Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

    Originally posted by Handyman View Post
    Except again...this isn't a court.
    Of course not, but court procedures are developed for reasons of fairness.

    And yeah, I realize politics are not about fairness.
    Last edited by burd; 09-21-2018, 01:19 PM.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by burd View Post
      This discussion is a little out of place in that Ford is not a party but a witness. It's also easy to confuse defense and rebuttal, as they are applied in court proceedings.

      As a basic concept, though, they should both be allowed to respond to the other's testimony. IMO.
      As long as they both do fine. That doesn't seem to be what others are saying though. Either both do or neither do.

      Plus it isn't like she just says her piece and leaves. The Senators can ask her anything they want (And will) unless I am missing something. (I am working so I am getting only pieces of info so it's possible). They will be rebutting her testimony on his behalf.

      We will see how it plays out I guess.
      "It's as if the Drumpf Administration is made up of the worst and unfunny parts of the Cleveland Browns, Washington Generals, and the alien Mon-Stars from Space Jam."
      -aparch

      "Scenes in "Empire Strikes Back" that take place on the tundra planet Hoth were shot on the present-day site of Ralph Engelstad Arena."
      -INCH

      Of course I'm a fan of the Vikings. A sick and demented Masochist of a fan, but a fan none the less.
      -ScoobyDoo 12/17/2007

      Comment


      • Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

        Originally posted by SJHovey View Post
        I'm going to disagree with you here. It's her allegation. How is he supposed to go first without knowing what she is going to accuse him of, other than media reports about some letter she wrote?

        This isn't a trial, and she's trying to make it like she has a "fair chance" to win or something. There aren't going to be any winners here.

        She should come in and tell the committee what she claims he did. If he wants, or if the committee insists, Kavanaugh should be called to respond. Then make a decision.
        Hes innocent. says he was never there. said it never happened.


        What could she say that would contradict his claims?


        Or is he lying, and needs to know what she knows to make up another lie?
        What kind of cheese are you planning to put on top?

        Comment


        • Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

          Originally posted by Handyman View Post
          If they prefer she go first that is fine. To me both sides state their case and answer questions then all is well. Rebuttal though will give him a chance to change his story and unless she has the same right is rather unfair.

          If both get a rebuttal I think it is fine otherwise I just would rather they say their piece and get grilled by the senators.
          My feeling is, let her testify. He then gets to respond, to basically answer the charge she levels against him.

          If she says he did it and he says he didn't, no purpose is served by insisting she come back. If she says he did it, and he says no he didn't and he has an entry signed by her in his yearbook to prove it, then obviously she needs to be given a chance to respond.

          This whole issue of who gets to go last reminds me of the absolute stupidity of these nightly news programs. All these idiots feel like they have to have the literal last word, otherwise they've been treated unfairly or can't "win."
          That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

          Comment


          • Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

            If he has an entry in his high school yearbook from her, we'd have seen it by now.


            Instead, they've spent the last three days forming this elaborate theory that she was actually attacked by a completely different person.
            What kind of cheese are you planning to put on top?

            Comment


            • Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

              Originally posted by rufus View Post
              Hes innocent. says he was never there. said it never happened.


              What could she say that would contradict his claims?


              Or is he lying, and needs to know what she knows to make up another lie?
              Those are his claims, in response to reporters questions about what the reporters think her claims are. But we don't know what she's going to say.

              It's silly to think that anyone but her would testify first. We need to know exactly what she is claiming. Then they can call Kavanaugh or witnesses to see if her story can be corroborated or refuted.
              That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

              Comment


              • Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

                So why do you say that? If you know she's lying, if he never did what she says, then you know that nothing she could ever say will incriminate you. You know what you did and what you didn't. You either say that cause you have to in order to appear innocent, or you're innocent. There's nothing to finesse about it, no matter what she might say

                The only way he needs to be prepared for what she might say is if he actually did do something like she's alleging.
                What kind of cheese are you planning to put on top?

                Comment


                • Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

                  Originally posted by burd View Post
                  Actually, on the subject of Ford's allegations, the ordinary (court) procedure would be to allow her to go first, he responds and she gets to rebut.
                  I'd be good with that ... along with the sequestered while the other is speaking idea someone rolled out (applied to both).
                  The preceding post may contain trigger words and is not safe-space approved. <-- Virtue signaling.

                  North Dakota Hockey:

                  Comment


                  • Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

                    Other than a chairman running the show who has a political agenda, the other thing about the allegation/defense/rebuttal setup is that it implies that the person alleging misconduct has the burden of proof, which is a very convenient avenue for a judge or anyone else to say "the evidence is troubling but not conclusive, and the plaintiff has the burden of proof, so the tie goes to the defense."

                    Republicans will say the Dems do have the burden of proof on the Ford allegations, but if the proofs, while not conclusive, yet raise substantial doubts about his truthfulness or character they should count toward the deliberations. But I think we all know that Ford's testimony will have to be very credible for the allegations to stop the train.

                    Comment


                    • Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

                      Don't like the reference from before? Fine. I'll clean it out.


                      You're up first, mount your defense, state your case, to whatever you haven't been formally charged with yet.
                      Your star chamber prosecutor will present the full scope and nature, the details, of the charges against you when you're finished.
                      And you get no rebuttal to the charges made.


                      The Senate may not be a court of law; however, I can fully see why Dershowitz called the Ford proposal unAmerican. It's not how we do accusation and discovery.
                      The preceding post may contain trigger words and is not safe-space approved. <-- Virtue signaling.

                      North Dakota Hockey:

                      Comment


                      • Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

                        Originally posted by rufus View Post
                        So why do you say that? If you know she's lying, if he never did what she says, then you know that nothing she could ever say will incriminate you. You know what you did and what you didn't. You either say that cause you have to in order to appear innocent, or you're innocent. There's nothing to finesse about it, no matter what she might say

                        The only way he needs to be prepared for what she might say is if he actually did do something like she's alleging.
                        For reasons that aren't clear to me, I'll agree to type this one more time. There are no allegations from her. At least not yet. At least not that she's willing to swear to tell the truth to.

                        What we have is someone told the New York Times that they were told by Diane Feinstein that she received a letter which contained some allegations.

                        I have an idea. How about we let the woman testify. Let's hear her story. Then if Kavanaugh wants to respond, so be it. At least at that point he'll know what her story is, and anyone who wants to ask him a question will know what her story is.

                        All Kavanaugh has done thus far is deny what someone's cousin overheard his next-door-neighbor whisper to his dog.
                        That community is already in the process of dissolution where each man begins to eye his neighbor as a possible enemy, where non-conformity with the accepted creed, political as well as religious, is a mark of disaffection; where denunciation, without specification or backing, takes the place of evidence; where orthodoxy chokes freedom of dissent; where faith in the eventual supremacy of reason has become so timid that we dare not enter our convictions in the open lists, to win or lose.

                        Comment


                        • Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

                          Originally posted by The Sicatoka View Post
                          I'd be good with that ... along with the sequestered while the other is speaking idea someone rolled out (applied to both).
                          Sequestration applies to non party witnesses, though. K and F aren't parties, but they should be able to hear what the other has to say, IMO. If I'm F's lawyer, I want to hear what K says, so the panel members can't misquote or misconstrue his testimony when they examine her. Same for K.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by burd View Post
                            Sequestration applies to non party witnesses, though. K and F aren't parties, but they should be able to hear what the other has to say, IMO. If I'm F's lawyer, I want to hear what K says, so the panel members can't misquote or misconstrue his testimony when they examine her. Same for K.
                            Exactly. That is why it is important both have the same right to rebut. It would be ridiculously one sided if he is allowed to attack her testimony and not the other way around. If she can't, he can't.

                            If certain people want to treat this as a trial then all rules apply. Both sides state their case, both sides rebut for as long as it takes.. That's it. No fast tracking, no nothing. Everything is game and everything can be be fact checked. And since certain people have a burr up their but about it anyone who wishes to put forth proof needs to disclose. And hey how about rebuttal witnesses too!

                            Let's stall this out forever!
                            "It's as if the Drumpf Administration is made up of the worst and unfunny parts of the Cleveland Browns, Washington Generals, and the alien Mon-Stars from Space Jam."
                            -aparch

                            "Scenes in "Empire Strikes Back" that take place on the tundra planet Hoth were shot on the present-day site of Ralph Engelstad Arena."
                            -INCH

                            Of course I'm a fan of the Vikings. A sick and demented Masochist of a fan, but a fan none the less.
                            -ScoobyDoo 12/17/2007

                            Comment


                            • Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

                              https://thehill.com/blogs/blog-brief...mpression=true

                              Wow this getting yuge!
                              "It's as if the Drumpf Administration is made up of the worst and unfunny parts of the Cleveland Browns, Washington Generals, and the alien Mon-Stars from Space Jam."
                              -aparch

                              "Scenes in "Empire Strikes Back" that take place on the tundra planet Hoth were shot on the present-day site of Ralph Engelstad Arena."
                              -INCH

                              Of course I'm a fan of the Vikings. A sick and demented Masochist of a fan, but a fan none the less.
                              -ScoobyDoo 12/17/2007

                              Comment


                              • Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

                                https://***********/CNN/status/1043221448192651264?s=19

                                Whelan now walking away from the "she misidentified her attacker" bs. My guess is he got a call from a lawyer...
                                "It's as if the Drumpf Administration is made up of the worst and unfunny parts of the Cleveland Browns, Washington Generals, and the alien Mon-Stars from Space Jam."
                                -aparch

                                "Scenes in "Empire Strikes Back" that take place on the tundra planet Hoth were shot on the present-day site of Ralph Engelstad Arena."
                                -INCH

                                Of course I'm a fan of the Vikings. A sick and demented Masochist of a fan, but a fan none the less.
                                -ScoobyDoo 12/17/2007

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X