Gads, where to start? 1. The accusation is inherently incredible. 2. It is not corroborated; the denial is corroborated. 3. Even a criminal defendant is entitled under law to the presumption of innocence, and Alito is far from a criminal defendant. 4. Outside criminal law, the sky is black with flying accusations, such as, for example, that conservatives are racist, which is flagrant BS. Simply being accused by Leftists has no probative value whatever. 5. We've seen a similar show before -- Kavanaugh was a teenage rapist wannbe; Thomas was a pervert; blah, blah, blah Was I supposed to fall for that, too? 6. As to criminal defendants, an accusation brought by politically corrupted prosecutors should be taken with a mineful of salt, see, e.g., Kyle Rittenhouse, the Duke lacrosse team. 7. Let's say strictly for the sake of argument that I know Alito and know him to be a man of the highest honesty and integrity.
1. No, the accusation is credible. 2. Sure, denial is “corroborated”—by the person to whom Alito, according to Schenck, leaked the decision: hardly disinterested. 3. “Criminal defendants are presumed innocent and conservative jurists deserve more than that”—immunity from criticism or suspicion, apparently. 4. Foam-flecked grievance mongering. 5. More of same. 6. Same; irrelevant to question at hand. 7. You appear to be replacing dumb claim re probative value of denial with a new assertion about what you know to be true about your pal, Alito. But why should I be impressed? I think you are the author of “In Six Weeks, a Happy Day for America”? Maybe your judgment re Alito’s character is similarly poor.
No. 4 far fetched? 5 years ago I would have emphatically said no. Now? I’m not so sure. Doesn’t history show that left wing movements often devolve into violence of the most heinous sort?
One reason I hope it's far-fetched is that the Left must know the justices have a good deal of security, and that the guards are armed, alert, and expert marksmen.
Surprised to see a former federal prosecutor assign such high probative value to the accused person’s denial.
Gads, where to start? 1. The accusation is inherently incredible. 2. It is not corroborated; the denial is corroborated. 3. Even a criminal defendant is entitled under law to the presumption of innocence, and Alito is far from a criminal defendant. 4. Outside criminal law, the sky is black with flying accusations, such as, for example, that conservatives are racist, which is flagrant BS. Simply being accused by Leftists has no probative value whatever. 5. We've seen a similar show before -- Kavanaugh was a teenage rapist wannbe; Thomas was a pervert; blah, blah, blah Was I supposed to fall for that, too? 6. As to criminal defendants, an accusation brought by politically corrupted prosecutors should be taken with a mineful of salt, see, e.g., Kyle Rittenhouse, the Duke lacrosse team. 7. Let's say strictly for the sake of argument that I know Alito and know him to be a man of the highest honesty and integrity.
1. No, the accusation is credible. 2. Sure, denial is “corroborated”—by the person to whom Alito, according to Schenck, leaked the decision: hardly disinterested. 3. “Criminal defendants are presumed innocent and conservative jurists deserve more than that”—immunity from criticism or suspicion, apparently. 4. Foam-flecked grievance mongering. 5. More of same. 6. Same; irrelevant to question at hand. 7. You appear to be replacing dumb claim re probative value of denial with a new assertion about what you know to be true about your pal, Alito. But why should I be impressed? I think you are the author of “In Six Weeks, a Happy Day for America”? Maybe your judgment re Alito’s character is similarly poor.
"But why should I be impressed? " Were you under the impression that I care if you're impressed? If I led you to think that, my apologies.
No. 4 far fetched? 5 years ago I would have emphatically said no. Now? I’m not so sure. Doesn’t history show that left wing movements often devolve into violence of the most heinous sort?
One reason I hope it's far-fetched is that the Left must know the justices have a good deal of security, and that the guards are armed, alert, and expert marksmen.
I meant yes, not no ha ha.