Report: Kavanaugh won’t commit to recusal from Trump/Mueller related matters

[Wakeforest22890]

what's the political issue?

Are you serious?

Whether the outstanding allegations against Kavanaugh are enough to merit a down vote from individual Senators on his nomination.

 

[dartsndeacs]

this thread is really a blaring siren of how terrified conservative men are of women gaining an ounce of agency

Perhaps ole' Kav will repeal that pesky 19th amendment #MAGA

 

[Wakeforest22890]

Plama will you sign a petition against women's suffrage?

 

[Louis Gossett Jr]

So any definitive answers from the board defenders yet? Why do you need to defend and have this guy that you don’t know on the court?

 

[Wakeforest22890]

I have made my own views on the matter perfectly clear.

I know that you have made your own views on the matter very clear, but that doesn't make your oft-repeated blanket statement that "founder intent is irrelevant to originalism" any more true.

 

[Wakeforest22890]

So any definitive answers from the board defenders yet? Why do you need to defend and have this guy that you don’t know on the court?

Biff laid out the correct answer: it's political and there isn't enough time to get a nominee through before the midterms which the GOP may lose.

 

[sailordeac]

I’m treating him as one of 50 people who are qualified for the job he wants. There’s a lot of shit swirling around him. I’d choose someone else for that job if I was hiring. You will choose him because your leader Trump tells you to.

you are not choosing in this instance (fortunately), it is not your job to choose here (also fortunately)

 

[dartsndeacs]

So any definitive answers from the board defenders yet? Why do you need to defend and have this guy that you don’t know on the court?

Cause it's getting close to the midterms and people are nervous whether they can get someone else in time.

 

[dartsndeacs]

Plama will you sign a petition against women's suffrage?

I think I'm OK with them having the right to vote, but only if they vote as their fathers/husbands see fit.

 

[Louis Gossett Jr]

Biff laid out the correct answer: it's political and there isn't enough time to get a nominee through before the midterms which the GOP may lose.

Only a theory until actually hear from on of his defenders. They defend defend defend but haven’t articulated why they are defending just that he must be defended.

 

[sailordeac]

So any definitive answers from the board defenders yet? Why do you need to defend and have this guy that you don’t know on the court?

the only thing that anyone is defending here is the right of an accused to be treated fairly in the face of a bunch of guilty-until-proven-innocent attackers

no one knows the truth of the accusation at this point

 

[bym051d]

I think I'm OK with them having the right to vote, but only if they vote as their fathers/husbands see fit.

Haven’t women sufferaged enough?

 

[sailordeac]

Only a theory until actually hear from on of his defenders. They defend defend defend but haven’t articulated why they are defending just that he must be defended.

the fairness of a process deserves to be defended, even if some are willing to sacrifice fairness for presumed momentary political advantage

 

[RJKarl]

Exactly why DiFi held the allegations back.

Because Dr. Ford ASKED her not make it public. It's called having integrity.

 

[Louis Gossett Jr]

Hahah that’s exactly the answer I wanted from the board conservative hypocrite shit heads. Yes the fairness of the process must be defended what a crock of shit from any conservative.

 

[Wakeforest22890]

Exactly why DiFi held the allegations back.

We don't know why she held them back (or if she ever intended to come forward). She only publicly came out about Ford's accusation when The Intercept reported on the existence of a letter about the incident, at which Feinstein said she had referred the letter to the FBI.

Plenty of motives here: 1) timing (as you point out); 2) Ford's request to keep her identity anonymous; (3) Feinstein perhaps seeking corroborating evidence; etc.

To say that she held back these allegations until it would be politically convenient is lazy. If she had brought it up at the hearing a couple weeks ago, the timing would still have been too restrictive to appropriately vet a replacement, cull through all the documents/information, and hold a vote in a timely manner.

 

[sailordeac]

Are you serious?

Whether the outstanding allegations against Kavanaugh are enough to merit a down vote from individual Senators on his nomination.

since we have not heard from the accuser and she has yet to produce evidence to support her accusation, at this point no

let's let both accuser and accused have their say before we decide anything

 

[RChildress107]

I, for one, am glad to see so many Ban the Box advocates on the right.

 

[Wakeforest22890]

the only thing that anyone is defending here is the right of an accused to be treated fairly in the face of a bunch of guilty-until-proven-innocent attackers

no one knows the truth of the accusation at this point

Well you'd have to investigate the matter to determine if there is truth to it, but you've advocated repeatedly instead for a formal proceeding to see if it even should be investigated.

Innocent until proven guilty is a legal concept. Again, this is a political issue.

Do you believe that a nominee should only be voted down in instances where rumors are swirling if and when they're convicted or plead guilty to a crime?

 

[Wakeforest22890]

since we have not heard from the accuser and she has yet to produce evidence to support her accusation, at this point no

let's let both accuser and accused have their say before we decide anything

This post was not asking you whether you personally believe that the outstanding allegations warrant a down vote - it was my response to your question of what the political issue here was.