(September 28, 2018 at 9:28 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(September 28, 2018 at 8:34 pm)Cathooloo Wrote: Even if he didn't do it - and I think he did - his penchant for evasive, deceptive answer and his temperament make him utterly unsuitable to fill any judgeship, much less on SCOTUS.

I'm -thrilled- there's going to be an investigation but it may matter little.

At least until the election.

On the contrary, IF he is innocent (big if), I can understand why he is angry. Could you imagine being wrongfully accused, in front of the whole world, of sexually assaulting women? Not only does that ruin your career, but your family and your name. Over something you never did. If he is innocent, I dont blame him for acting angry. I think any human would, under those circumstances.

I kudosed your post cuz I was glad to see you back on the forum! I kinda disagree w/ your position but whatevs...

FBI investigation!

I take it all is well now, right?

A Supreme Court nominee by the only U.S. President who proudly stated that if he was not his daughter's father he would be fucking her. What did they expect?

Saw this today......

(September 29, 2018 at 5:06 am)vulcanlogician Wrote:

(September 28, 2018 at 9:28 pm)Catholic_Lady Wrote: On the contrary, IF he is innocent (big if), I can understand why he is angry. Could you imagine being wrongfully accused, in front of the whole world, of sexually assaulting women? Not only does that ruin your career, but your family and your name. Over something you never did. If he is innocent, I dont blame him for acting angry. I think any human would, under those circumstances.

I kudosed your post cuz I was glad to see you back on the forum! I kinda disagree w/ your position but whatevs...

In case there is any misunderstanding, my position is not that he is innocent. The response above was to CD saying that even IF he is innocent, he isn't fit to be judge because he was angry during the hearing.

(September 29, 2018 at 8:30 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(September 29, 2018 at 5:06 am)vulcanlogician Wrote: I kudosed your post cuz I was glad to see you back on the forum! I kinda disagree w/ your position but whatevs...

In case there is any misunderstanding, my position is not that he is innocent. The response above was to CD saying that even IF he is innocent, he isn't fit to be judge because he was angry during the hearing.

I think that appealing to his emotions during the hearing is rather silly. I don’t see how getting sad or angry, over something that if he is correct, one should be sad and angry about, is a very good reason at all, not to conform him. It just seems resiculous. However if he had shown no emotion, I suspect that would be given as reason from some people not to confirm from some as well.

(September 29, 2018 at 8:30 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote:

(September 29, 2018 at 5:06 am)vulcanlogician Wrote: I kudosed your post cuz I was glad to see you back on the forum! I kinda disagree w/ your position but whatevs...

In case there is any misunderstanding, my position is not that he is innocent. The response above was to CD saying that even IF he is innocent, he isn't fit to be judge because he was angry during the hearing.

Lindsey like Crappynuts were making the argument that that was long ago and he was young and stupid. I am no fan of mob rule and a lifetime of revenge, but I am also not for rewarding horrible behavior even if someone cleans their life up. 

If a pilot who is training gets caught drunk in the cockpit, they should not be allowed to fly a jet.

I lived back then, and it was the age of keg parties, getting blitzed off your ass and spring break wet tee shirt contests. The fact he lied about all the yearbook stuff makes me think, if he can lie about that, he can lie about what he would do on the bench.

I believe Ford and to say she was mistaken isn't saying one believes her.

Yeah, what RR said.

Get angry: He can't control his emotions, he's not fit to be a judge.

Don't get angry: Proves he's guilty, an innocent man would get angry at those charges.

(September 29, 2018 at 8:45 am)RoadRunner79 Wrote:

(September 29, 2018 at 8:30 am)Catholic_Lady Wrote: In case there is any misunderstanding, my position is not that he is innocent. The response above was to CD saying that even IF he is innocent, he isn't fit to be judge because he was angry during the hearing.

I think that appealing to his emotions during the hearing is rather silly. I don’t see how getting sad or angry, over something that if he is correct, one should be sad and angry about, is a very good reason at all, not to conform him. It just seems resiculous. However if he had shown no emotion, I suspect that would be given as reason from some people not to confirm from some as well.

Exactly. Hypothetically speaking, if he were innocent (not saying he is), it would be completely human and normal of him to be upset, emotional, angry, etc. I'm not sure how anyone can't put themselves in that position and realize this.

With that being said, I think he more probably is not innocent. Obviously the lady was attacked. I don't think it is reasonable to deny that. But since there is still the possibility of mistaken identity given some of the evidence on his side, I hope the investigation will unequivocally either confirm or debunk this.