SURVEY: Is Brett Kavanaugh suitable for the Supreme Court?

[atyclb]

4 minutes ago, neeray said:

"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".

 

 

 

 

in my life including a high school job interview i have never been asked if i ever drank alcohol being underage. during job interviews as an adult post university the question was never raised because it is soooo very relevant.  if ever a prospective employer were to dissect my high school yearbook for a position decades after i would struggle to remain civil but might end up asking if they are retarded.

[AsianAtHeart]

3 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

 

in my life including a high school job interview i have never been asked if i ever drank alcohol being underage. during job interviews as an adult post university the question was never raised because it is soooo very relevant.  if ever a prospective employer were to dissect my high school yearbook for a position decades after i would struggle to remain civil but might end up asking if they are retarded.

As far as I know, no one asked Kavanaugh about whether his drinking were underage.  He volunteered the lie without having been asked.

[neeray]

4 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

 

in my life including a high school job interview i have never been asked if i ever drank alcohol being underage. during job interviews as an adult post university the question was never raised because it is soooo very relevant.  if ever a prospective employer were to dissect my high school yearbook for a position decades after i would struggle to remain civil but might end up asking if they are retarded.

You just misquoted me in post #232. Those were not my words.

 

It's okay, just a simple mistake.

[Nyezhov]

6 minutes ago, kjun12 said:

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.

Well how about this:

 

Kavanaugh had 300 plus written decisions in cases and controversies before him. He had a very high affirmance rate and a very low reversal rate.

 

Sotomayor sat on an equally influential and prestigious circuit (the 2nd), however, her tenure was shorter than his, and I believe she wrote less and was reversed more. You would need to check that, Im at the pool and my net is slow. Regardless, if I am wrong on the numbers she is NO MORE or NO LESS qualified than he was. Her selection was a pure political decision, a female "wise latina". AS opposed to Miguel Estrada, a conservative Latino. But I digress.

 

Kagan had no judicial track record. Ergo, Kavanaugh was more qualified as a jurist.

 

Finally why do you characterize me as right wing? Are you a mind reader? What are my personal views on the compelling political issues of the day? How do I feel about issues relating to the 1st, 2nd, 4th and 5th Amendments. What is my view on the 14th? What is my view about the past application of American power in the world, and the present geopolitical situation? Tell me what a right winger is? Is that an ad hominem in your mind? Would it be fair for me to characterize you as a left winger merely because you seem to oppose Kavanaugh? I mean with some folks, they wear their politics on their sleeves or Avatars, is that you?

[atyclb]

4 minutes ago, neeray said:

10 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

 

in my life including a high school job interview i have never been asked if i ever drank alcohol being underage. during job interviews as an adult post university the question was never raised because it is soooo very relevant.  if ever a prospective employer were to dissect my high school yearbook for a position decades after i would struggle to remain civil but might end up asking if they are retarded.

You just misquoted me in post #232. Those were not my words.

 

It's okay, just a simple mistake.

 

i apologize if i misquoted you. below is the actual post i quoted that seems to written by you??

 

[neeray]

9 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

i apologize if i misquoted you. below is the actual post i quoted that seems to written by you??

 

Wrong again. Those words were written by a previous poster.

 

Whatever.

[Kieran00001]

2 hours 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....

 

You are telling me to look up a word I have already correctly defined and one which you used in a way that no one has ever used it before, it is you who needs a dictionary. 

 

There are legal terms of art, connections is not one of them, is that difficult for you to understand?  Perhaps connection is a term of art in engineering or surveying, but not in legal language, which is what you were arguing, isn't it?

 

You claim my analysis is specious yet again offer nothing to support hat claim.  So, just to recap, you cannot produce anything at all to support any of your claims, can you?

[Kieran00001]

55 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

 

Surely you are not trying to use a blogger with a degree in English as some sort of evidence against what the trained psychiatrists are saying?  Hilarious!!!

[Nyezhov]

35 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

You are telling me to look up a word I have already correctly defined and one which you used in a way that no one has ever used it before, it is you who needs a dictionary. 

 

There are legal terms of art, connections is not one of them, is that difficult for you to understand?  Perhaps connection is a term of art in engineering or surveying, but not in legal language, which is what you were arguing, isn't it?

 

You claim my analysis is specious yet again offer nothing to support hat claim.  So, just to recap, you cannot produce anything at all to support any of your claims, can you?

sigh......

 

in American English, when one speaking in the context of what Justice Kavanaugh was talking about (ie, getting into a top notch college) the term of art (ie in the area of employment or education) used is "connection", viz:

 

My Daddy went to Yale Law School, so I used my connections to get in.....

or

I was a good student, I didnt have any "connection", but I still go in.

 

See the difference?

 

Now that I have hopefully educated you, why don't YOU  answer the question about perjury. Keep in mind Yales position, and case law. Is it still your contention that he committed perjury? Do you think he should be indicted and tried? Do you think he would be convicted?

 

 

[Morch]

1 hour ago, atyclb said:

 

 

in my life including a high school job interview i have never been asked if i ever drank alcohol being underage. during job interviews as an adult post university the question was never raised because it is soooo very relevant.  if ever a prospective employer were to dissect my high school yearbook for a position decades after i would struggle to remain civil but might end up asking if they are retarded.

 

Let me venture a guess that you weren't interviewing for a life-time appointment for the US Supreme Court, and hopefully no allegations relating to sexual abuse/assault were involved. Posters supporting Kavanaugh seem to forget this was not ordinary "job interview", nor an ordinary appointment.

[Morch]

14 hours 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.

 

Whereas you seem to have no issues with Kavanaugh's words being read from a prepared statement. Same for Kavanaugh's reactions when asked direct questions. 

[Baerboxer]

It seems fashionable now for the left to organize protests, and campaigns against judges or other public officials who don't share their own political views.

 

The left demonstrate a growing distaste for freedom of speech, and the right to a different view. Far more dangerous than the few right wing nut jobs that spring up all over the place.

 

The left have given the world far more totalitarian regimes than the right. Enforced with ruthless cruelty. 

 

Time people woke up to their agenda.

[Neeranam]

On 10/6/2018 at 10:03 PM, Scottjouro said:

i thought said "comedian" had promised to move to Canada if Trump became President ?...so simple question " sweetheart" what you doing in DC and shouldnt you be moose hunting in the great white North...?

A lot of people said the same as they arrogantly thought Trump would never win. They are all talk.

[Kieran00001]

4 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

sigh......

 

in American English, when one speaking in the context of what Justice Kavanaugh was talking about (ie, getting into a top notch college) the term of art (ie in the area of employment or education) used is "connection", viz:

 

My Daddy went to Yale Law School, so I used my connections to get in.....

or

I was a good student, I didnt have any "connection", but I still go in.

 

See the difference?

 

Now that I have hopefully educated you, why don't YOU  answer the question about perjury. Keep in mind Yales position, and case law. Is it still your contention that he committed perjury? Do you think he should be indicted and tried? Do you think he would be convicted?

 

 

 

No, I don't see any difference, they both are talking about connections in the same sense.

[Kieran00001]

10 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

It seems fashionable now for the left to organize protests, and campaigns against judges or other public officials who don't share their own political views.

 

The left demonstrate a growing distaste for freedom of speech, and the right to a different view. Far more dangerous than the few right wing nut jobs that spring up all over the place.

 

The left have given the world far more totalitarian regimes than the right. Enforced with ruthless cruelty. 

 

Time people woke up to their agenda.

 

What a flawed comparison!  Why would right regimes be totalitarian? 

[Nyezhov]

9 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

No, I don't see any difference, they both are talking about connections in the same sense.

So again. Indicted, tried and found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in your mind?

[melvinmelvin]

 

now, the guy is on SCOTUS, what now?

 

qualified/not qualified - suitable/not suitable - I haven't the foggiest

 

what now?

 

seems to me US citizens have 2 options;

look for any opportunity to challenge his seat, if at all possible involve FBI,

continuously over the next 10 years chasing him in public, replay videos of his worst

appearances point  to his lies under oath - at least every 2 weeks

in short - make his personal life absolutely hell - he would probably resign within the next 5 years

 

or

try make the best of it - write in newspapers - yes - but with a view to show him what is expected and why

 

up to you

 

or, as the way it normally goes, just forget it and await the next presidential abuse

 

[Becker]

2 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

I mean with some folks, they wear their politics on their sleeves or Avatars, is that you?

So exactly what conclusion should be drawn from your avatar?

[Becker]

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

It seems fashionable now for the left to organize protests, and campaigns against judges or other public officials who don't share their own political views.

 

The left demonstrate a growing distaste for freedom of speech, and the right to a different view. Far more dangerous than the few right wing nut jobs that spring up all over the place.

 

The left have given the world far more totalitarian regimes than the right. Enforced with ruthless cruelty. 

 

Time people woke up to their agenda.

hyperbole

hʌɪˈpəːbəli/

noun

 

1. exaggerated statements or claims not meant to be taken literally.

[Becker]

47 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

Whatever there mein fruend, hit the ignore button. If you want to consider asking legit questions (albiet difficult ones for some folks) as trolling, have at that button... the questions and the responses thereto (or lack thereof) all speak for themselvesm as does your post above. I am sorry they are uncomfortable for folks who may be confronted with the vacuity of not just their positions on a particular subject, but their entire weltanshauung.

You do know that your rather sesquipedalian posts are not necessarily proof of a great mind, right?

[Kieran00001]

1 hour ago, Nyezhov said:

So again. Indicted, tried and found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in your mind?

 

I thought you had something to say about the implications of the term, what was it you were trying to say?  You never actually said it, just tried to imply that it meant something, or have you given up on that one?

[allanos]

15 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

Of course you could say that both of them looked like they were lying, however the fact is that the experts who were there and who have analyzed their body language, doctors in the field, say that she did not look like she was lying while he did.

 

Here is Brett nodding to confirm his guilt.

 

I didn't see this portion of testimony live, so thank you for posting.

 

However, the almost imperceptible nod of acquiescence which Kavanaugh evidences in the video, in my opinion, is an acknowledgement to the question posed of him, and the fact that he understands it.

 

It is not a motion contradicting the negative answer which he gives.

[atyclb]

2 hours ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

Surely you are not trying to use a blogger with a degree in English as some sort of evidence against what the trained psychiatrists are saying?  Hilarious!!!

 

just thought some would be interested in an intelligent womans opinion.  its likely there are trained professionals in applicable fields that support her and do not support her and perhaps some are swayed by their own political beliefs.

 

btw what is your feeling on the ms sweatnik gal. the one that claims kavanaugh is a gang rapist and she witnessed it at one of his "rape parties" before attending 9 more of his gang rape parties?

[Kieran00001]

37 minutes ago, allanos said:

I didn't see this portion of testimony live, so thank you for posting.

 

However, the almost imperceptible nod of acquiescence which Kavanaugh evidences in the video, in my opinion, is an acknowledgement to the question posed of him, and the fact that he understands it.

 

It is not a motion contradicting the negative answer which he gives.

 

But not according to experts in body language, according to them it is significant.

[Kieran00001]

27 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

just thought some would be interested in an intelligent womans opinion.  its likely there are trained professionals in applicable fields that support her and do not support her and perhaps some are swayed by their own political beliefs.

 

btw what is your feeling on the ms sweatnik gal. the one that claims kavanaugh is a gang rapist and she witnessed it at one of his "rape parties" before attending 9 more of his gang rape parties?

 

She may come across as intelligent to you but she is actually just an actress, she has no opinion of her own, she is a corporate shill, Fox News' very own "expert" in any field they need from to lie for them today.

[Kieran00001]

2 hours ago, Nyezhov said:

So again. Indicted, tried and found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt in your mind?

 

Was it not your intention to come up with two meanings of the word so as to demonstrate that there is some ambiguity?

[atyclb]

4 minutes ago, Kieran00001 said:

35 minutes ago, atyclb said:

 

just thought some would be interested in an intelligent womans opinion.  its likely there are trained professionals in applicable fields that support her and do not support her and perhaps some are swayed by their own political beliefs.

 

btw what is your feeling on the ms sweatnik gal. the one that claims kavanaugh is a gang rapist and she witnessed it at one of his "rape parties" before attending 9 more of his gang rape parties?

 

She may come across as intelligent to you but she is actually just an actress, she has no opinion of her own, she is a corporate shill, Fox News' very own "expert" in any field they need from to lie for them today.

 

 

if i were to adapt your modus of thinking i might come to the very same conclusion about actors/actresses and corporate shills on several mainstream media networks,... nahhh , that could never be true

[Becker]

Just now, atyclb said:

 

 

if i were to adapt your modus of thinking i might come to the very same conclusion about actors/actresses and corporate shills on several mainstream media networks,... nahhh , that could never be true

You could but that's not really the point.

[Nyezhov]

1 hour ago, Kieran00001 said:

 

I thought you had something to say about the implications of the term, what was it you were trying to say?  You never actually said it, just tried to imply that it meant something, or have you given up on that one?

And I thought I had answered your question about "connections". Guess you wont answer the question.  I'll let the readers take it from here. More importantly, my little grill isnt working and I have some nice Isaan sausages...damn....any suggestions? Fry pan?

[Kieran00001]

11 minutes ago, Nyezhov said:

And I thought I had answered your question about "connections". Guess you wont answer the question.  I'll let the readers take it from here. More importantly, my little grill isnt working and I have some nice Isaan sausages...damn....any suggestions? Fry pan?

 

No, sorry but it just doesn't work like that, you interjected with a claim made against my comment, I queried your reasoning and so far you have yet to offer any resemblance of an explanation, unless you do so then your attempts to divert the attention away from yourself will be ignored.

 

Just eat the sausages as is, why on earth would you cook them?