| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#3
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 9/29/18 4:24 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 14:01:36 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 9/29/18 12:58 PM, wrote: On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 08:08:01 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 9/29/18 7:38 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: During Ford's testimony she said something that I thought was odd but I wasn't smart enough to understand what it meant. It was when Ford was being asked about her fear of flying and she acknowledged it, blaming it on "claustrophobia" as a result of her experience 36 years ago.Â* She then went on to acknowledge however that she has regularly flown often in spite of this. But that's not the odd part. She was asked why she didn't accept Grassley's offer to conduct the testimony in California.Â* He said the committee would fly to her instead of her having to fly to WashDC. The offer was made in consideration of her claimed fear of flying and the delay it imposed on the whole process. In her testimony Ford expressed surprise that Grassley had made that offer. She said she was "unaware" of it and thanked Sen. Grassley. That's strange. A lawyer I heard last night addressed this.Â* He said that Grassley had sent three letters to Ford's attorneys regarding the offer to have the committee come to her rather than she come to WashDC.Â*Â* He said that if her attorneys had withheld those letters from FordÂ* they were in violation of some codes of conduct governing their responsibilities. As her attorneys they could be subject to being disbarred for unethical behavior. Interestingly, at least one of the attorneys ... the woman ... is a known political activist and participates in the Trump "resist" movement. According to the lawyer, she was recommended to Ford by Dianne Feinstein after Ford sent Feinstein the "confidential" letter regarding her claimed sexual abuse by Kavanaugh. I am telling ya.Â* You just can't make this stuff up. Whatever. Hopefully, Dr. Ford's public testimony in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee works out for the best. It didn't occur to me until after Kavanaugh's testimony, but the political screed he offered during it should be something that completely disqualifies him from the federal bench...in any judgeship. He blamed his delay in confirmation on the Democrats, on women, on the Clintons, on politics. He sounded like Trump. A federal judge isn't supposed to be political and isn't supposed to behave that way. He's really Trump's boy. He should be subjected to a writ of scire facias or impeached for expressing those partisan thoughts. As a wise man said "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they are not out to get you". (alternatively credited to Joseph Heller and Henry Kissinger) I saw a man who was surprised and frustrated by a partisan attack on him that seems to have no provable basis in fact. If this nomination does go down, I would not mind seeing him drag Ford and Feinstein into civil court and let them prove this was not just a politically motivated assault on his character. You might not mind it, but absent malice, Kavanaugh, a public figure, would get nowhere with a civil suit alleging libel or slander. It would be close to impossible for Kavanaugh to prove malice. Kavanaugh's tempermental outburst should be enough to do him in...hell, he doesn't have the temperment to serve as a judge in any court. I doubt he would do it but you can sue anyone for anything even if the objective is nothing but to get them under oath answering questions and proving their allegations. You may not have "malice" in the case of Ford, assuming she can demonstrate this was not just a political move but Feinstein was certainly malicious in the way she handled this. I also understand congress people are expected to be malicious political hacks so she has the perfect defense. I really think the democrats may be shooting themselves in the foot here tho. Kananaugh may be the least objectionable of the 3 on your core issues. You will have a hard time "Borking" 2 candidates in a row. I don't see Kavanaugh as dumb enough to try to sue Dr. Ford or Senator Feinstein. And of course if he went after them in a lawsuit, he would be subject to being questioned, too, and not as sweetly as he was by the Republicans on the Committee. Further, if he were as evasive as he was during the hearings, he'd be cited for contempt. I wouldn't bet either way at this time on the outcome of Kavanaugh's attempt at confirmation. He certainly doesn't have the demeanor or restraint one might expect of an Associate Justice but, of course, this is the age of Trump in which those judicial attributes do not matter. |
|
#4
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 9/29/2018 4:24 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 14:01:36 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 9/29/18 12:58 PM, wrote: On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 08:08:01 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 9/29/18 7:38 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: During Ford's testimony she said something that I thought was odd but I wasn't smart enough to understand what it meant. It was when Ford was being asked about her fear of flying and she acknowledged it, blaming it on "claustrophobia" as a result of her experience 36 years ago.Â* She then went on to acknowledge however that she has regularly flown often in spite of this. But that's not the odd part. She was asked why she didn't accept Grassley's offer to conduct the testimony in California.Â* He said the committee would fly to her instead of her having to fly to WashDC. The offer was made in consideration of her claimed fear of flying and the delay it imposed on the whole process. In her testimony Ford expressed surprise that Grassley had made that offer. She said she was "unaware" of it and thanked Sen. Grassley. That's strange. A lawyer I heard last night addressed this.Â* He said that Grassley had sent three letters to Ford's attorneys regarding the offer to have the committee come to her rather than she come to WashDC.Â*Â* He said that if her attorneys had withheld those letters from FordÂ* they were in violation of some codes of conduct governing their responsibilities. As her attorneys they could be subject to being disbarred for unethical behavior. Interestingly, at least one of the attorneys ... the woman ... is a known political activist and participates in the Trump "resist" movement. According to the lawyer, she was recommended to Ford by Dianne Feinstein after Ford sent Feinstein the "confidential" letter regarding her claimed sexual abuse by Kavanaugh. I am telling ya.Â* You just can't make this stuff up. Whatever. Hopefully, Dr. Ford's public testimony in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee works out for the best. It didn't occur to me until after Kavanaugh's testimony, but the political screed he offered during it should be something that completely disqualifies him from the federal bench...in any judgeship. He blamed his delay in confirmation on the Democrats, on women, on the Clintons, on politics. He sounded like Trump. A federal judge isn't supposed to be political and isn't supposed to behave that way. He's really Trump's boy. He should be subjected to a writ of scire facias or impeached for expressing those partisan thoughts. As a wise man said "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they are not out to get you". (alternatively credited to Joseph Heller and Henry Kissinger) I saw a man who was surprised and frustrated by a partisan attack on him that seems to have no provable basis in fact. If this nomination does go down, I would not mind seeing him drag Ford and Feinstein into civil court and let them prove this was not just a politically motivated assault on his character. You might not mind it, but absent malice, Kavanaugh, a public figure, would get nowhere with a civil suit alleging libel or slander. It would be close to impossible for Kavanaugh to prove malice. Kavanaugh's tempermental outburst should be enough to do him in...hell, he doesn't have the temperment to serve as a judge in any court. I doubt he would do it but you can sue anyone for anything even if the objective is nothing but to get them under oath answering questions and proving their allegations. You may not have "malice" in the case of Ford, assuming she can demonstrate this was not just a political move but Feinstein was certainly malicious in the way she handled this. I also understand congress people are expected to be malicious political hacks so she has the perfect defense. I really think the democrats may be shooting themselves in the foot here tho. Kananaugh may be the least objectionable of the 3 on your core issues. You will have a hard time "Borking" 2 candidates in a row. That's not the objective. They've got the delaying process down pat. They want to block Kavanaugh and then delay any replacement long enough for the mid terms plus 2 months. Technically there may be time to rush another nominee through the process but unlikely because all the jerks in WashDC want to get home and get into heavy campaign mode. |
|
#5
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#6
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 9/29/18 4:32 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article , says... Kavanaugh's tempermental outburst should be enough to do him in...hell, he doesn't have the temperment to serve as a judge in any court. It's strange how these Republicans don't see the **** storm they're bringing on this country. Don't they know that putting a partisan hack on SCOTUS will irreparably harm it? Don't they know that this guy WILL be impeached? Only thing I can figure is they are unknowingly exhibiting a "death struggle." I wish it was amusing. It's not. The Repubs are afraid to tell their Emperor he isn't wearing any clothes. |
|
#7
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 9/29/2018 4:32 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article , says... Kavanaugh's tempermental outburst should be enough to do him in...hell, he doesn't have the temperment to serve as a judge in any court. It's strange how these Republicans don't see the **** storm they're bringing on this country. Don't they know that putting a partisan hack on SCOTUS will irreparably harm it? Don't they know that this guy WILL be impeached? Only thing I can figure is they are unknowingly exhibiting a "death struggle." I wish it was amusing. It's not. Funny. The best thing for this country is a reasoned SCOTUS with a conservative list. (boating term for "tilt"). Impeach him after he's installed? Be serious. Those are only threats being circulated by Dems to further dissuade any of their own and even some Republicans from voting "aye" on his confirmation but also in preparation for the mid-terms and their respective images back home. You know ... the usual ... "Fake News". The Democrat Party has turned into a sleazy, dishonest and disgusting party. I wish it was amusing. It's not. |
|
#8
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 15:32:15 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote: In article , says... Kavanaugh's tempermental outburst should be enough to do him in...hell, he doesn't have the temperment to serve as a judge in any court. It's strange how these Republicans don't see the **** storm they're bringing on this country. Don't they know that putting a partisan hack on SCOTUS will irreparably harm it? Don't they know that this guy WILL be impeached? Only thing I can figure is they are unknowingly exhibiting a "death struggle." I wish it was amusing. It's not. Really, now you have this guy being impeached and there still has not been a single credible charge against him and nothing even hinted in his adult life. You people are just nuts. BTW no supreme court judge has ever been thrown off the court and the last one impeached was over 200 years ago, acquitted of all charges. |
|
#9
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Saturday, September 29, 2018 at 12:59:25 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 08:08:01 -0400, Keyser Soze wrote: On 9/29/18 7:38 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote: During Ford's testimony she said something that I thought was odd but I wasn't smart enough to understand what it meant. It was when Ford was being asked about her fear of flying and she acknowledged it, blaming it on "claustrophobia" as a result of her experience 36 years ago.Â* She then went on to acknowledge however that she has regularly flown often in spite of this. But that's not the odd part. She was asked why she didn't accept Grassley's offer to conduct the testimony in California.Â* He said the committee would fly to her instead of her having to fly to WashDC. The offer was made in consideration of her claimed fear of flying and the delay it imposed on the whole process. In her testimony Ford expressed surprise that Grassley had made that offer. She said she was "unaware" of it and thanked Sen. Grassley. That's strange. A lawyer I heard last night addressed this.Â* He said that Grassley had sent three letters to Ford's attorneys regarding the offer to have the committee come to her rather than she come to WashDC.Â*Â* He said that if her attorneys had withheld those letters from FordÂ* they were in violation of some codes of conduct governing their responsibilities. As her attorneys they could be subject to being disbarred for unethical behavior. Interestingly, at least one of the attorneys ... the woman ... is a known political activist and participates in the Trump "resist" movement. |
| Reply |
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Need a top of the line lawyer? | General | |||
| Interesting comment in Wash Post | General | |||
| I suppose I should ask a lawyer, but... | Cruising | |||
| Is Obama a Lawyer? I know, plonk! | Cruising | |||
| Saw a lawyer in NH.... | General | |||