Supreme Court Nominee

Should a person be judged on something done over 40 years ago?

  • Yes

    Votes: 59 39.1%
  • No

    Votes: 17 11.3%
  • Depends

    Votes: 75 49.7%

  • Total voters
Not open for further replies.


Well-Known Member
Aug 26, 2012
Reaction score
Thank you for a thought provoking question.

For me it’s BK’s behavior once the accusations became public that is so odious.

Yes, I would deny appointment for someone that I admired if this same scenario had played out post accusations.

I would no longer admire that person if he had reacted as BK has.

I really had no interest in BK until that creepy Fox interview caught my eye.

Maybe if he didn’t feel so entitled he would have handled himself with the decorum that, imo, the job requires.


Yes, i am guessing most who feel this way about Kavanaugh all hold a similar position.
We'll see what happens when it is someone admired by the left who is in the seat of the accused.
I do not think you will have to wait long for that to happen.

just a guess, but both the right and the left are going to flip scripts.


Well-Known Member
Jul 15, 2014
Reaction score


Well-Known Member
Mar 11, 2009
Reaction score
I understand what you are saying, and how devastating it is to be accused of something, especially something horrible, that isn't true.

Supposing that what Dr. Blasey accuses him of is untrue (I believe her, in case I haven't made that clear enough ;)), K indeed has the right to be angry. Even very angry. Even spitting crying angry, if I stretch my tolerance in this scenario to it's utmost limits.

What he, as a nominee for a seat on the highest court in the land, isn't entitled to do is to express that anger as a PARTISAN attack, in public, in a hearing allegedly held to get at the truth of Blasey's accusations.

The bridge way way way too far is when he accused the Clintons, ffs, of seeking revenge on him. That wildly irresponsible and crazy assertion was disqualifying all by itself.

I love your post- because I totally agree with every word in it. Indeed his irresponsible and crazy accusations should disqualify him from being a jurist on the highest court in our land- if he is confirmed it will be a horrible miscarriage of justice which this country will pay for, for decades.


Well-Known Member
Sep 10, 2011
Reaction score
Not only that Cool..if this keeps up we never become a civil society again.

I hate how this has turned out pitching one against the other. I hate how Dr Ford was never told she could give her testimony in the comforts of her home. That is unforgivable.

This is not a new process. When complaints are made against any nominee before being confirmed both parties come together privately and the complaints are investigated. Many of the staffers for each senator are investigators with a law background...many who have served in the DOJ..FBI or seasoned police officers along with seasoned lawyers.

Senator Grassley upon learning of the allegation immediately went to the FBI with the complaint. It was the FBI upon seeimg the claim said their investigation was closed.

Instead of screaming over and over saying it should be up to the accused to decide or even the president is ridiculous political posturing. DF did take it to the FBI too. She was told the same. If they want to go to someone then go to the AG who already has a poor relationship with PDT. The way this has all been orchestrated and purposefully hidden until the 11th hour should not be acceptable to anyone.

I have never seen such vile dispicable behavior and I am 71 years old. Part of congress looks like it is being run by crazies vigilantes and have been out of control in this entire process.

If we dared to allow unsupported allegations to be the threshold for finding anyone..anyone...guilty then we have becobme a third world country.

They lamely say..this is not a trial. I agree is far worse than any trial I have ever seen. People in court have much better behavior. If they acted like this they are found in contempt and can be thrown in jail.

If that was truly the acceptable threshold then the 5 Duke lacrosse players would be in prison today along others like them.

Imo we can't lower our standards on fairness and justice because of unsupported allegations whether we 'believe' them or not. A belief is not evidence. That puts every person at great risk.

I greatly dislike how some compare Dr Ford's testimony and judge Kavannah. Dr Ford was handled with kid gloves throughout by both sides so of course she wasn't angry or combative. Why would she be?

She wasn't the one being be accused nor was she was being attacked or treated so aggressively in the questions either. I just wish they would layout the case fairly and not spin it. As an independent it drives me crazy how simple truths are spun.

They truly must think that many millions of Americans can't see this nor do they believe the millions who have watched all of this know what has actually been said. Why do they have to spin when everyone watching is perfectly capable of thinking for themselves and know what has transpired as well as they do..


The FBI did NOT say their investigation was closed & nothing more could be done.

In fact, the FBI issued a statement saying that they had simply added Blasey's letter to K's background check file, but could not do more without the president explicitly requesting that additional investigation be done.

Trump did not, has not made that request. President Bush WAS requested - by Senators on both sides of the aisle- to reopen Thomas's background check and to investigate Anita Hill's allegations. I've heard/read Senators & Senate aides from that time saying there was never any disagreement or tension about the need to do so. It was a given.

What changed in this case is the question to ask.

I hope Flake's demand for an investigation is honored (if I understand what's going on correctly).

The FBI needs to investigate. Everyone should welcome such an investigation. And the necessity of everyone believing what the FBI finds (if it happens) is absolutely why attacks on the FBI and the politization of the FBI is so incredibly dangerous and wrong.


Well-Known Member
Aug 13, 2013
Reaction score
TRUMP: “I thought her testimony was very compelling and she looks like a very fine woman to me…Brett’s testimony likewise was really something that I haven’t seen before - it was incredible.”
*his calmness makes me think
It’s a sham to appease some voters or more women are about to come forward


Well-Known Member
Apr 27, 2009
Reaction score
Whether he is stable or not is and always will be individual perception. Doesn’t matter who is under oath. People are going to have differing views on that.
The question, which is being avoided, is whether or not these allegations are sufficient to eliminate him from this process and would you answer the same way if it was someone you admired being accused?

I'm not avoiding the question. Are the allegations sufficient to remove him from the process? No. It's his RESPONSE and REACTION to the allegations that the show he's unfit to be considered. He could not answer a single question straightforwardly. He has limited emotional control. No matter what his viewpoints and whether or not I agree with him, he's shown he's not made of the right stuff to be on the Supreme Court. And I would think that no matter who it was.


Well-Known Member
May 5, 2009
Reaction score
@AcostaTrump tells WH pool he is open to delay on Kavanaugh saying “whatever they think is necessary.”
Well played POTUS. The longer the delay the less time for campaigning from some Senate members.
Have Faith!
Off topic- I love old people and it's disappointing to keep reading the insulting comments in this thread. MO


Well-Known Member
Nov 24, 2013
Reaction score
Not open for further replies.