LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 139
0 members and 139 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 4,499, 10-26-2015 at 07:55 AM.
View Single Post
Old 10-10-2018, 01:09 PM   #3495
sebastian_dangerfield
Moderator
 
sebastian_dangerfield's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Monty Capuletti's gazebo
Posts: 26,077
Re: We are all Slave now.

Quote:
He was credibly accused. Having been so, an actual investigation should have ensued.
Agreed.

Quote:
We did not get one.
Agreed.

Quote:
We got a blanket denial from him, along with lying on collateral issues as to his credibility. That's more than enough for a no vote based on the allegations.
Agreed on lies, not on blanket denial. I personally think the denial was a lie. But I'm speculating. I'd want more investigation before I made a decision if I were a senator.

I would not - ever - decide she was entirely truthful and he was not based solely on her testimony. I do not think a credible accusation alone shifts the burden of proof in any forum, including any truly logical person's mind.

You are right to rip the GOP for avoiding a real investigation. You are dead wrong if you believe based on a credible accusation alone, and a blanket denial, a nominee should be dinged. That's dangerous thinking.

Quote:
But you don't need that either, because his demonstrated temperament and lies to the committee are also more than sufficient reason to vote no.
Agreed on lies, not on temperament.

Quote:
Weirdly, I do not think having worked for Starr is disqualifying, but hey, each Senator gets to decide, so whatever.
Non-negotiable from my end. Total disqualification. Do not pass go.
__________________
All is for the best in the best of all possible worlds.

Last edited by sebastian_dangerfield; 10-10-2018 at 01:11 PM..
sebastian_dangerfield is offline  
 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:20 AM.