Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 1118 comments are related to the topic:
Brett Kavanaugh
Brett Kavanaugh
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 1,118
|
By:
His nomination was political and the opposition to it is political is all I'm saying.
|
|
By:
Yes I know that’s what you are saying , but the first is not necessarily a bad thing and is in any case inevitable
And the second is very wrong and dangerous Apples and pears |
|
By:
You see judges should not make the law , that is for government alone to do
|
|
By:
for example , for 500 years English law is what the English parliament says is the law
|
|
By:
Charles 1st was told this , in court , before his execution
|
|
By:
In America , as in Britain , Parliament gets its authority from the people
|
|
By:
But isn't that the big problem. Supreme Court judges are appointed for life. Therefore they are above the authority of the people.
Hence the huge scraps when it comes to nominating a new one. You could argue it's more important than the President as if you have a Supreme Court that leans one way then you have control over the laws and no election in 5 years is going to change that. |
|
By:
How do they have control over the laws , Parliament makes the laws
It doesn’t matter what might happen in 20 years time , it’s what happens now that matters |
|
By:
They interpret the law yes , every law can be changed by the parliament
|
|
By:
Let what might happen in 20 years time look after itself
get to work today on today’s problems that’s what they are elected to do |
|
By:
The courts cannot overule a law , Parliament may have to write a new law or amend the old law to better achieve its intent , that’s all
Of course this can be troublesome if you have the wrong judges in place which is why republicans and democrats try to appoint those that they think might be more aligned So it’s easier , but it’s also not necessarily a bad thing |
|
By:
ultimately the law as passed by parliament must be obeyed
|
|
By:
That is merely the mechanism of government
When people talk about the Kavanagh case , and other cases , and politicising , it’s about an attempt to undermine this process by false ( if they are ) accusations Thats why northanlites comment makes no sense |
|
By:
Well it made sense to me. The whole system is overtly political. They can claim this guy is
the best candidate for the job but what they really mean is he is the best candidate for them politically. The lifetime appointments are just a bonkers idea anyway. |
|
By:
Well northanlite one is the legally recognised process of government , and the other is the attempt to damage that government by making false ( if they are false ) and dangerous allegations that could ruin a mans life
If you don’t understand the difference there is not much that can be done about that |
|
By:
I think it's just another example of how riven US politics is. There are only eight judges who can all serve for as long as they like ultimately. The nomination is purely from the president and is approved by the Senate.
It's just not conducive to democracy ultimately. I fully understand judges are experts in their field and at this level they are the cream of the crop but their should still be some accountability and a need to prove they are still capable. Secondly, the nomination process. As we saw with the end of the Obama era, if the same party don't hold the Senate then no nomination is going through and there's just a general stasis. How is that good for anybody? Conversely, if one party is in control then they can stick in someone who is a fully paid up subscriber without opposition. Separation of State and Justice is massively important otherwise you are just leaving yourself open to corruption. Without wishing to opine on his guilt or not, I find Trump's tweets on the Kavanaugh situation alarming. The authorities are still collecting evidence, witnesses and potential victims are making statements and he is massively prejudicing the case by lending his support or casting aspersions. How can that be right? Any politician should be hauled for contempt for potentially obstructing a case no matter who he is. I just don't see how you can entwine politics and law so closely. Why should the President be the person to nominate him? Wouldn't it be better if a panel of esteemed judges sat and interviewed candidates and rigorously selected who is the most knowledgeable and best qualified? Now it's all to do with special interests and who will potentially lean the right way if the question of gun control or human rights comes up. |
|
By:
pp Supreme Court judges in Britain are appointed by the Queen on advice of the prime minister
|
|
By:
with recommendations from a commission made up of judges appointed by the prime minister and the Queen
And assisted by the lord chancellor appointed by the prime minister and the Queen |
|
By:
really weird never went to police
|
|
By:
would you go to the police if you were raped by a man money as a matter of interest?
|
|
By:
Whatever happens now Kavanaugh's reputation is in tatters, millions of Americans will still believe him to be guilty regardless of any evidence to the contrary. Consider that for a moment if the man is entirely innocent of any wrongdoing. Put yourself in his shoes.
Put yourself in the shoes of the accuser. What if she is telling the truth and this man and Chump are laughing at her? |
|
By:
Dr Christine Blasey Ford sounds totally believable and has a polygraph backing her up !
|
|
By:
Guilty or not guilty nobody can possibly know without a confession or a recant of accusations after all this time. The despicable thing here is how the democrats sat on these allegations until the eleventh hour so a new nomination wouldn't be possible before mid term elections where they hope to gain control of the house. To now moan about no investigation is pathetic. Despite all their sickening words, democrats couldn't care less about Dr Ford, they are just using her for their own agenda.
Here's a question that I genuinely don't know the answer to. Why can't there be a full investigation after Kavanaugh is confirmed to the Supreme Court? Does that position come with immunity? |
|
By:
I don't know if she is telling the truth leopard, but that polygraph was a joke. Two dolly questions FFS! To be a genuine test there should have been many, many awkward questions.
|
|
By:
Whisperingdeath. It is supposed to be innocent until proven guilty, not the other way around. That is the point.
|
|
By:
Otherwise anybody with a personal grievance could accuse you of anything without repercussions! How would you feel if somebody from 36 years ago accused you of attempted rape and everybody started saying that whisperingdeath must be guilty? It would just be dreadful for you and your family. That us not how justice should be played out.
|
|
By:
dont believe her one bit
|
|
By:
Does anyone know the answer to my question about an investigation after confirmation?
|
|
By:
Dr Ford said she wanted anonymity. Senator Grassley made it clear she could have been assured full privacy if Senator Feinstein had not delayed everything until just before the confirmation hearings and then encouraging Ford to go public. There could have been a full FBI investigation with Dr Ford remaining anonymous. Instead, the democrats wanted to use these allegations to their own poiltical advantage. They couldn't care less about the effect on Dr Ford or Judge Kavanaugh and their families. The political left wing are truly despicable.
|
|
By:
White men?
|
|
By:
Why did you write "white" men?
|
|
By:
That is total bollocks, not to mention racist.
|
|
By:
The colour of people's skin has nothing whatsoever to do with this case. You are acting like a despicable racist, Eboue.
|
|
By:
Why can't there be a full FBI investigation after Kavanaugh becomes a Supreme Court judge? One with a harsh penalty for either side at the end of it - him if he's guilty - her if she is lying?
|
|
By:
Eboue has embarrassed himself here.
 |
|
By:
The tory / donny fanboys out in force again trying to defend the right of the rich and powerful to use their money power and greed to say i do what i want
|
|
By:
The main issue here is Trump and his racist agenda
|
|
By:
The main issue? Do you ever read the drivel you are writing, Anxious? There is no racist angle here except the one in your own head.
|
|
By:
|
|
By:
Not true, Edy, there was plenty of time. Check your facts, buddy.
|