On death threats, in general: Sure, most people who make death threats probably have no intention to follow through with it, but they likely have every intention to persist intimidating and harassing a person--would you be ok with that?
Kavanaugh Vote on hold.???
- Thread starter cluelusshusbund
- Start date
On death threats, in general: Sure, most people who make death threats probably have no intention to follow through with it, but they likely have every intention to persist intimidating and harassing a person--would you be ok with that?
sculptor
Valued Senior Member
Perhaps now, not so unfortunately---death threats =assault and assault is a crime, and if it originated in another state, then that is federal.
======
I think that
"there were no allegations of a federal crime,"
was in regard to the original claim of unwanted sexual advances from 36 years ago.
Death threats are a whole new level.
I would be disappointed if the FBI and city and state police did not look into the alleged "death threats".
If it was proven to you that her claim of atempted rape was true... do you thank that shoud disqualify Kavanaugh from bein on the surpreme court.???
sculptor
Valued Senior Member
Psst
This the most political site I visit, and thereby the most right wing site.
(though, it seems that, many in here seem so entrenched in the left that all they can see is the walls of their trench)
Today, for instance I was reading up on gods gift to Ukraine
circa 370 years ago--right wing/left wing seems meaningless
..................................
doxxed---------thanks that's a new word for me
sculptor
Valued Senior Member
How would you prove that?
Witnesses. Physical evidence. The usual.
sculptor
Valued Senior Member
Who, exactly?
and
Physical evidence
From 36 years ago, at an unknown address
hahahahahaha
billvon
you seem to have an odd sense of humor
Unlikely in this case.
But that wasn't the question. The question was - "If it was proven to you that her claim of atempted rape was true... do you thank that shoud disqualify Kavanaugh from bein on the surpreme court.???"
We have the date, time, and place of the alleged assault, the names of the victim and both perpetrators, and sufficient particulars to affix appropriate legal charges.
Mark Judge.
Among others - such as other people at the party, corroborating various particulars.
Not really. Par for the course, actually.
You keep putting this stuff in quotes. Do you seriously doubt that these threats were made? Anyone with even a passing familiarity with such events would be far more surprised to find they had not.
So you do not have even a passing familiarity with such matters. Why not grant weight to the assessments of those who do?
sculptor
Valued Senior Member
Hell dad, absent more knowledge, I ain't made up my mind yet.
ergo
If you can prove it, go ahead and do that
then, we'll revisit that question.
If they investigate. So?
You know he has lied under oath to the Senate about his partisan activities and role. You know he is a Party hack up to his neck in dishonest and skeevy behavior. You know the people putting his name in for this job are withholding significant amounts of information about his record. What haven't you made up your mind about?
Fair enough.
Is there ANYTHING a Supreme Court candidate could do that you think should disqualify him? Attempted rape, actual rape, murder?
sculptor
Valued Senior Member
We don't know yet - but the Senate Judiciary committee has a lot of that info. From a Senate Judiciary tweet:
"Staff contacted third person allegedly at party described by Dr. Ford and obtained a statement under penalty of felony."
So they know who was there and they know which party it was. Of course, we will likely never see it; they've already stated that they are going to nominate him no matter what they find.
sculptor
Valued Senior Member
Which would make this intercourse moot?
Probably. But if enough pressure can be placed on them that they decide to actually listen to the facts before deciding, that would be good, and might change their minds. Hence all the pressure on them.
Some of the "we" who oppose this nomination.
Is it just my imagination that you frequently claim to disapprove of the partisan politicization of the Supreme Court and other legal institutions of the US? And here you have a genuine Party hack lawyer, a type specimen of the very degradation you claim to dislike, and you hem and haw over credible accusations of assault - like that's going to make or break your stamp of acquiescence.
Along with any pretense you may have in the future of opposing partisan political degradation of the Supreme Court.
sculptor
Valued Senior Member
Simple malfeasance in office would do it.
Though proven, not just allegations
also, a clear pattern of bias (I expect non partiality from judges)
again, proven
So attempted rape is OK. But "bias" isn't. Interesting.
That's been driven into the ground, by Kavanaugh's biography and dissembling. He's been a partisan Republican hack his entire life. He was the coordinator of the media leaks for Ken Starr's Clinton harassment, for chrissake. And check out his acceptance speech for his current nomination - the perfumed courtiers of King Louie the 14th could have taken lessons in kissing ass from this guy. Scott Pruitt level.