanaugh votes on Gamble vs USA. What this decision comes down to is, if Trump is charged with a crime then pardons himself, he could STILL be indicted at the state level after his term in office. This decision PROTECTS him. WAKE UP!!!

http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/gamble-v-united-states/

It does nothing of the sort. Have you read the case? Are you familiar with the precedents? 

[bristolboy]

13 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

Evidently English is not your first language? Please look up the phrase "term of art" as to what it means and apply the appropriate definition of "connection".

 

The rest of your analysis is specious. Lets just assume, therefore, that you consider the "Connections" comment to be perjury. I wont belabour the point further, the debate we have had speaks for itself and I guess who is right and who is wrong will be decided by the gallery herein, since it will never be tested in a Court of Law. Until the Democrats achieve the power they seek, there is no real Cheka here, albiet some wannabes....

Given Brett Kavanaugh's take on the 4th amendment, the advent of the Cheka may be closer than you think.

[bristolboy]

11 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

Well in terms of your "Yale" point....what does Yale have to say? You know, dont you? So much for that one.

 

The DNA was corroboration under Wood. So if Bill said "i never had sex with that woman" under oath, and Monica said, "O yeah...well I nibbled that knockwurst, and here is the chowder you drizzled on my dress".  Billy DNA! Lie, contradiction, corroboration.

 

As opposed to "Hey I had no connections to get into Yale Law School". "Oh yeah, your Grandpappy was an undergraduate there". "Um guys, as the Dean of Doofus here at Yale, I can assure you that it made no difference". Next.

 

Got another one we can discuss? Maybe you can convince me. 

Because there's no such thing as legacy preference?

https://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/06/education/edlife/being-a-legacy-has-its-burden.html

[AlQaholic]

I am extremely surprised and shocked that there are so many on here that think Kavanaugh is suitable for the supreme court. In my years in high school and university, I never encountered such depravity as is described in this guy's yearbook and classmates testimony. Yes, we partied on occasion. Taking alcohol up your butt? But in the end, there is only one thing that needs to be checked to disqualify him, lying under oath. And I'm not talking about the alleged rape attempt, but of the numerous emails, he received about spying on the Democrats, of which he said he knew nothing about. He was a political operative working with Starr, his hate for the Clinton's shone through when he started to peddle his conspiracy delusions during the last hearing.

Edited October 8, 2018 by AlQaholic

[bristolboy]

3 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

I normally dont respond to personal attacks, but here, Ill play: I respond to valid points, not agitprop.

 

 

There was nothing personal in those comments at all. He was making allegations about how you proceed in this forum. It would be easy enough to come up with examples of said conduct. I'd be glad to oblige you in that regard, if you're willing.

[Hummin]

26 minutes ago, theonetrueaussie said:

So the supreme court is only supreme when it is majority left judges that push the left agenda...ok got it. As for the US being divided, that started way back thanks to OBAMA but hey the right put up with him for 8 years and I don't remember any of them chanting "Not my president" or conducting violent riots or making up rape claims with zero evidence. I ask you this if obama was in power and the judge was a left leaning judge and the republicans pulled this stunt would you still believe all the women...I know your answer it would be a hard No.

If you can not tell the difference, there is no use in trying to convince you what is good values, and bad values. Easy as that. President Trump, have showed the American people, that some really do not care about good and fear values, but only think about their American egoistic values they think Mr Trump can give them. They believe Trump can give them back the American dream like it was in the 50ies, 60ies and 70ies, after decades of weapon production and wars. Oil marked stimulated cheep production, and wages going up. It aint going to happen again, because China is on rise, and then what to do? War? 

[bristolboy]

On 10/6/2018 at 10:30 PM, Nyezhov said:

He is one of the most highly respected jurists on the most prestigious Circuit Court in the US Court System. His track record (meaning affirmances vis a vis reversals) is stellar. His opinions are cogent and well written. He is well respected by his peers and by those who have worked with him and appeared before him. There is no disqualifying information in his background.

 

He is as qualified, or more, than other recent appointees such as Sotomayor and Kagan who were not subjected to the slanders that he was subjected to. I want his confirmation, as his judicial philosophy mirrors mine, but that has nothing to do with qualifications. Elections have consequences. President Obama gave us qualified nominees in accord with his judicial philosophy, now President Trump is doing the same.

So now we know your judicial philosophy is one that is in favor of the diminisnment of 4th amendment protections, lessening for workers' rights, and increased protection for corporations vs. workers and consumers. Good to know. And so much for draining the swamp.

[bristolboy]

On 10/7/2018 at 12:34 AM, Nyezhov said:

Care to pint out the "half truths" or "outright lies" he posted.

 

 

 

Have you asked yourself who paid for her polygraph? Have you asked yourself who paid for her high priced lawyers? Do you deny that her attorneys are associated with the Democratic party?

 

 

Conspiracy theory much?

In fact, her lawyers were working pro bono.

The lawyers paid for the polygraph test

And as for her lawyers being "associated" with the Democratic party, that's quite an inclusive and vague word. How exactly are they "associated"? Nice little piece of smearing here.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/christine-blasey-fords-lawyers-say-they-paid-for-polygraph-test

[neeray]

6 minutes ago, bristolboy said:

Conspiracy theory much?

In fact, her lawyers were working pro bono.

The lawyers paid for the polygraph test

And as for her lawyers being "associated" with the Democratic party, that's quite an inclusive and vague word. How exactly are they "associated"? Nice little piece of smearing here.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/christine-blasey-fords-lawyers-say-they-paid-for-polygraph-test

Even if working pro bono, it is only prudent of her lawyers to want to satisfy themselves that Dr Ford was being truthful, so of course they would subject her to a polygraph (and pay for it).

And as for being associated with the Democratic party, haha, would have been pretty strange if they'd been associated with the Republican party (which would mean bury it).

Two moot points !

[AsianAtHeart]

People get angriest when they are on the defensive and are already goaded by their guilty conscience.  Kavanaugh showed the world that his anger was beyond controllable.  If he can not keep his own cool, maintaining respectability as an impartial judge should, he has lost the most important quality of a supreme court caliber jurist.  Furthermore, he implicates himself by his reaction to the accusations.  An innocent man could have demonstrated his innocence by his own calm and unruffled demeanor, having nothing to hide or defend.

 

Even the White House knew their goose might be cooked if the FBI were allowed to do its ordinary work.  That they felt the need to muzzle the investigation, putting blinders on it to prevent unwanted witness testimony from entering the public record, speaks volumes for the state of honesty in society today.  Moral worth used to be a major criterion for selection to the highest positions in any branch of government.  Sadly, this seems to no longer be the case.

 

When Kavanaugh lied to congress about his high school drinking being legal (it wasn't), and no one seemed to catch on nor regard this dishonesty as of any significance, it begged the question as to what else Kavanaugh may be lying about.

[neeray]

"When Kavanaugh lied to congress about his high school drinking being legal (it wasn't), and no one seemed to catch on nor regard this dishonesty as of any significance, it begged the question as to what else Kavanaugh may be lying about".

 

4 minutes ago, AsianAtHeart said:

This problem-plagued appointment and the muzzling of the FBI investigation has the Trump signature all over it. Win at any cost, "damn the torpedoes, full speed ahead".

THE ART OF THE DEAL ! Do it my way. Win at any cost. And the puppets all played along.

"We'll see".

 

[kjun12]

On 10/6/2018 at 10:30 PM, Nyezhov said:

He is one of the most highly respected jurists on the most prestigious Circuit Court in the US Court System. His track record (meaning affirmances vis a vis reversals) is stellar. His opinions are cogent and well written. He is well respected by his peers and by those who have worked with him and appeared before him. There is no disqualifying information in his background.

 

He is as qualified, or more, than other recent appointees such as Sotomayor and Kagan who were not subjected to the slanders that he was subjected to. I want his confirmation, as his judicial philosophy mirrors mine, but that has nothing to do with qualifications. Elections have consequences. President Obama gave us qualified nominees in accord with his judicial philosophy, now President Trump is doing the same.

How did you reach these conclusions?  Especially that bit about him being such a better jurist than Sotomayor and Kagan.  I think that your right-wing mind-set is at play here and no real knowledge.

[Nyezhov]

16 minutes ago, neeray said:

Even if working pro bono, it is only prudent of her lawyers to want to satisfy themselves that Dr Ford was being truthful, so of course they would subject her to a polygraph (and pay for it).

Sorry, that doesnt cut it. Lawyers dont use Polys to show "truthfulness". Polys dont determine the truth. A real polygraph test entails a hard core interrogation, that's why LE use them. You ever see one? Or have one done? The goal is to break the subject. I remember one I ordered on a criminal defendant who professed innocence. Took about 45 minutes to break him. Thats why you find that so many polygraphers are retired Fed LE. The one that did my client was retired CID and he was a hard core interrogator.

 

 Based ONLY on what I have read, Ms. Fords poly was a softball. How many questions was she asked about the incident at issue? Two? Ms Fords poly was more of a sop for the media, Trump haters and gullible public. Please correct me with facts if I am wrong.

 

I further find it hard to believe that a lawyer would pay for a poly without a reasonable expectation of getting reimbursed. 

 

[kjun12]

On 10/6/2018 at 10:52 PM, Nyezhov said:

Their politics aside, the objection apparently is that he got angry at the politcal smears against him at the hearings. That has no bearing on his performance as a distinguished Judge in the past, nor does it in any fashion negate what litigants and clerks say about him. His performance on the bench is what counts. Stellar.

Wrong, wrong and wrong.  His demeanor has everything to do with being a good or poor or even bad jurist.  And, again, where do you get this information about your allegations about a "stellar" performance.