Tom, you make some VERY strong arguments to not just term limits, but a more fair vetting process. Maybe it's not just the president and his cronies and sycophants who should decide the highest jurist in the land. Is it time to remove the politics from that branch of government? Or a more strict definition of the role of SCOTUS? I think removing it as an EQUAL branch of government would be a mistake, but we would also have to reduce the role s and power of the other two branches. Boy what a fight that would be!

Small government democracy? Or just better people in the job? Something to think about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Whose father is not trusting his daughter? Dr. Ford is not my daughter, and this is not about me trusting someone I don't even know in the same way that I would know and trust my daughter. You are trying to make this case a nationwide referendum on whether women get abused. That is not what this is about. It is about one man, the accusations leveled against him, and whether the evidence warrants any action. The bottom line is, the evidence does not at all support the allegations. So we should send Kavanaugh down the road because other women have, indeed, been abused? How does that help them?

---

Whatever you say.

Quote:

---

I think removing it as an EQUAL branch of government would be a mistake,

---

That ship already sailed . My proposals would restore balance .

I can agree with term limits for SCOTUS. It also appears Kavanaugh has enough votes to be confirmed.

Quote:

---

I think removing it as an EQUAL branch of government would be a mistake,

---

I would agree with that, but I don't know what to suggest other than to have justices who really believe in the rule of law and a proper role for SCOTUS.

term limits . This is my idea . A fixed term subject to renewal upon Senate consent. Repeat the confirmation process after 8 years . A new Senate re-confirms and there is a body of work in SCOTUS that the associate justice has accumulated . Too often they say what Senators want to hear during confirmation knowing they will never be held to account again .

Looks like BK will be confirmed. Now the next atrocity will be when ignorant, politically driven people start talking about "How Kavanaugh getting away with a sexual assault" has set the stage for more assaults against women. The two will have nothing to do with each other, but that won't stop them. BK got away with nothing since, the evidence indicates, nothing happened that involved him.

All the evidence wasn't gathered and evaluated.

How can you know?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

term limits . This is my idea . A fixed term subject to renewal upon Senate consent. Repeat the confirmation process after 8 years . A new Senate re-confirms and there is a body of work in SCOTUS that the associate justice has accumulated . Too often they say what Senators want to hear during confirmation knowing they will never be held to account again .

---

Or they refuse to answer hypotheticals, or cases that MAY come before them in the future. How about a return to the 60 vote thresh hold for SCOTUS nominees?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Looks like BK will be confirmed. Now the next atrocity will be when ignorant, politically driven people start talking about "How Kavanaugh getting away with a sexual assault" has set the stage for more assaults against women. The two will have nothing to do with each other, but that won't stop them. BK got away with nothing since, the evidence indicates, nothing happened that involved him.

---

No telling what will be revealed in the coming months or years, but just as the shunning of Garland was seen as a dirty trick, so will the investigation of the Kavanaugh investigation be seen. Slick Mitch and dufus gets their twofer, but one battle not a war makes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

All the evidence wasn't gathered and evaluated.

---

I doubt it remains hidden either.

Quote:

---

All the evidence wasn't gathered and evaluated.

---

Not sure what else could have been done. With all the holes in the stories presented by the three women, it finally just fell apart. If a person is going to make an accusation, it would be good to have some evidence to back it up, such as being able to remember important details. Let it go. There is nothing at all to show that BK was there. Nothing. End of story.

Can't really compare Garland and BK. The repubs pulled a political trick with Garland, and I can understand dems being upset by it, but that's what you can do when you control the senate. But they did not go after him personally and try to destroy his character with a highly questionable and difficult to believe series of accusations. One is smelly politics, but the other is a pathetic attempt to destroy a man's career and reputation.

Maybe the dems can get off their high horses long enough to take care of two of their own, Keith Ellison and Cory Booker. Perhaps its time to apologize to Monica Lewinsky and the other women who accused Bill Clinton of sexual offenses.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jlisenbe

Not sure what else could have been done. With all the holes in the stories presented by the three women, it finally just fell apart. If a person is going to make an accusation, it would be good to have some evidence to back it up, such as being able to remember important details. Let it go. There is nothing at all to show that BK was there. Nothing. End of story.

---

Just keep holding your nose at what the dufus keeps cooking up.

Quote:

---

Not sure what else could have been done.

---

Um, interview more than six people, interview all the people from back then who have come forward, interview for a reasonable length of time, interview longer than two or maybe three days.

Took a while to get Dennis Hastert too, but they got him.

https://www.politico.com/story/2015/...-scheme-118387

The thing about this investigation though that stinks is not just the small number of people questioned, but who decided who to question. The WH says the senators had control of the scope, the senators say the WH. We will never know what the marching orders were, or who issued them but the dufus said the FBI was free to follow any lead it found.

Sadly that leaves a lot of stories yet to tell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Um, interview more than six people, interview all the people from back then who have come forward, interview for a reasonable length of time.

---

Of course!!

A great deal of information arose far beyond what was represented by the three original accusers. NONE of this new information was allowed or even discussed by the WH-driven FBI investigation. It is a damn disgrace and you know that when the right starts bringing up the past like the Clintons simply to distract from what is being discovered to avoid getting at the truth.

Putting Booker in the same category as Kavanaugh is the height of Fox-inspired right-wing absurdity.

Quote:

---

Um, interview more than six people, interview all the people from back then who have come forward, interview for a reasonable length of time, interview longer than two or maybe three days.

---

It WAS more than three days. But if it had been seven, then people would have asked, "Why not ten?" They interviewed, I believe, nine people, with one person not agreeing to testify. That is more than the six you note, but even with the ten, folks will say, "Why wasn't it fifteen?" Democrats said, "We must have the FBI involved in this." They got their way, found out nothing, and are now complaining even more. There is nothing that will stop the complaining because nothing but the rejection of Kavanaugh would satisfy. If that means the destruction of an innocent man's life, family, and reputation, then so be it. It is hard to understand how some of you on this board are OK with that, but you plainly are, and that is tragic. All the rest of this whining is just a smoke screen to hide the real agenda.

Nope. Flake set it up to fail.

I don't know if it was Flake who set this investigation to fail, but have no doubt the White House, or senate leadership had a lot to do with how this sham was perpetrated. The fix was in to find nothing new.

https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?ur...qRAm.Q4vuw--~C

He lies as usual, and attacked Ford to the delight of his cheering base while he called her credible before.

https://ecp.yusercontent.com/mail?ur...88_TBbt9sg--~C
Time not truth was the real agenda.

you all should listen to Susan Collin's address yesterday https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iXzzmjgyO9k

Yeah. Right. The whole country is just dripping with evidence against BK. Everything known now points to his innocence, but no doubt if the FBI had kept on looking for another year or two, they would have found a hidden yearbook with handwritten notes about flatulence.

No, it's all about destroying a man just to get your way. I don't always agree with Lindsey Graham, but he was right in his statement about the dems. They will do anything in order to gain power. This is just another sick illustration of that fact. The only good thing I can think of is that the corrupt nature of the left is now on full display for the whole country to see. They will do anything and destroy anyone in order to get power. A letter of accusation held in secret for months. A woman whose desire for anonymity is tossed aside by a leaked letter. Delay. Stall. Accuse. Whine. Complain. Good grief. What corrupt attempt is next? The good news is that Mr. Trump is beginning to look downright clean compared to the people you guys support.

Attachment 49068