• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Which procedure change demands Democrats are making for Dr. Ford should be universally enacted?

Which procedure change demands Democrats are making for Dr. Ford should be made law?

  • No sworn complaint nor evidence is necessary to put a person on trial

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Defense goes first before any evidence or sworn accusation against the accused

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • The accuser sets the date, time and conditions for any hearing or trial

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • None of the above

    Votes: 9 100.0%

  • Total voters
    9

joko104

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
65,981
Reaction score
23,408
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
For Dr. Ford, the following demands are being made:

1. There is no requirement for any sworn statement and no evidence offered to put someone on trial or defense - defense goes first,
2. that a person has to present their defense before any sworn accusation or evidence is offered for which the defendant must guess at the what s/he is charged with, and
3. the accuser is who sets the date, time and conditions of the hearing or trial.

Which of those changes should be made in government and legal proceedings?

Multiple choice poll.
 
Last edited:
She should have the opportunity to tell her story to the Senate, and without GOP Senators demeaning her testimony and debasing her character.
 
For Dr. Ford, the following demands are being made:

1. There is no requirement for any sworn statement and no evidence offered to put someone on trial or defense - defense goes first,
2. that a person has to present their defense before any sworn accusation or evidence is offered for which the defendant must guess at the what s/he is charged with, and
3. the accuser is who sets the date, time and conditions of the hearing or trial.

Which of those changes should be made in government and legal proceedings?

Multiple choice poll.
I voted "NONE". The inmates don't run the asylum. She's fiddle-****ed with the committee for far too long.
 
She should have the opportunity to tell her story to the Senate, and without GOP Senators demeaning her testimony and debasing her character.

Yes, I do understand that many, maybe most, Democrats now want all defendant's rights and all due process rights eliminated.

Democrats on the Committee no-stop tried to demean and debase Kavanaugh, didn't they? Many Democrats in Congress have already declared Kavanaugh guilty - though to this date there is not so much as her giving a sworn accusation - meaning literally zero evidence whatsoever.
 
She should have the opportunity to tell her story to the Senate, and without GOP Senators demeaning her testimony and debasing her character.
She's making serious unsubstantiated claims against Kavenaugh - turnabout is fair play.
 
She should have the opportunity to tell her story to the Senate, and without GOP Senators demeaning her testimony and debasing her character.

Sometimes getting to the truth isn't pretty. What would you have them do? Ask softball questions so as to not upset her?
 
She should have the opportunity to tell her story to the Senate, and without GOP Senators demeaning her testimony and debasing her character.

Ditto for Kavanaugh, as much as for her. If I go back a couple of weeks, will I find you upset about Kavanaugh's treatment by Democrat Senators?
 
this is not a criminal or civil complaint so points.of law do not apply
 
None of the above. It doesn't matter what kind of hearing or trial this is.
 
She should have the opportunity to tell her story to the Senate, and without GOP Senators demeaning her testimony and debasing her character.

I believe, sir, that she had that opportunity. She chose to ignore it and write an anonymous letter to a Senator instead.
 
this is not a criminal or civil complaint so points.of law do not apply

The principles of justice are exactly the same.
 
OP appears to not be aware that this is a Supreme Court nomination
 
The principles of justice are exactly the same.

And not terribly relevant to a job interview. Your boss does not have the standard of “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
 
Back
Top Bottom