So, we're well past the initial Kavanaugh engagements and I can say one thing- the man's behavior during all of this is enough for me to say he doesn't belong on the US Supreme Court.
I was on the fence, before, but now watching how he's acting and the things he's saying- and most importantly the WAY he is saying them makes me believe he's just not Supreme Court Material.
I have a certain expectation of the people on the highest court of the US. Brett Kavanaugh does not meet those expectations.
🇳🇱
@Surasanji While I understand your reaction I also have to say if an entire nation was after me over someone lying with no evidence and i had to deal with a full blown trial that also lacked any shred of evidence, I'd probably be pretty cross too. If there was at least some evidence and some sense of credibility to it all I might agree with ya.
CW For Length
@freemo Oh, he's got *every* right to be angry. Every single right, particularly if we assume that this didn't happen, or didn't happen as described.
Either way, the way he's been treated is pretty trashy and he's got the right to be upset.
But the manner in which you behave given these kinds of stressing events- given this kind of legitimate anger- is very important when you're talking about someone who will be appointed for the rest of their life/career to a position that dictates law and acts as a check and balance to the other two branches of government.
I do not, personally, believe that Brett Kavanaugh has behaved in a way that indicates the maturity and self-control required for a Supreme Court Justice. SCOTUS justices should be the kind of people who think before they speak.
This whole thing is a circus and a shitshow, sure, and wider investigations should be done- but I'm just not feeling that I can trust Kavanaugh to make rational, dispassionate decisions based on just and honest interpretations of the law. His behavior just doesn't feel appropriate to it.
For instance, his interchange between himself and Sen. Amy Klobuchar. That felt childish more so than borne of anger. The whole process has been peppered with little things from Kavanaugh that call in to question (Again, for me and in my opinion) his ability to be a member of the SCOTUS.
CW For Length
@Surasanji fair
@freemo @Surasanji wouldn't a full unhindered investigation by the FBI be the obvious solution? If you are innocent you have nothing to hide. But if you lied under oath or if your other witness won't lie under oath you might want to hamstring that investigation. His demeanour has more to do with having his entitlted crappy behaviour examined.
The previous Trump appointment had no such problems because he was qualified and less a party hack.
As to Graham's tantrum, two words Merril Garland. What the Republicans did there set the precedent.
@Ozmont Depends what a "funn unhindered investigation" means. If we are talking simply about FBI agents talking to people, sure, they should be doing that. If we are talking about search of digital or physical property, well that requires a search warrent, for that you need at east some level of evidence.
So really just depends on what we mean here. But I dont think the argument of "If your innocent you have nothing to hide" is a very good one when it comes to personal liberties. Thats a very dangerous mentality, thats the same train of thought that leads us to state wide surveillance and ease dropping.
@Surasanji Anyone associated with the federalist society is wildly unqualified. There shouldn't be a partisan judiciary.
Your personal convictions should never taint the outcome of a trail. You do not get to selectively apply the law to serve your agenda, nor can you shape it to make your agenda the only legal one.