The Lawfare Editor in Chief posits great arguments on Kavanaugh

[SavannahMann]

I love what we are becoming. From Innocent until proven guilty, to guilty and never able to prove your innocence, our standards have not so much done a 180 as been destroyed totally. We use political standards for criminal issues.

I told a neighbor that I would not fly the American Flag because we had become the old Soviet Union. Every day I see more and more examples of how right I am in that assessment.

No. Not that Republicans impress me, but it's the Democrats alone who have become the old Soviet Union. There's still time to flatten them.

It takes just one to tip that first domino.

Hardly. Both embrace the old Soviet idealism. The Conservatives, Republicans if you will, argued before the Supreme Court and won when the Police refused to get a lawyer for a suspect. Their argument? The suspect said. “I think I want a Lawyer Dog.” The Supreme Court agreed that there were no Canines admitted to the BAR, and so the request was nonsense and not a real request for a lawyer.

Suspect Asks for “a Lawyer, Dawg.” Judge Says He Asked for “a Lawyer Dog.”

Republicans, especially Conservative Republicans, argue that the Constitution limits the Government. I believe they are correct. Their faithfulness to this belief is worse than non existent. They champion themselves as strict originalists, who believe in smaller Government. Only all their causes lead to greater Government and less of that limiting factor that the Constitution says is supposed to be the purpose.

It isn’t just the Democrats. If only it was I’d be a true blue Republican.

 

[SavannahMann]

`
I read the article and the author sums it up nicely;
`
`

`
`
​

Ok. I accuse you of sacrificing an animal worshipping the devil. Prove you didn’t do it. You have one hour. If you can’t prove it beyond the shadow of the doubt, you will be sent to prison for animal cruelty.

Tick. Tock. Times up. Report to your local prison. I know I said an hour, but we cant wait on a case this serious. Guilty until proven innocent is not the standard we use in this nation. At least not since the Salem Witch Trials.

 

[Windparadox]

He doesn't have to defend anything. The burden of proof is on the accuser. Without proof, the accusers can be shown the door.This is all merely another Leftist circus. Kavanaugh should openly condemn every Democrat in that room today specifically and their party generally. Give them a little of their own theater.

`
You didn't read the article. Benjamin Wittes is a Senior Fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution, where he is the Research Director in Public Law, and Co-Director of the Harvard Law School – Brookings Project on Law and Security. I'll take his word over yours.

 

[OldLady]

I have known Brett Kavanaugh for a long time—in many different contexts. I am fond of him personally. I think the world of him intellectually. I don’t believe he lied in his Senate testimony. I don’t believe he’s itching to get on the Supreme Court to protect Donald Trump from Robert Mueller. I’m much less afraid of conservative judges than are many of my liberal friends. As recently as a few days ago, I was cheerfully vouching for Kavanaugh’s character.

That said, the allegation against him is, at least so far as one can tell from the press reports, credible, and it deserves to be taken seriously.

Brett Kavanaugh Bears the Burden of Proof - The Atlantic

Based on your source, The Atlantic, I gave you the respect of reading, the article.


THe piece is complete shit that boils down to, "so much accusations, it looks like something"



My view of the Atlantic just went down several notches. This is pathetic.

"so much accusations, it looks like something"
That's how it's done. Pattern of behavior. It was when he was a teenager, all of it, so that needs to be taken into account, but all these women are liars? I don't think so.

 

[SavannahMann]

He doesn't have to defend anything. The burden of proof is on the accuser. Without proof, the accusers can be shown the door.This is all merely another Leftist circus. Kavanaugh should openly condemn every Democrat in that room today specifically and their party generally. Give them a little of their own theater.

`
You didn't read the article. Benjamin Wittes is a Senior Fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution, where he is the Research Director in Public Law, and Co-Director of the Harvard Law School – Brookings Project on Law and Security. I'll take his word over yours.

And is word, his standard applied to Kieth Ellison?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

I love what we are becoming. From Innocent until proven guilty, to guilty and never able to prove your innocence, our standards have not so much done a 180 as been destroyed totally. We use political standards for criminal issues.

I told a neighbor that I would not fly the American Flag because we had become the old Soviet Union. Every day I see more and more examples of how right I am in that assessment.

No. Not that Republicans impress me, but it's the Democrats alone who have become the old Soviet Union. There's still time to flatten them.

It takes just one to tip that first domino.

Hardly. Both embrace the old Soviet idealism. The Conservatives, Republicans if you will, argued before the Supreme Court and won when the Police refused to get a lawyer for a suspect. Their argument? The suspect said. “I think I want a Lawyer Dog.” The Supreme Court agreed that there were no Canines admitted to the BAR, and so the request was nonsense and not a real request for a lawyer.

Suspect Asks for “a Lawyer, Dawg.” Judge Says He Asked for “a Lawyer Dog.”

Republicans, especially Conservative Republicans, argue that the Constitution limits the Government. I believe they are correct. Their faithfulness to this belief is worse than non existent. They champion themselves as strict originalists, who believe in smaller Government. Only all their causes lead to greater Government and less of that limiting factor that the Constitution says is supposed to be the purpose.

It isn’t just the Democrats. If only it was I’d be a true blue Republican.

As I said, Republicans do not impress me, but they are Americans. The Democrats are not.

 

[Windparadox]

And is word, his standard applied to Kieth Ellison?

`
Try reading the entire article first. I'm not going to explain it to you.

 

[Indeependent]

Trump is not a man one wants in their corner

Everyone wants John Travolta’s twin brother on their side.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

He doesn't have to defend anything. The burden of proof is on the accuser. Without proof, the accusers can be shown the door.This is all merely another Leftist circus. Kavanaugh should openly condemn every Democrat in that room today specifically and their party generally. Give them a little of their own theater.

`
You didn't read the article. Benjamin Wittes is a Senior Fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution, where he is the Research Director in Public Law, and Co-Director of the Harvard Law School – Brookings Project on Law and Security. I'll take his word over yours.

I don't have to read the article. He's a legal hack. His premise flies in the face of logic, common sense and the basis of American justice.

He is a good friend of James Comey, which explains much.

 

[Windparadox]

I don't have to read the article. He's a legal hack. His premise flies in the face of logic, common sense and the basis of American justice.He is a good friend of James Comey, which explains much.

`
He's also a good friend of Brett Kavanaugh, to wit;
`

I have known Brett Kavanaugh for a long time—in many different contexts. I am fond of him personally. I think the world of him intellectually. I don’t believe he lied in his Senate testimony. I don’t believe he’s itching to get on the Supreme Court to protect Donald Trump from Robert Mueller. I’m much less afraid of conservative judges than are many of my liberal friends. As recently as a few days ago, I was cheerfully vouching for Kavanaugh’s character.​

`

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

I don't have to read the article. He's a legal hack. His premise flies in the face of logic, common sense and the basis of American justice.He is a good friend of James Comey, which explains much.

`
He's also a good friend of Brett Kavanaugh, to wit;
`

I have known Brett Kavanaugh for a long time—in many different contexts. I am fond of him personally. I think the world of him intellectually. I don’t believe he lied in his Senate testimony. I don’t believe he’s itching to get on the Supreme Court to protect Donald Trump from Robert Mueller. I’m much less afraid of conservative judges than are many of my liberal friends. As recently as a few days ago, I was cheerfully vouching for Kavanaugh’s character.​

`

He does not say he is a "good friend", he says he has known him for a long time, and is fond of him.

Regardless, for this "lawyer" to push the notion that the burden of proof falls upon the accused presents the antithesis of American justice. We fought wars to escape that Inquisitional-style nonsense.

 

[Indeependent]

And is word, his standard applied to Kieth Ellison?

`
Try reading the entire article first. I'm not going to explain it to you.

Try studying European history and perhaps you’ll learn something about why in America the burden of proof is on the accuser.
I’m not going to explain it to you.

 

[Correll]

I have known Brett Kavanaugh for a long time—in many different contexts. I am fond of him personally. I think the world of him intellectually. I don’t believe he lied in his Senate testimony. I don’t believe he’s itching to get on the Supreme Court to protect Donald Trump from Robert Mueller. I’m much less afraid of conservative judges than are many of my liberal friends. As recently as a few days ago, I was cheerfully vouching for Kavanaugh’s character.

That said, the allegation against him is, at least so far as one can tell from the press reports, credible, and it deserves to be taken seriously.

Brett Kavanaugh Bears the Burden of Proof - The Atlantic

Based on your source, The Atlantic, I gave you the respect of reading, the article.


THe piece is complete shit that boils down to, "so much accusations, it looks like something"



My view of the Atlantic just went down several notches. This is pathetic.

"so much accusations, it looks like something"
That's how it's done. Pattern of behavior. It was when he was a teenager, all of it, so that needs to be taken into account, but all these women are liars? I don't think so.

WHy not?

 

[Correll]

`
I read the article and the author sums it up nicely;
`
`

`
`
​

1. "Getting out" would of course be spun by the left as admitting that Ford's account is accurate.

2. That fact that the accusation is so ancient and vague, as to be impossible to disprove or prove, is a problem for the accusation, not the accused. Validating the opposite would be a terrible injustice.

3. "Moral viability" my ass. He will be the Justice, and if people want to convince themselves that his rulings are injustice so that they can play at being outraged, that is on them.

 

[Dan Stubbs]

I have known Brett Kavanaugh for a long time—in many different contexts. I am fond of him personally. I think the world of him intellectually. I don’t believe he lied in his Senate testimony. I don’t believe he’s itching to get on the Supreme Court to protect Donald Trump from Robert Mueller. I’m much less afraid of conservative judges than are many of my liberal friends. As recently as a few days ago, I was cheerfully vouching for Kavanaugh’s character.

That said, the allegation against him is, at least so far as one can tell from the press reports, credible, and it deserves to be taken seriously.

Brett Kavanaugh Bears the Burden of Proof - The Atlantic

The accused never has the burden of proof. But you know this.

Well I saw what the FBI did to the Security Guard in the case of a bomb that was set off in Georgia Atl, back about 20 years ago. He saw a backpack that had been placed in the floor area and reported it. It went off and he got charged with the crime. The FBI arrested him. many years later he was found not guilty by a conservative judge and evidence. The False media had him convicted prior to the trial and his life was down the drain. He sued the FBI and collected. The Media had him Arrested, tried, convicted way before the case ever got throught the court system.

 

[JBvM]

Well I saw what the FBI did to the Security Guard in the case of a bomb that was set off in Georgia Atl, back about 20 years ago. He saw a backpack that had been placed in the floor area and reported it. It went off and he got charged with the crime. The FBI arrested him. many years later he was found not guilty by a conservative judge and evidence. The False media had him convicted prior to the trial and his life was down the drain. He sued the FBI and collected. The Media had him Arrested, tried, convicted way before the case ever got throught[sic] the court system.

"a bomb exploded in Centennial Olympic Park in Atlanta in the early hours of July 27, 1996"

In October 1996, when it became obvious that Mr. Jewell had not been involved in the bombing, the Justice Department formally cleared him. Richard Jewell, 44, Hero of Atlanta Attack, Dies

The media's rush not LE caused problems for Jewell. He sued a few outlets.

Mistaken stories are not false or fake news. Corrections are issued by every single news outlet and have been for ages. Fake news would be made up shit

 

[JBvM]

I love what we are becoming. From Innocent until proven guilty, to guilty and never able to prove your innocence, our standards have not so much done a 180 as been destroyed totally. We use political standards for criminal issues.

I told a neighbor that I would not fly the American Flag because we had become the old Soviet Union. Every day I see more and more examples of how right I am in that assessment.

In a court of law, everyone is given the pretense of innocence, even when we have video and audio of a crime.

people like you misrepresent everything. you should not be allowed to vote

LOL

 

[JBvM]

I have known Brett Kavanaugh for a long time—in many different contexts. I am fond of him personally. I think the world of him intellectually. I don’t believe he lied in his Senate testimony. I don’t believe he’s itching to get on the Supreme Court to protect Donald Trump from Robert Mueller. I’m much less afraid of conservative judges than are many of my liberal friends. As recently as a few days ago, I was cheerfully vouching for Kavanaugh’s character.

That said, the allegation against him is, at least so far as one can tell from the press reports, credible, and it deserves to be taken seriously.

Brett Kavanaugh Bears the Burden of Proof - The Atlantic

Based on your source, The Atlantic, I gave you the respect of reading, the article.


THe piece is complete shit that boils down to, "so much accusations, it looks like something"



My view of the Atlantic just went down several notches. This is pathetic.

Correll you people did that with every bogus Hillary accusation. the bogus ones like watching people die and doing nothing and ordering a stand down - just saying


AND It was so much accusations that looked like something must be there led to this

Dennis Hastert: Ex-House speaker can't be alone with children, judge rules - CNN

and

Bill Cosby Assault Case: A Timeline From Accusation to Sentencing

and

Abuse allegations have been leveled at the Catholic Church for decades - CNN

 

[JBvM]

He doesn't have to defend anything. The burden of proof is on the accuser. Without proof, the accusers can be shown the door.This is all merely another Leftist circus. Kavanaugh should openly condemn every Democrat in that room today specifically and their party generally. Give them a little of their own theater.

`
You didn't read the article. Benjamin Wittes is a Senior Fellow in Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution, where he is the Research Director in Public Law, and Co-Director of the Harvard Law School – Brookings Project on Law and Security. I'll take his word over yours.

I don't have to read the article. He's a legal hack. His premise flies in the face of logic, common sense and the basis of American justice.

He is a good friend of James Comey, which explains much.

and Donald Trump was a good friend of Jeffrey the Pederast

 

[Windparadox]

He does not say he is a "good friend", he says he has known him for a long time, and is fond of him. Regardless, for this "lawyer" to push the notion that the burden of proof falls upon the accused presents the antithesis of American justice. We fought wars to escape that Inquisitional-style nonsense.

`
As you stated, you refused to read the article so how can I possibly conduct a rational discussion about it with a person who is relying on his own partisan opinions? This topic is about an article written by Benjamin Wittes, not your opinions on something you never read. Sorry.