Media Bias

[pondwater]

If it's 50/50 whether he attempted to rape a girl (to say nothing of the other accusations), someone else should be nominated. 

There's your problem right there. If they can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt. then he should be confirmed. Witch hunt...

[CF DolFan]

There is no shortage of qualified candidates for the position.

I'm not so sure. If all we need is one person to stand up and say "blah, blah, blah" without any physical or circumstantial proof then no one is safe. This tactic will be used as a weapon from this day forward. I believe this for two reasons. 1) everyone has something in their past especially if we use childhood and 2) It doesn't take much for people to come forward for the fame, experiences and money that come from it. 

We just may be looking at the end of the process.

Ruth Bader Ginsburg nailed it ...
"The way it was was right. The way it is is wrong," Ginsburg said. "I wish I could wave a magic wand and have it go back the way it was."

"Think of Justice Scalia, who’s certainly a known character," she continued, adding that he was confirmed unanimously. "That’s the way it should be...instead of what it’s become, which is a highly-partisan show. The Republicans move in lockstep, and so do the Democrats."

[Spider-Dan]

There's your problem right there. If they can't prove beyond a reasonable doubt. then he should be confirmed.

But if they can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, then not only should be be rejected, but he should go to prison.  That's the standard of proof for a criminal conviction, not denial of a promotion.

So I guess you're saying that he should either be confirmed to the Supreme Court or imprisoned... no middle ground?

[Spider-Dan]

If all we need is one person to stand up and say "blah, blah, blah" without any physical or circumstantial proof then no one is safe. This tactic will be used as a weapon from this day forward.

So I guess under this theory, Democrats used it (unsuccessfully) for Thomas, forgot about it for Roberts, Alito, and Gorsuch, and then remembered it again?

The fact that Republicans had a list of 65 women lined up in support of Kavanaugh, but not Gorsuch, tells you they already knew where the bodies were buried.

[pondwater]

But if they can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt, then not only should be be rejected, but he should go to prison.  That's the standard of proof for a criminal conviction, not denial of a promotion.

So I guess you're saying that he should either be confirmed to the Supreme Court or imprisoned... no middle ground?

You have real comprehension issues. No one is talking about criminal convictions. I'm saying that if they can't prove that he did it beyond a reasonable doubt, then he should be confirmed. If they can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it, then he should be rejected. It's pretty simple common sense. But I know you, like most la-la land liberals, like to blur the line between common sense and fantasy land.

[Spider-Dan]

You're the one saying that it needs to be beyond a reasonable doubt. That standard is almost exclusively applied to criminal convictions.

When your employee applies for a promotion, and then someone comes forward saying, "This guy was a drug dealer in college," you don't need proof beyond a reasonable doubt to say, "You know what?  I think we'll promote someone else to this position." Reasonable doubt is plenty enough.

[pondwater]

You're the one saying that it needs to be beyond a reasonable doubt. That standard is almost exclusively applied to criminal convictions.

When your employee applies for a promotion, and then someone comes forward saying, "This guy was a drug dealer in college," you don't need proof beyond a reasonable doubt to say, "You know what?  I think we'll promote someone else to this position." Reasonable doubt is plenty enough.

An accusation 35 years later with no proof and foggy memory is not even reasonable doubt. It's simply an accusation.

The funny part is that if the shoe was on the other foot and this same thing was happening to a democrat nominee, you would be calling this what it actually is, a witch hunt. More Spider-Dan hypocrisy, LMAO...

[CF DolFan]

An accusation 35 years later with no proof and foggy memory is not even reasonable doubt. It's simply an accusation.

Not only that, everyone she said was there denies it and her friend even went as far as to say she didn't know Kavanough or remember him ever being at anything she attended.

[pondwater]

Not only that, everyone she said was there denies it and her friend even went as far as to say she didn't know Kavanough or remember him ever being at anything she attended.

Graham just went apeshit on the Democrats. 100% spot on...

[CF DolFan]

Graham just went apeshit on the Democrats. 100% spot on...

I did not see that coming from Graham. He caries a lot on both sides.  I'm glad he chose to speak rather than have that lady do it. All of the Republicans should have done the same.

[Spider-Dan]

An accusation 35 years later with no proof and foggy memory is not even reasonable doubt.

I'd say that's what the hearings are for.

The funny part is that if the shoe was on the other foot and this same thing was happening to a democrat nominee, you would be calling this what it actually is, a witch hunt. More Spider-Dan hypocrisy, LMAO...

If only there were a recent example of a high profile Democrat (on the Senate Judiciary Committee, even!) accused of sexual assault by someone who is clearly a partisan operative (say, a right-wing radio host).  Then we could see how the Democrats responded to those accusations, and whether they insisted that he resign.

Sorry, family values conservatives don't get to play the hypocrisy card while President Grab 'Em By The Pussy is in office.

[Phishfan]

Not only that, everyone she said was there denies it and her friend even went as far as to say she didn't know Kavanough or remember him ever being at anything she attended.

This isn't unusual though. Do you have any idea how many high school parties I attended where I don't know who was there, especially if I didn't know them? It seems the friend should recall the event or at least something happened though. Has she commented about that?

[CF DolFan]

This isn't unusual though. Do you have any idea how many high school parties I attended where I don't know who was there, especially if I didn't know them? It seems the friend should recall the event or at least something happened though. Has she commented about that?

She knew nothing about it. Apparently Dr Ford says she didn't tell anyone about her rape until 2012 so she never informed one of her best friends who was at the party.

[pondwater]

I'd say that's what the hearings are for.

If both witnesses are credible, no evidence corroborates her claim (and much refutes it), and he unequivocally denies the charge . . .

He's an innocent man wrongly accused.

[Spider-Dan]

Well, there's another person who was allegedly in the room and can testify one way or the other.  But for some reason, Republicans don't want to subpoena him.  Hmmm.

I think we should create a new government organization to try to get to the bottom of claims like this.  Like a federal department of investigations, or something.  I'm sure if such an entity existed, Republicans would surely be on board with getting it involved.  I vaguely remember another recent investigation into a Democrat seeking high office, but it was probably too inconspicuous for anyone else to remember.