One Political PlazaSM - Home of politics
Home | Political Digest | Active Topics | Newest Pictures | Search | Login | Register | Help
Main
The former dean of Yale weighs in on Kavanaugh?
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8 next>>
Oct 8, 2018 12:23:40   #
tactful (a regular here)
 
1ST - Don't shoot the messenger,Thanks!
I got this in a news feed that seemed awfully unclear so I investigated.
this is the result of said investigation:
really getting sick of this,should have been viewed by the committee prior IMO along with the 650 law professors who signed a similar document at both Yale and Harvard ( where he taught).

ON THE BENCH
Brett Kavanaugh Cannot Have It Both Ways

As the former dean of Yale Law School, I’m shocked by the judge’s partisan turn.

By ROBERT POST

October 06, 2018


Brett Kavanaugh and I differ on most fundamental questions of constitutional law. Nevertheless, as a former dean of the institution where he received his law degree, I have withheld comment on the merits of his appointment. I am proud of the rich diversity of views that Yale Law School has produced.

Over the past decade, Kavanaugh has been a casual acquaintance. He seemed a gentle, quiet, reserved man, always solicitous of the dignity of his position as a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. It was therefore with something approaching unbelief that I heard his speech after Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony.

With calculation and skill, Kavanaugh stoked the fires of partisan rage and male entitlement. He had apparently concluded that the only way he could rally Republican support was by painting himself as the victim of a political hit job. He therefore offered a witches’ brew of vicious unfounded charges, alleging that Democratic members of the Senate Judicial Committee were pursuing a vendetta on behalf of the Clintons. If we expect judges to reach conclusions based solely on reliable evidence, Kavanaugh’s savage and bitter attack demonstrated exactly the opposite sensibility.

I was shell-shocked. This was not the Brett Kavanaugh I thought I knew. Having come so close to confirmation, Kavanaugh apparently cared more about his promotion than about preserving the dignity of the Supreme Court he aspired to join. Even if he sought to defend his honor as a husband and father, his unbalanced rantings about political persecution were so utterly inconsistent with the dispassionate temperament we expect from judges that one had to conclude that he had chosen ambition over professionalism.

His performance is indelibly etched in the public mind. For as long as Kavanaugh sits on the court, he will remain a symbol of partisan anger, a haunting reminder that behind the smiling face of judicial benevolence lies the force of an urgent will to power. No one who felt the force of that anger could possibly believe that Kavanaugh might actually be a detached and impartial judge. Each and every Republican who votes for Kavanaugh, therefore, effectively announces that they care more about controlling the Supreme Court than they do about the legitimacy of the court itself. There will be hell to pay.

I was in the end prompted to write this essay because, on Thursday, Kavanaugh published a remarkable op-ed in the Wall Street Journal in which he apologized for his rash words and attempted to reclaim for himself the “independence and impartiality” so necessary for judges. But judicial temperament is not like a mask that can be put on or taken off at will. Judicial temperament is more than skin-deep. It is part of the DNA of a person, as is well illustrated by Merrick Garland, who never once descended to the partisan rancor of Kavanaugh, despite the Senate’s refusal even to dignify his nomination with a hearing.

Judge Kavanaugh cannot have it both ways. He cannot gain confirmation by unleashing partisan fury while simultaneously claiming that he possesses a judicial and impartial temperament. If Kavanaugh really cared about the integrity and independence of the Supreme Court, he would even now withdraw from consideration.

But I see no evidence that he is about to withdraw. Kavanaugh will thus join the court as the black-robed embodiment of raw partisan power inconsistent with any ideal of an impartial judiciary. As the court moves to the right to accommodate Trump’s appointments, Kavanaugh will inevitably become the focus of distrust and mobilization. His very presence will undermine the court’s claim to legitimacy; it will damage the nation’s commitment to the rule of law. It will be an American tragedy.


Robert Post is Sterling professor at Yale Law School. This article is adapted from its original version, which appeared on the blog Take Care

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 12:37:33   #
Lonewolf (a regular here)
 
thanks



tactful wrote:
1ST - Don't shoot the messenger,Thanks!
I got this in a news feed that seemed awfully unclear so I investigated.
this is the result of said investigation:
really getting sick of this,should have been viewed by the committee prior IMO

ON THE BENCH
Brett Kavanaugh Cannot Have It Both Ways

As the former dean of Yale Law School, I’m shocked by the judge’s partisan turn.

By ROBERT POST

October 06, 2018


Brett Kavanaugh and I differ on most fundamental questions of constitutional law. Nevertheless, as a former dean of the institution where he received his law degree, I have withheld comment on the merits of his appointment. I am proud of the rich diversity of views that Yale Law School has produced.

Over the past decade, Kavanaugh has been a casual acquaintance. He seemed a gentle, quiet, reserved man, always solicitous of the dignity of his position as a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. It was therefore with something approaching unbelief that I heard his speech after Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony.

With calculation and skill, Kavanaugh stoked the fires of partisan rage and male entitlement. He had apparently concluded that the only way he could rally Republican support was by painting himself as the victim of a political hit job. He therefore offered a witches’ brew of vicious unfounded charges, alleging that Democratic members of the Senate Judicial Committee were pursuing a vendetta on behalf of the Clintons. If we expect judges to reach conclusions based solely on reliable evidence, Kavanaugh’s savage and bitter attack demonstrated exactly the opposite sensibility.

I was shell-shocked. This was not the Brett Kavanaugh I thought I knew. Having come so close to confirmation, Kavanaugh apparently cared more about his promotion than about preserving the dignity of the Supreme Court he aspired to join. Even if he sought to defend his honor as a husband and father, his unbalanced rantings about political persecution were so utterly inconsistent with the dispassionate temperament we expect from judges that one had to conclude that he had chosen ambition over professionalism.

His performance is indelibly etched in the public mind. For as long as Kavanaugh sits on the court, he will remain a symbol of partisan anger, a haunting reminder that behind the smiling face of judicial benevolence lies the force of an urgent will to power. No one who felt the force of that anger could possibly believe that Kavanaugh might actually be a detached and impartial judge. Each and every Republican who votes for Kavanaugh, therefore, effectively announces that they care more about controlling the Supreme Court than they do about the legitimacy of the court itself. There will be hell to pay.

I was in the end prompted to write this essay because, on Thursday, Kavanaugh published a remarkable op-ed in the Wall Street Journal in which he apologized for his rash words and attempted to reclaim for himself the “independence and impartiality” so necessary for judges. But judicial temperament is not like a mask that can be put on or taken off at will. Judicial temperament is more than skin-deep. It is part of the DNA of a person, as is well illustrated by Merrick Garland, who never once descended to the partisan rancor of Kavanaugh, despite the Senate’s refusal even to dignify his nomination with a hearing.

Judge Kavanaugh cannot have it both ways. He cannot gain confirmation by unleashing partisan fury while simultaneously claiming that he possesses a judicial and impartial temperament. If Kavanaugh really cared about the integrity and independence of the Supreme Court, he would even now withdraw from consideration.

But I see no evidence that he is about to withdraw. Kavanaugh will thus join the court as the black-robed embodiment of raw partisan power inconsistent with any ideal of an impartial judiciary. As the court moves to the right to accommodate Trump’s appointments, Kavanaugh will inevitably become the focus of distrust and mobilization. His very presence will undermine the court’s claim to legitimacy; it will damage the nation’s commitment to the rule of law. It will be an American tragedy.


Robert Post is Sterling professor at Yale Law School. This article is adapted from its original version, which appeared on the blog Take Care
1ST - Don't shoot the messenger,Thanks! br I got t... (show quote)

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 12:42:35   #
Gatsby (a regular here)
 
tactful wrote:
1ST - Don't shoot the messenger,Thanks!
I got this in a news feed that seemed awfully unclear so I investigated.
this is the result of said investigation:
really getting sick of this,should have been viewed by the committee prior IMO

ON THE BENCH
Brett Kavanaugh Cannot Have It Both Ways

As the former dean of Yale Law School, I’m shocked by the judge’s partisan turn.

By ROBERT POST

October 06, 2018


Brett Kavanaugh and I differ on most fundamental questions of constitutional law. Nevertheless, as a former dean of the institution where he received his law degree, I have withheld comment on the merits of his appointment. I am proud of the rich diversity of views that Yale Law School has produced.

Over the past decade, Kavanaugh has been a casual acquaintance. He seemed a gentle, quiet, reserved man, always solicitous of the dignity of his position as a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. It was therefore with something approaching unbelief that I heard his speech after Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony.

With calculation and skill, Kavanaugh stoked the fires of partisan rage and male entitlement. He had apparently concluded that the only way he could rally Republican support was by painting himself as the victim of a political hit job. He therefore offered a witches’ brew of vicious unfounded charges, alleging that Democratic members of the Senate Judicial Committee were pursuing a vendetta on behalf of the Clintons. If we expect judges to reach conclusions based solely on reliable evidence, Kavanaugh’s savage and bitter attack demonstrated exactly the opposite sensibility.

I was shell-shocked. This was not the Brett Kavanaugh I thought I knew. Having come so close to confirmation, Kavanaugh apparently cared more about his promotion than about preserving the dignity of the Supreme Court he aspired to join. Even if he sought to defend his honor as a husband and father, his unbalanced rantings about political persecution were so utterly inconsistent with the dispassionate temperament we expect from judges that one had to conclude that he had chosen ambition over professionalism.

His performance is indelibly etched in the public mind. For as long as Kavanaugh sits on the court, he will remain a symbol of partisan anger, a haunting reminder that behind the smiling face of judicial benevolence lies the force of an urgent will to power. No one who felt the force of that anger could possibly believe that Kavanaugh might actually be a detached and impartial judge. Each and every Republican who votes for Kavanaugh, therefore, effectively announces that they care more about controlling the Supreme Court than they do about the legitimacy of the court itself. There will be hell to pay.

I was in the end prompted to write this essay because, on Thursday, Kavanaugh published a remarkable op-ed in the Wall Street Journal in which he apologized for his rash words and attempted to reclaim for himself the “independence and impartiality” so necessary for judges. But judicial temperament is not like a mask that can be put on or taken off at will. Judicial temperament is more than skin-deep. It is part of the DNA of a person, as is well illustrated by Merrick Garland, who never once descended to the partisan rancor of Kavanaugh, despite the Senate’s refusal even to dignify his nomination with a hearing.

Judge Kavanaugh cannot have it both ways. He cannot gain confirmation by unleashing partisan fury while simultaneously claiming that he possesses a judicial and impartial temperament. If Kavanaugh really cared about the integrity and independence of the Supreme Court, he would even now withdraw from consideration.

But I see no evidence that he is about to withdraw. Kavanaugh will thus join the court as the black-robed embodiment of raw partisan power inconsistent with any ideal of an impartial judiciary. As the court moves to the right to accommodate Trump’s appointments, Kavanaugh will inevitably become the focus of distrust and mobilization. His very presence will undermine the court’s claim to legitimacy; it will damage the nation’s commitment to the rule of law. It will be an American tragedy.


Robert Post is Sterling professor at Yale Law School. This article is adapted from its original version, which appeared on the blog Take Care
1ST - Don't shoot the messenger,Thanks! br I got t... (show quote)


Until professor Post has "walked a mile" in Justice Kavanaugh's shoes, he should sit down, shut his mouth, and open his mind!

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 12:49:58   #
crazylibertarian (a regular here)
 
Gatsby wrote:
Until professor Post has "walked a mile" in Justice Kavanaugh's shoes, he should sit down, shut his mouth, and open his mind!



Amen! It's one thing to sit & soberly evaluate evidence against someone else and very difficult to assess it against yourself.

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 12:50:38   #
maryla (a regular here)
 
Agreed!!! He acts holier than thou...
Gatsby wrote:
Until professor Post has "walked a mile" in Justice Kavanaugh's shoes, he should sit down, shut his mouth, and open his mind!

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 12:57:33   #
tactful (a regular here)
 
Gatsby wrote:
Until professor Post has "walked a mile" in Justice Kavanaugh's shoes, he should sit down, shut his mouth, and open his mind!


noted! however he is just voicing what hundreds of Law professors thought and signed off on from both Yale and Harvard that got as much interest as the so called feebee ( FBI) investigation.
everybody Needs to walk in someone else's shoes before opening their mouth. Moi included.

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 13:04:30   #
Louie27 (a regular here)
 
tactful wrote:
1ST - Don't shoot the messenger,Thanks!
I got this in a news feed that seemed awfully unclear so I investigated.
this is the result of said investigation:
really getting sick of this,should have been viewed by the committee prior IMO along with the 650 law professors who signed a similar document at both Yale and Harvard ( where he taught).

ON THE BENCH
Brett Kavanaugh Cannot Have It Both Ways

As the former dean of Yale Law School, I’m shocked by the judge’s partisan turn.

By ROBERT POST

October 06, 2018


Brett Kavanaugh and I differ on most fundamental questions of constitutional law. Nevertheless, as a former dean of the institution where he received his law degree, I have withheld comment on the merits of his appointment. I am proud of the rich diversity of views that Yale Law School has produced.

Over the past decade, Kavanaugh has been a casual acquaintance. He seemed a gentle, quiet, reserved man, always solicitous of the dignity of his position as a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. It was therefore with something approaching unbelief that I heard his speech after Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony.

With calculation and skill, Kavanaugh stoked the fires of partisan rage and male entitlement. He had apparently concluded that the only way he could rally Republican support was by painting himself as the victim of a political hit job. He therefore offered a witches’ brew of vicious unfounded charges, alleging that Democratic members of the Senate Judicial Committee were pursuing a vendetta on behalf of the Clintons. If we expect judges to reach conclusions based solely on reliable evidence, Kavanaugh’s savage and bitter attack demonstrated exactly the opposite sensibility.

I was shell-shocked. This was not the Brett Kavanaugh I thought I knew. Having come so close to confirmation, Kavanaugh apparently cared more about his promotion than about preserving the dignity of the Supreme Court he aspired to join. Even if he sought to defend his honor as a husband and father, his unbalanced rantings about political persecution were so utterly inconsistent with the dispassionate temperament we expect from judges that one had to conclude that he had chosen ambition over professionalism.

His performance is indelibly etched in the public mind. For as long as Kavanaugh sits on the court, he will remain a symbol of partisan anger, a haunting reminder that behind the smiling face of judicial benevolence lies the force of an urgent will to power. No one who felt the force of that anger could possibly believe that Kavanaugh might actually be a detached and impartial judge. Each and every Republican who votes for Kavanaugh, therefore, effectively announces that they care more about controlling the Supreme Court than they do about the legitimacy of the court itself. There will be hell to pay.

I was in the end prompted to write this essay because, on Thursday, Kavanaugh published a remarkable op-ed in the Wall Street Journal in which he apologized for his rash words and attempted to reclaim for himself the “independence and impartiality” so necessary for judges. But judicial temperament is not like a mask that can be put on or taken off at will. Judicial temperament is more than skin-deep. It is part of the DNA of a person, as is well illustrated by Merrick Garland, who never once descended to the partisan rancor of Kavanaugh, despite the Senate’s refusal even to dignify his nomination with a hearing.

Judge Kavanaugh cannot have it both ways. He cannot gain confirmation by unleashing partisan fury while simultaneously claiming that he possesses a judicial and impartial temperament. If Kavanaugh really cared about the integrity and independence of the Supreme Court, he would even now withdraw from consideration.

But I see no evidence that he is about to withdraw. Kavanaugh will thus join the court as the black-robed embodiment of raw partisan power inconsistent with any ideal of an impartial judiciary. As the court moves to the right to accommodate Trump’s appointments, Kavanaugh will inevitably become the focus of distrust and mobilization. His very presence will undermine the court’s claim to legitimacy; it will damage the nation’s commitment to the rule of law. It will be an American tragedy.


Robert Post is Sterling professor at Yale Law School. This article is adapted from its original version, which appeared on the blog Take Care
1ST - Don't shoot the messenger,Thanks! br I got t... (show quote)


This professor really is the partisan hack that he accuses of Kavanaugh of being. Anyone in there right mind would have been indignant and riled up with the accusations the Democratic Senators put forward about him. I could not have sat and taken their abuse as long as he did and keep my cool. Anyone with an once of decency would have been very ticked off by the Democrats abuse in their questions.

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 13:05:40   #
tactful (a regular here)
 
crazylibertarian wrote:
Amen! It's one thing to sit & soberly evaluate evidence against someone else and very difficult to assess it against yourself.


simple matter of fact: actions speak louder than words and both were witnessed by the whole world.

I be back later.

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 13:12:08   #
Liberty Tree (a regular here)
 
tactful wrote:
1ST - Don't shoot the messenger,Thanks!
I got this in a news feed that seemed awfully unclear so I investigated.
this is the result of said investigation:
really getting sick of this,should have been viewed by the committee prior IMO along with the 650 law professors who signed a similar document at both Yale and Harvard ( where he taught).

ON THE BENCH
Brett Kavanaugh Cannot Have It Both Ways

As the former dean of Yale Law School, I’m shocked by the judge’s partisan turn.

By ROBERT POST

October 06, 2018


Brett Kavanaugh and I differ on most fundamental questions of constitutional law. Nevertheless, as a former dean of the institution where he received his law degree, I have withheld comment on the merits of his appointment. I am proud of the rich diversity of views that Yale Law School has produced.

Over the past decade, Kavanaugh has been a casual acquaintance. He seemed a gentle, quiet, reserved man, always solicitous of the dignity of his position as a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. It was therefore with something approaching unbelief that I heard his speech after Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony.

With calculation and skill, Kavanaugh stoked the fires of partisan rage and male entitlement. He had apparently concluded that the only way he could rally Republican support was by painting himself as the victim of a political hit job. He therefore offered a witches’ brew of vicious unfounded charges, alleging that Democratic members of the Senate Judicial Committee were pursuing a vendetta on behalf of the Clintons. If we expect judges to reach conclusions based solely on reliable evidence, Kavanaugh’s savage and bitter attack demonstrated exactly the opposite sensibility.

I was shell-shocked. This was not the Brett Kavanaugh I thought I knew. Having come so close to confirmation, Kavanaugh apparently cared more about his promotion than about preserving the dignity of the Supreme Court he aspired to join. Even if he sought to defend his honor as a husband and father, his unbalanced rantings about political persecution were so utterly inconsistent with the dispassionate temperament we expect from judges that one had to conclude that he had chosen ambition over professionalism.

His performance is indelibly etched in the public mind. For as long as Kavanaugh sits on the court, he will remain a symbol of partisan anger, a haunting reminder that behind the smiling face of judicial benevolence lies the force of an urgent will to power. No one who felt the force of that anger could possibly believe that Kavanaugh might actually be a detached and impartial judge. Each and every Republican who votes for Kavanaugh, therefore, effectively announces that they care more about controlling the Supreme Court than they do about the legitimacy of the court itself. There will be hell to pay.

I was in the end prompted to write this essay because, on Thursday, Kavanaugh published a remarkable op-ed in the Wall Street Journal in which he apologized for his rash words and attempted to reclaim for himself the “independence and impartiality” so necessary for judges. But judicial temperament is not like a mask that can be put on or taken off at will. Judicial temperament is more than skin-deep. It is part of the DNA of a person, as is well illustrated by Merrick Garland, who never once descended to the partisan rancor of Kavanaugh, despite the Senate’s refusal even to dignify his nomination with a hearing.

Judge Kavanaugh cannot have it both ways. He cannot gain confirmation by unleashing partisan fury while simultaneously claiming that he possesses a judicial and impartial temperament. If Kavanaugh really cared about the integrity and independence of the Supreme Court, he would even now withdraw from consideration.

But I see no evidence that he is about to withdraw. Kavanaugh will thus join the court as the black-robed embodiment of raw partisan power inconsistent with any ideal of an impartial judiciary. As the court moves to the right to accommodate Trump’s appointments, Kavanaugh will inevitably become the focus of distrust and mobilization. His very presence will undermine the court’s claim to legitimacy; it will damage the nation’s commitment to the rule of law. It will be an American tragedy.


Robert Post is Sterling professor at Yale Law School. This article is adapted from its original version, which appeared on the blog Take Care
1ST - Don't shoot the messenger,Thanks! br I got t... (show quote)


His first sentence tells his real motive in not wanting Kavanaugh on the SCOTUS. The rest is just fluff.

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 13:14:18   #
byronglimish (a regular here)
 
tactful wrote:
1ST - Don't shoot the messenger,Thanks!
I got this in a news feed that seemed awfully unclear so I investigated.
this is the result of said investigation:
really getting sick of this,should have been viewed by the committee prior IMO along with the 650 law professors who signed a similar document at both Yale and Harvard ( where he taught).

ON THE BENCH
Brett Kavanaugh Cannot Have It Both Ways

As the former dean of Yale Law School, I’m shocked by the judge’s partisan turn.

By ROBERT POST

October 06, 2018


Brett Kavanaugh and I differ on most fundamental questions of constitutional law. Nevertheless, as a former dean of the institution where he received his law degree, I have withheld comment on the merits of his appointment. I am proud of the rich diversity of views that Yale Law School has produced.

Over the past decade, Kavanaugh has been a casual acquaintance. He seemed a gentle, quiet, reserved man, always solicitous of the dignity of his position as a judge on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. It was therefore with something approaching unbelief that I heard his speech after Christine Blasey Ford’s testimony.

With calculation and skill, Kavanaugh stoked the fires of partisan rage and male entitlement. He had apparently concluded that the only way he could rally Republican support was by painting himself as the victim of a political hit job. He therefore offered a witches’ brew of vicious unfounded charges, alleging that Democratic members of the Senate Judicial Committee were pursuing a vendetta on behalf of the Clintons. If we expect judges to reach conclusions based solely on reliable evidence, Kavanaugh’s savage and bitter attack demonstrated exactly the opposite sensibility.

I was shell-shocked. This was not the Brett Kavanaugh I thought I knew. Having come so close to confirmation, Kavanaugh apparently cared more about his promotion than about preserving the dignity of the Supreme Court he aspired to join. Even if he sought to defend his honor as a husband and father, his unbalanced rantings about political persecution were so utterly inconsistent with the dispassionate temperament we expect from judges that one had to conclude that he had chosen ambition over professionalism.

His performance is indelibly etched in the public mind. For as long as Kavanaugh sits on the court, he will remain a symbol of partisan anger, a haunting reminder that behind the smiling face of judicial benevolence lies the force of an urgent will to power. No one who felt the force of that anger could possibly believe that Kavanaugh might actually be a detached and impartial judge. Each and every Republican who votes for Kavanaugh, therefore, effectively announces that they care more about controlling the Supreme Court than they do about the legitimacy of the court itself. There will be hell to pay.

I was in the end prompted to write this essay because, on Thursday, Kavanaugh published a remarkable op-ed in the Wall Street Journal in which he apologized for his rash words and attempted to reclaim for himself the “independence and impartiality” so necessary for judges. But judicial temperament is not like a mask that can be put on or taken off at will. Judicial temperament is more than skin-deep. It is part of the DNA of a person, as is well illustrated by Merrick Garland, who never once descended to the partisan rancor of Kavanaugh, despite the Senate’s refusal even to dignify his nomination with a hearing.

Judge Kavanaugh cannot have it both ways. He cannot gain confirmation by unleashing partisan fury while simultaneously claiming that he possesses a judicial and impartial temperament. If Kavanaugh really cared about the integrity and independence of the Supreme Court, he would even now withdraw from consideration.

But I see no evidence that he is about to withdraw. Kavanaugh will thus join the court as the black-robed embodiment of raw partisan power inconsistent with any ideal of an impartial judiciary. As the court moves to the right to accommodate Trump’s appointments, Kavanaugh will inevitably become the focus of distrust and mobilization. His very presence will undermine the court’s claim to legitimacy; it will damage the nation’s commitment to the rule of law. It will be an American tragedy.


Robert Post is Sterling professor at Yale Law School. This article is adapted from its original version, which appeared on the blog Take Care
1ST - Don't shoot the messenger,Thanks! br I got t... (show quote)




Kavanaugh fought fire with fire, no need for all of the hoopla.

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 13:17:19   #
tactful (a regular here)
 
Louie27 wrote:
This professor really is the partisan hack that he accuses of Kavanaugh of being. Anyone in there right mind would have been indignant and riled up with the accusations the Democratic Senators put forward about him. I could not have sat and taken their abuse as long as he did and keep my cool. Anyone with an once of decency would have been very ticked off by the Democrats abuse in their questions.


the fourth,fifth and sixth paragraph posted all mention absent qualities not found by his actions if read correct.
right anyone would be ticked though again the actions spoke volumes,still can or do.
ciao for now.

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 13:17:47   #
bmac32 (a regular here)
 
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/dems-wage-war-on-kavanaugh-court-new-battles-over-legitimacy-impeachment-recusal




Gatsby wrote:
Until professor Post has "walked a mile" in Justice Kavanaugh's shoes, he should sit down, shut his mouth, and open his mind!

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 13:33:35   #
tactful (a regular here)
 
Liberty Tree wrote:
His first sentence tells his real motive in not wanting Kavanaugh on the SCOTUS. The rest is just fluff.


huh? a former dean is motive for not speaking out?so called fluff has merit as do all the Law professors.
one would think at least in my opinion they all can't be wrong on many points made throughout what 650 of them signed that should have been seen at some point before.

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 13:34:41   #
Gatsby (a regular here)
 
tactful wrote:
noted! however he is just voicing what hundreds of Law professors thought and signed off on from both Yale and Harvard that got as much interest as the so called feebee ( FBI) investigation.
everybody Needs to walk in someone else's shoes before opening their mouth. Moi included.


Nobody can honestly predict how they will react in such "heat of combat", until they have!

| Reply
Oct 8, 2018 13:35:58   #
Blade_Runner (a regular here)
 
tactful wrote:
noted! however he is just voicing what hundreds of Law professors thought and signed off on from both Yale and Harvard that got as much interest as the so called feebee ( FBI) investigation.
everybody Needs to walk in someone else's shoes before opening their mouth. Moi included.


Law professors?? Right, if you can't practice law, teach it.

| Reply
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 8 next>>
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main
Home | Latest Digest | Back to Top | All Sections
Contact us | Privacy policy | Terms of use
OnePoliticalPlaza.com - Forum
Copyright 2012-2018 IDF International Technologies, Inc.