Nigel Short Appointed FIDE Vice President

[Sid Belzberg]

Looks like you didn't look up the word "sanctity". And no, it couldn't just be anyone in the world. Any claims would have to have a thread of credibility. People say this was like a job interview, but it was even more serious than that, more like a jury selection. In jury selection, you as a potential jurist can be eliminated for ANY reason, and no one talks about this being "unfair" to any potential jurist.

This same concept (in an ideal world) should apply in triplicate to any potential SC Justice. What seems to be the problem here is that the posting of SC Justice is a "plum" posting, for life. So Susan Collins made her decision to be "fair" to Brett K., at the expense of the entirety of sexual violence victims.

It should be realized that the U.S. Constitution, like any similar document, is not perfect, and can always be made more perfect. Part of that would be to put a maximum limit on term for a SC Justice, since it turns out that Justices ARE partisan which is why there is even discussion of the court being 5-4 in favor of Conservatives.




No evidence was provided to the committee....which is a fault of the PROCESS because the evidence does exist.




By the Senate, controlled by eleven white patriarchal males who needed to bring in a women to question Ford because they didn't want to let the public see their misogynism on display.

As for Trump having no input, perhaps if a Grand Jury is going to look into Hillary there should be one to look into the Trump question as well.




A patently RIDICULOUS claim with no evidence whatsoever.




The friend signed an affidavit, subject to perjury, that no such coaching EVER took place.




One single partisan rant reveals a partisan outlook, and should not be "forgiven" when applying for SC Justice. Again, look up the word "sanctity". Or maybe you only care about that word when it comes to your particular religious group. Gotcha!





I didn't say anything about how America is currently doing economically (but if I must, it would be "Thanks Obama"). What I spoke to was the trend, because as we all know, nothing is forever including 0% interest rates and easy money. The trend is to higher inflation, and the Amazon wage policy isn't so much a barometer as an ingredient added to the inflation soup.

which is a fault of the PROCESS because the evidence does exist.

The evidence Dr Ford presented was investigated and did not support her claims Not one of the four people she alleged were at the gathering have any recollection of this at all including her life long friend. No corroboration = no evidence.

A patently RIDICULOUS claim with no evidence whatsoever.

The fact that Dr Ford has published papers on self hypnosis is evidence that she is very knowledgeable on self control that could possibly be used in an effort to defeat a polygraph test.Her boyfriend lived with her for six years and his statements were at odds with other things In Dr Ford's testimony besides teaching her friend how to defeat a polygraph test including no fear of small closed spaces, no fear of flying, did fly often, lived in a small closed space with only one door for many years, no mention whatsoever of being sexually assaulted etc etc. Several of her ex boyfriend's statements are completely verifiable, where did she live, airplane travel records etc. The ex boyfriend also signed an affidavit under threat of perjury.

Or maybe you only care about that word when it comes to your particular religious group. Gotcha!

If you want to have a rational discussion I am open to that. You can refrain from unnecessarily bringing up my ethnicity every time you post here. My ethnicity is
not necessarily indicative of my religious views that are none of your business.

It is the prerogative of the senate whether or not they will tolerate various issues with a candidate and apparently the majority agreed that his partisan rant under the circumstances should be ignored.The majority also agreed to confirm Judge K. It is not 11 white males or Paul Bonhams prerogative nor it is the democratic parties prerogative or even President Trumps prerogative whether or not a SC candidate gets confirmed.

Thanks Obama

Sure, and if the economy was tanking you would be saying "thanks Trump". The top 100 money managers supported Trump in October 2016 including chess patron Rex Sinquefield not because they liked Trump but they knew his economic policies would be very conducive to a thriving US economy and they have been proven correct. I would trust in their analysis far more then anything you have to say on this and in fact i posted this fact here on Chesstalk in October 2016.

[Sid Belzberg]

BS. I have ears you know.



You, upon the evidence presented in this thread.

Yes you have ears but you don't appear to have brains if you really believe that Trump advocates throwing Hillary in prison without due process. "Lock her up" is nothing but political rhetoric that has no literal basis in reality without due process and never will. Dismissing any video out of hand because You Tube hosts it and claiming that anyone that posts a video from Youtube is a nut case ....well I am sure you can see how ridiculous that sounds.

[Paul Bonham]

I am very glad that is not the bar. That would be a very dystopian world where the elected minority could simply have any one in the world throw out any accusation (perhaps for reasons other then the nominees merits) and have them disqualified.

Looks like you didn't look up the word "sanctity". And no, it couldn't just be anyone in the world. Any claims would have to have a thread of credibility. People say this was like a job interview, but it was even more serious than that, more like a jury selection. In jury selection, you as a potential jurist can be eliminated for ANY reason, and no one talks about this being "unfair" to any potential jurist.

This same concept (in an ideal world) should apply in triplicate to any potential SC Justice. What seems to be the problem here is that the posting of SC Justice is a "plum" posting, for life. So Susan Collins made her decision to be "fair" to Brett K., at the expense of the entirety of sexual violence victims.

It should be realized that the U.S. Constitution, like any similar document, is not perfect, and can always be made more perfect. Part of that would be to put a maximum limit on term for a SC Justice, since it turns out that Justices ARE partisan which is why there is even discussion of the court being 5-4 in favor of Conservatives.

As for Ford mentioning this years ago no evidence was provided to the committee that supports this including her therapists records and only was Justice K singled out by name by Ford as the culprit recently (only her husband claims he heard the name K from her in the past but this is not a reliable witness for obvious reasons).

No evidence was provided to the committee....which is a fault of the PROCESS because the evidence does exist.

The FBI did what they were instructed to do by the Senate that was then authorized by Trump. Trump had no input into what the FBI would investigate.

The FBI was not told by the Senate to investigate Justice K's teenage drinking habits and accordingly did not.

By the Senate, controlled by eleven white patriarchal males who needed to bring in a women to question Ford because they didn't want to let the public see their misogynism on display.

As for Trump having no input, perhaps if a Grand Jury is going to look into Hillary there should be one to look into the Trump question as well.

Ford herself is apparently very knowledgeable of how to defeat Polygraph tests...

A patently RIDICULOUS claim with no evidence whatsoever.

...and at least one person (ex boyfriend who in 8 years in being with her heard nothing from Ford about the alleged assault) claims she coached a friend of hers who was applying for a job with the FBI on how to defeat a Polygraph test in the 1990s' Not withstanding this none of the corroborators offered by Ford supported her claim including her own life long friend.

The friend signed an affidavit, subject to perjury, that no such coaching EVER took place.

I agree that Judge K should not have gone on a partisan rant and he in fact says that himself. He was forgiven for losing his temper by the majority that supported him including some women republicans as well as at least one democratic senator given that he was outraged at the outlandish allegations that harmed him, his family and even the accuser that wished to remain anonymous.

One single partisan rant reveals a partisan outlook, and should not be "forgiven" when applying for SC Justice. Again, look up the word "sanctity". Or maybe you only care about that word when it comes to your particular religious group. Gotcha!

As for using a wage policy of Amazon's as a barometer of inflation or how well the American economy is performing proves nothing other then your own ignorance of economics and how America is doing economically.

I didn't say anything about how America is currently doing economically (but if I must, it would be "Thanks Obama"). What I spoke to was the trend, because as we all know, nothing is forever including 0% interest rates and easy money. The trend is to higher inflation, and the Amazon wage policy isn't so much a barometer as an ingredient added to the inflation soup.

[Ed Seedhouse]

That is simply your fantasy of what "lock her up" is about. No one is going to prison without a trial nor is that advocated by Trump.

BS. I have ears you know.

Who exactly are you calling a nutcase?

You, upon the evidence presented in this thread.

[Sid Belzberg]

Not my logic, Der Drumpher's logic which says that people may be locked up without a trial. The accusations were not unsubstantiated and were credible, but even if they were not K's rage infested diatribe alone makes him unsuitable for the Supreme Court.




Nope you are just wrong yourself. You have no evidence of criminality that would stand up by the Constitutional standard which Der Drumph, lover of Kim of Korea, wants to destroy. And I don't see youtube videos by nutcases as evidence, sorry.

Not my logic, Der Drumpher's logic which says that people may be locked up without a trial

That is simply your fantasy of what "lock her up" is about. No one is going to prison without a trial nor is that advocated by Trump.

You have no evidence of criminality that would stand up by the Constitutional standard

That is for a jury to decide, not you or I.

I don't see youtube videos by nutcases as evidence, sorry.

Who exactly are you calling a nutcase? Anyone that deigns to think for themselves? Senator Susan Collins is certainly not a nutcase.
You are the one that sounds like a "nutcase" making this type of ridiculous pronouncement.

[Ed Seedhouse]

By your logic someone simply has to make an accusation that is completely unsubstantiated that then disqualifies them for a job.

Not my logic, Der Drumpher's logic which says that people may be locked up without a trial. The accusations were not unsubstantiated and were credible, but even if they were not K's rage infested diatribe alone makes him unsuitable for the Supreme Court.

As for Hillary you are just wrong, as explained above when the evidence of the cover up is released publicly

Nope you are just wrong yourself. You have no evidence of criminality that would stand up by the Constitutional standard which Der Drumph, lover of Kim of Korea, wants to destroy. And I don't see youtube videos by nutcases as evidence, sorry.

[Vlad Drkulec]

I am very glad that is not the bar. That would be a very dystopian world where the elected minority could simply have any one in the world throw out any accusation (perhaps for reasons other then the nominees merits) and have them disqualified. As for Ford mentioning this years ago no evidence was provided to the committee that supports this including her therapists records and only was Justice K singled out by name by Ford as the culprit recently (only her husband claims he heard the name K from her in the past but this is not a reliable witness for obvious reasons). The FBI did what they were instructed to do by the Senate that was then authorized by Trump. Trump had no input into what the FBI would investigate.

The FBI was not told by the Senate to investigate Justice K's teenage drinking habits and accordingly did not. Ford herself is apparently very knowledgeable of how to defeat Polygraph tests and at least one person (ex boyfriend who in 8 years in being with her heard nothing from Ford about the alleged assault) claims she coached a friend of hers who was applying for a job with the FBI on how to defeat a Polygraph test in the 1990s' Not withstanding this none of the corroborators offered by Ford supported her claim including her own life long friend.

I agree that Judge K should not have gone on a partisan rant and he in fact says that himself. He was forgiven for losing his temper by the majority that supported him including some women republicans as well as at least one democratic senator given that he was outraged at the outlandish allegations that harmed him, his family and even the accuser that wished to remain anonymous.

As for using wage a policy of Amazon's as a barometer of inflation or how well the American economy is performing proves nothing other then your own ignorance of economics and how America is doing economically.

.

In addition, Ford has written a paper on recovered memories in which she states that all hypnosis is self-hypnosis. Someone who is aware of hypnosis could conceivably hypnotize themselves to beat a polygraph. There were many inconsistencies in her testimony and there is indication that an ex-FBI agent friend also attempted to suborn perjured testimony from Ford's friend who asserted that she had never met Kavanaugh nor attended any party in which he was present. It is not surprising that demonic forces are gathering to attack a good man. I think a Democratic ticket for 2020 of Avenati and Revnick is the next logical step in the collapse of the Democrat party assuming Revnick escapes prison for her perjured testimony.

[Sid Belzberg]

The bar for maintaining true sanctity (look up that word) in the Supreme Court needs to be 'is there any likelihood at all?"

I am very glad that is not the bar. That would be a very dystopian world where the elected minority could simply have any one in the world throw out any accusation (perhaps for reasons other then the nominees merits) and have them disqualified. As for Ford mentioning this years ago no evidence was provided to the committee that supports this including her therapists records and only was Justice K singled out by name by Ford as the culprit recently (only her husband claims he heard the name K from her in the past but this is not a reliable witness for obvious reasons). The FBI did what they were instructed to do by the Senate that was then authorized by Trump. Trump had no input into what the FBI would investigate.

The FBI was not told by the Senate to investigate Justice K's teenage drinking habits and accordingly did not. Ford herself is apparently very knowledgeable of how to defeat Polygraph tests and at least one person (ex boyfriend who in 8 years in being with her heard nothing from Ford about the alleged assault) claims she coached a friend of hers who was applying for a job with the FBI on how to defeat a Polygraph test in the 1990s' Not withstanding this none of the corroborators offered by Ford supported her claim including her own life long friend.

I agree that Judge K should not have gone on a partisan rant and he in fact says that himself. He was forgiven for losing his temper by the majority that supported him including some women republicans as well as at least one democratic senator given that he was outraged at the outlandish allegations that harmed him, his family and even the accuser that wished to remain anonymous.

As for using a wage policy of Amazon's as a barometer of inflation or how well the American economy is performing proves nothing other then your own ignorance of economics and how America is doing economically.

.

[Paul Bonham]

Clearly you have not read my post properly or bothered to see the video. The "beyond reasonable doubt" standard is not being applied in Judge K's confirmation process as is explained in some detail in the video. By your logic someone simply has to make an accusation that is completely unsubstantiated that then disqualifies them for a job. I am very happy to see that at least this is not the case when it comes to jobs in the US federal Government. It simply does not work that way.

As for Hillary you are just wrong, as explained above when the evidence of the cover up is released publicly I think it is very probable that she will be held to account for her crimes in a court of law. Even President Trump does not have the power under the American system to unilaterally decide to put someone on trial. When all the ducks are in a row a grand jury will be convened and they will decide if the evidence warrants indicting her and putting her on trial.

I see that Maine Senator Susan Collins decided that she believes that Dr. Ford was sexually assaulted, but that it was not Kavanaugh who did it. Who is she to make this determination? Completely innappropriate and she will be turfed for sticking a knife in the heart of a true victim. It is not even correct to be setting a "more likely than not likely" bar. The bar for maintaining true sanctity (look up that word) in the Supreme Court needs to be 'is there any likelihood at all?" If the answer is yes, the candidate should be disqualified. And in Kavanaugh's case, because (1) Dr. Ford brought up her allegations years ago AND passed a polygraph test, and (2) there is evidence that Kavanaugh was a blackout drunk in both high school and college, he should by the "any likelihood at all" standard be disqualified. And that's not even including his partisan rant in front of the committee, which all by itself is disqualifying even according to former (Conservative!) SC Justice Stevens.

Also, in making her decision, Collins declared that the FBI investigation "appeared to be thorough". That is an outright lie. In fact, if Kavanaugh eventually gets impeached, it will be because the FBI will be forced to uncover the limits placed on their investigation by Trump, limits that Collins chose to ignore. Witnesses to Kavanaugh's blackout drunk behavior were NOT ALLOWED to be included in the FBI investigation.

In an ideal world, Kavanaugh would drop dead of a heart attack this afternoon and that would end his lifetime appointment. But even that isn't ideal, because the corrupt Republican senators are still not punished. For that, we need to look ahead to the midterms and the 2020 election.

Their decades of misogny was even confirmed further by Senator's Grassley's public statement that they can't find women for the Judiciary Committee because it's too much work! I wonder if Nigel Short would say the same about female chess players???

There's no doubt in my mind that Mitch McConnell et al made a deliberate tradeoff of executive power versus Conservative domination of the SCOTUS. They might even think they can get away without that trade, because there are FOX News polls showing a "resurgence" of Republican enthusiasm for the midterms. We'll just have to wait and see, but I"m pretty certain where it will go. I am reminded of the Mulroney era when he decided to simply ignore the electorate and make purely elitist decisions. His party was reduced to just 2 seats in the subsequent election, which he was at least smart enough to not be the party leader for that debacle.

I do believe Republicans have sentenced themselves to the political hinterland for at least a decade to come. Even if both bases are fired up, the Repugs are significantly outnumbered.

Also, on a slightly related note, I am seeing that my predictions from 2 years ago about Trump's "America First" agenda are coming true.... a return to a high inflation world. Amazon's decision to give all their employees a $15 per hour minimum wage is only going to accelerate the trend, and wise stock investors are seeing the trend now. We still haven't reached the knee of that curve.

[Sid Belzberg]

Well that should tell *you* something, but I doubt it will.

BS not reproduced...but even if it were true (and it isn't) it's utterly beside the point since it is an observable fact that the lady in question has never been charged with anything and under the system as it was before Der Pfuerer at least, you can't be locked up until you are charged and convicted. The standard "beyond reasonable doubt" only applies to conviction by trial, not to a job interview...

If Der Trumpf really wanted Ms. H. to be locked up he'd have put her on trial. Didn't happen. Ain't gonna happen. Give your head a shake!

Clearly you have not read my post properly or bothered to see the video. The "beyond reasonable doubt" standard is not being applied in Judge K's confirmation process as is explained in some detail in the video. By your logic someone simply has to make an accusation that is completely unsubstantiated that then disqualifies them for a job. I am very happy to see that at least this is not the case when it comes to jobs in the US federal Government. It simply does not work that way.

As for Hillary you are just wrong, as explained above when the evidence of the cover up is released publicly I think it is very probable that she will be held to account for her crimes in a court of law. Even President Trump does not have the power under the American system to unilaterally decide to put someone on trial. When all the ducks are in a row a grand jury will be convened and they will decide if the evidence warrants indicting her and putting her on trial.

[Ed Seedhouse]

Ed this is one of the very few posts I have seen from you where I totally disagree.

Well that should tell *you* something, but I doubt it will.

BS not reproduced...but even if it were true (and it isn't) it's utterly beside the point since it is an observable fact that the lady in question has never been charged with anything and under the system as it was before Der Pfuerer at least, you can't be locked up until you are charged and convicted. The standard "beyond reasonable doubt" only applies to conviction by trial, not to a job interview...

If Der Trumpf really wanted Ms. H. to be locked up he'd have put her on trial. Didn't happen. Ain't gonna happen. Give your head a shake!

[Sid Belzberg]

Ah, you mean the Drumpf standard (lock her up, lock her up!!) of jurisprudence? Of course Kavanaugh wasn't on trial, he was applying for a job but that's irrelevant to you I guess. But since Der Trumpfer has spoken and GUPI us no longer in force according to him, then of "K" I say "lock him up, lock him up!!"

Oh, does it hurt when your own standard is applied to you and your friends? Poor baby...

Ed, this is one of the very few posts I have seen from you where I totally disagree. The corroborating evidence supporting Hillary's crimes is massive and has been for many years. The only reason she is not locked up was thanks to the good graces of James Comey, Loretta Lynch, Peter Sztrock, Andrew Mcabe et al who gave her a free pass. The evidence of this coverup has been recently declassified and pending the Inspector general's final ok will be released soon enough. The people chanting "lock her up" fully expected a fair trial where the evidence would be weighed.
K's alleged crimes on the other hand has ZERO corroborating evidence. An allegation that is completely uncorroborated is not grounds to deny someone a job or to publicly smear them, especially against the wishes of the accuser. Senator Susan Collins brillaintly articulated the issues.

[Ed Seedhouse]

presumes guilt until proven innocent.

Ah, you mean the Drumpf standard (lock her up, lock her up!!) of jurisprudence? Of course Kavanaugh wasn't on trial, he was applying for a job but that's irrelevant to you I guess. But since Der Trumpfer has spoken and GUPI us no longer in force according to him, then of "K" I say "lock him up, lock him up!!"

Oh, does it hurt when your own standard is applied to you and your friends? Poor baby...

[Sid Belzberg]

lol. yeah right. Kavanaugh and Short both just got the nod. Women haters must be rejoicing. All hail the ugly misogynists!

And so says the resident fascist pig who adores murderous ex dictators like Kirsan and parrots meaningless rhetoric that presumes guilt until proven innocent.Join the shrieks of young left protesters in DC supporting an unsubstantiated Dem smear campaign, Sounds like the place for you Nigel. Short
survived a similar smear campaign and carried out his prinicipal aim of getting cleanhands4fide in a position to influence FIDE via the Presidential board.

[Nigel Hanrahan]

As expected Nigel is now FIDE VIce President. This is a great outcome....

lol. yeah right. Kavanaugh and Short both just got the nod. Women haters must be rejoicing. All hail the ugly misogynists!