| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#22
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
Interesting comment by lawyer ...
On 9/29/2018 7:23 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/29/18 5:10 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: 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.Â* 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.Â* 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. There's no doubt there are strong efforts to block Kavanaugh, and for good reason. I suppose if Kavanaugh is withdrawn, the Repubs could try to fast-track a replacement before the election and if not, certainly after the election. I have no problem with the Dems trying to block Kavanaugh ... for the right reasons like simple political differences ... but not for the ridiculous and disgusting reasons they have demonstrated over the past week. |
|
#23
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Interesting comment by lawyer ...
On 9/29/2018 5:58 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article , says... 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. Funny. The Democrats didn't nominate a sniveling drunk liar to SCOTUS. In case you didn't notice, he's a Republican nominee. Why can't the Republicans find a clean nominee? Believe me, if this sorry excuse for a jurist gets on the court, any ruling where he's a deciding vote will be considered dirt. And if the Dems take the House he will be impeached for lying to Congress, and rightfully so. There's really no reason to debate or even discuss this with you. Your first sentence (after "Funny") says it all. Your mind is made up, closed and you've condemned before a trial. Congratulations. You've morphed into a true, card carrying, modern Democrat. |
|
#24
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Interesting comment by lawyer ...
On 9/29/2018 7:20 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 9/29/18 5:16 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: 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.Â* 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."Â* I wish it was amusing.Â* It's not. Funny.Â* The best thing for this country is a reasoned SCOTUS with a conservative list.Â* (boating term for "tilt"). You mean, the best thing for corporations, the wealthy, the enemies of rights for minorities, workers, women, et cetera. Nope. I said for the country. Change will always take place but it should be slow, measured and controlled. The USA is slowly drifting towards where you and other Dems want it to be. Personally, I don't like it but I am aware enough to realize it's happening. I just don't think it should move too fast. |
|
#25
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Interesting comment by lawyer ...
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. |
|
#26
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Interesting comment by lawyer ...
On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 17:01:51 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote: 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. I understand in your Trump derangement syndrome everything that happens is Trump's fault but if any of those 16 GOP candidates had won, you would see a similar slate of nominees. If it was one of the righteous right guys they might have even found a more undesirable person for you. As I said, of the 3 in the running, Kavanaugh might be the most centrist. |
|
#27
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Interesting comment by lawyer ...
On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 16:58:26 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote: In article , says... 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. Funny. The Democrats didn't nominate a sniveling drunk liar to SCOTUS. In case you didn't notice, he's a Republican nominee. Why can't the Republicans find a clean nominee? Believe me, if this sorry excuse for a jurist gets on the court, any ruling where he's a deciding vote will be considered dirt. And if the Dems take the House he will be impeached for lying to Congress, and rightfully so. Don't suppose you would put some money where your mouth is, say $100. If he is elevated to the SCOTUS, it is over and I have $100 that says he stays there until he dies. |
|
#28
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Interesting comment by lawyer ...
On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 19:23:25 -0400, Keyser Soze
wrote: On 9/29/18 5:10 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: 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.Â* 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.Â* 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. There's no doubt there are strong efforts to block Kavanaugh, and for good reason. I suppose if Kavanaugh is withdrawn, the Repubs could try to fast-track a replacement before the election and if not, certainly after the election. It will certainly frost your nuts if a lame duck Senate approves Barrett. |
|
#29
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Interesting comment by lawyer ...
On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 19:34:35 -0400, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote: On 9/29/2018 7:23 PM, Keyser Soze wrote: On 9/29/18 5:10 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote: 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.Â* 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.Â* 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. There's no doubt there are strong efforts to block Kavanaugh, and for good reason. I suppose if Kavanaugh is withdrawn, the Repubs could try to fast-track a replacement before the election and if not, certainly after the election. I have no problem with the Dems trying to block Kavanaugh ... for the right reasons like simple political differences ... but not for the ridiculous and disgusting reasons they have demonstrated over the past week. It is interesting that nobody has admitted that this is really just about Roe to them, at least not since they had the Ford thing to wave around. I do think this is the first time ever that I have seen a politician or a potential justice being crucified for what they might have done as a teenager. We were not even allowed to criticize what democrat sitting senators and governors did while they were in office. |
|
#30
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
Interesting comment by lawyer ...
On Sat, 29 Sep 2018 16:58:26 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote: In article , says... 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. Funny. The Democrats didn't nominate a sniveling drunk liar to SCOTUS. In case you didn't notice, he's a Republican nominee. Why can't the Republicans find a clean nominee? Believe me, if this sorry excuse for a jurist gets on the court, any ruling where he's a deciding vote will be considered dirt. And if the Dems take the House he will be impeached for lying to Congress, and rightfully so. The democrats did nominate a rapist and serial sexual harasser for president and I bet you voted for him ... twice. You also had a drunken murderer as the senior senator from Massachusetts for 50 years. Before you go after things people are accused of, as teenagers, look at what your people did as adults and admitted it. (Teddy copped a plea and Bill paid Paula) |
| 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 | |||
Linear Mode
