What evidentiary standard do you recommend for trying to prove you are indeed worthy of the seat? Beyond a reasonable doubt? Preponderance of evidence?
-
-
-
Great write up. I like the reasonable suspicion standard as you recommend it and agree overall on Kavanaugh. To be sure, more thorough vetting from the administration could have provided another candidate.
-
Admittedly hypothetical and possibly a red herring: assuming a judge doesn’t have the financial problems or questions about honesty that K does, do 2 additional accusations like we saw this week rise to your level of reasonable suspicion?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The thing is, though, I personally would not have made "proof without a reasonable doubt" the standard. The problem with Dr. Ford's testimony is that she couldn't even prove it with a reasonable doubt... even if one of her witnesses had confirmed it happened, that'd settle it
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
the standard should be no "appearance of impropriety"
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
“Due process” cuts both ways. Every time an argument using a criminal trial standard is made, remember that they refuse to have a key named individual, Mark Judge, subject to additional scrutiny.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Kavanaugh should call for FBI to show there’s no corroborating witnesses-clear his name of 4 similar accusations.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
remains the core disagreement.