Kavanaugh

Brigham

John
Thread Starter
It's My Birthday!
Joined
Aug 24, 2010
Messages
1,555
Brett Kavanaugh. What has happened to "Innocent until proven guilty?"
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2005
Messages
8,546
Prior to the accuser/accused hearings, where's the evidence that "devil's triangle" was/is a drinking game?

Where's the evidence that his life/family has been "totally destroyed"?

Liars shouldn't be SC judges. Case closed.
 

Brigham

John
Thread Starter
It's My Birthday!
Joined
Aug 24, 2010
Messages
1,555
QUOTE="bomb #21, post: 9546276, member: 199685"]Prior to the accuser/accused hearings, where's the evidence that "devil's triangle" was/is a drinking game?

Where's the evidence that his life/family has been "totally destroyed"?

Liars shouldn't be SC judges. Case closed.[/QUOTE]

Which court of law did your brilliant "evidence" arrive at.
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2005
Messages
8,546
The first part of your post contains quote mangling. The last sentence looks like a question but there's no question mark at the end? Other than that, your post makes no sense.

FTR you're actually "talking" to someone who's been on the wrong end of false accusations, so I can assure you that, when that DOES happen, it IS a nightmare.

It's been pointed out MANY times that a senate hearing is NOT a court of law. Thus the OP is literally the definition of barking up the wrong tree. But, y'know, I suggest that the bigger picture be observed, by looking at questions such as "why life tenure?" and "why aren't seniorest judges appointed independently, as they are in the UK?". HTH

Edit: supplemental (rhetorical) question. There was an "investigation" after some guy named Flake said something about it being needed because the US was torn apart. Is it fixed now?
 
Last edited:

Johnny b

John
Joined
Nov 6, 2016
Messages
8,544
Brett Kavanaugh. What has happened to "Innocent until proven guilty?"
In the US, that only applies in the legal sense, where charges are brought.
Kavanaugh wasn't charged with anything. It was essentially an investigation of/for a job interview.

In the public, in the press, it's an issue of public opinion and malicious intent is dealt with by libel suits.
 
Joined
Nov 30, 2001
Messages
19,690
The accusations of sexual assault and drinking from 35+ years ago were iffy at best IMO. What really turned me sour on K was his demeanor during his last performance before the senate panel and his OBVIOUS political bias and his feeding into conspiracy theories. He doesn't perform well under pressure and seems or appeared to have an overt hatred of anything 'left' - not what I would consider an open mind. I would not want him on a jury if I were a defendant, much less a jurist. His view of the world is anarchic and backward IMO and he should not sit on SCOTUS. He and his ilk will return us to a past history of abuses that have no place in a modern progressive world. The entire Trump administration seems hell bent on returning us to the 50's and is regressive and hateful in it's whole.
 

Johnny b

John
Joined
Nov 6, 2016
Messages
8,544
I wondered why the accusations Kavanaugh perjured himself in 2006 wasn't made the main issue.
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2005
Messages
8,546
WASHINGTON, Oct. 5, 2018 — The American Bar Association’s Standing Committee on the Federal Judiciary sent a letter to the leaders of the Senate Judiciary Committee today telling them that the evaluation of Brett Kavanaugh was being reopened due to new information of a material nature regarding temperament during from Kavanaugh’s September 27 hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee.

https://www.americanbar.org/news/abanews/aba-news-archives/2018/10/aba_standing_committ.html
 

zx10guy

Trusted Advisor
Spam Fighter
Joined
Mar 30, 2008
Messages
6,646
There were 6 BIs done during the course of Kavanaugh's Federal career. I find it hard to believe the accused behaviors and incidents were missed. If anyone here has ever filled out an SF86 along with having to go through what Kavanaugh had gone through for his SSBI, you would know either OPM or the FBI are very very thorough.

I lead a very boring life and during my interview with my adjudicator, he had a thick file on me. It's pretty clear from people's stances on those that have been through such a background investigation and those that have not.

In addition, his reaction is to be expected. Granted he went a bit overboard in some respects but I challenge any of you to keep a calm demeanor in the face of such accusations affecting your Federal employment. I've worked in Federal circles for over two decades at various Federal agencies. I know what the consequences are if you're accused of something and the uphill battle one is going to face to clear yourself of such charges.

If those of you who are still dissatisfied with the outcome of the recent targeted FBI investigation and the 6 BIs Kavanaugh went through, then you should be complaining to your local representatives that the system in place used by DoD, OPM, and FBI is broken.
 
Joined
Jul 1, 2005
Messages
8,546
With respect, I don't see the relevance of alluding to supposed dissatisfaction with investigations when no-one in this thread's even mentioned said investigations.

You say he went a bit overboard. If I say he was at times unhinged, should we then start a poll? The two words that jump out at me are "calm demeanour". I won't say he threw a tantrum because, as he stated, everything he said was planned - by him. I submit that to decide to (let's say) go on to the extent where the "performance" can easily be characterised (rightly or wrongly) by commentators as a partisan rant can hardly be considered judicious. That said, he absolutely lost it at times by his own admission (see apology to Klobuchar).

IMO some of the prevarication (and there was plenty) was INCREDIBLE. At times I half-expected (Mike Myers as) Wayne to interject "Do we have to put up with this? Can't we get a better nominee? It's an important role, and could last a while". Thus I find myself in agreement with former Justice Stevens that his "performance" (alone) should disqualify him from Supreme-ness.

Cheers. (I don't like beer)
 

zx10guy

Trusted Advisor
Spam Fighter
Joined
Mar 30, 2008
Messages
6,646
With respect, I don't see the relevance of alluding to supposed dissatisfaction with investigations when no-one in this thread's even mentioned said investigations.

You say he went a bit overboard. If I say he was at times unhinged, should we then start a poll? The two words that jump out at me are "calm demeanour". I won't say he threw a tantrum because, as he stated, everything he said was planned - by him. I submit that to decide to (let's say) go on to the extent where the "performance" can easily be characterised (rightly or wrongly) by commentators as a partisan rant can hardly be considered judicious. That said, he absolutely lost it at times by his own admission (see apology to Klobuchar).

IMO some of the prevarication (and there was plenty) was INCREDIBLE. At times I half-expected (Mike Myers as) Wayne to interject "Do we have to put up with this? Can't we get a better nominee? It's an important role, and could last a while". Thus I find myself in agreement with former Justice Stevens that his "performance" (alone) should disqualify him from Supreme-ness.

Cheers. (I don't like beer)
Because you brought up points about things pointing to his unsuitability to perform or hold the position of SC. The BIs he's been through creates a whole picture of whether the person is fit to hold a clearance or a sensitive position in the Federal government. This is the whole person concept which is at the heart of what is done as an adjudication of the person's application.

This is why I say those who are still crying about or pointing to supposed judgement issues such as heavy drinking don't know anything about how background investigations are done for positions of trust. Hence my remark that if you are not satisifies with the 6 BIs Kavanaugh has been through and the targeted FBI investigation demanded by some senators, then you should be complaining to your local representatives that the current system used by OPM, FBI, and DoD is broken in your eyes.

Again, many of you have no idea the level of scrutiny which goes into these BIs. If you want to educate yourselves about what is involved, download a copy of the SF86. The SF86 is just a starting point for how investigators create a picture of who you are. The last clearance I held costs $80k for someone going through the process the first time. Periodic updates cost $40k. These investigations are not your simple criminal background checks nor applying for a loan.
 

zx10guy

Trusted Advisor
Spam Fighter
Joined
Mar 30, 2008
Messages
6,646
Here's more information for those that even care about educating yourselves behind what happens in background investigations and adjudications:

http://ogc.osd.mil/doha/industrial/

Also, in your consent to go through the process of being vetted, you are made aware that if through the course of doing the BI the investigators find something which breaks any law, you can be handed over to the proper authorities for prosecution.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

As Seen On
As Seen On...

Welcome to Tech Support Guy!

Are you looking for the solution to your computer problem? Join our site today to ask your question. This site is completely free -- paid for by advertisers and donations.

If you're not already familiar with forums, watch our Welcome Guide to get started.

Join over 807,865 other people just like you!

Latest posts

Staff online

Top