Skip to main content

Comment Critical of Susan Collins Kavanaugh Speech Deleted from Boothbay Register Comments

The latest comment by this author to be removed from the comment section of the Boothbay Register takes censorship of free speech beyond the realm of local politics.

You can read the whole discussion- minus my response to JFxm  HERE

Proud of Susan Collins

Mackenziella




Detected as spam Thanks, we'll work on getting this corrected.

I think you are missing the point. There is something called "Separation of Powers" which is in the United States Constitution. The Powers which are separated are the Legislature, the Justice Branch, and the Administration. "Innocent until proven guilty applies in the Justice branch of government because it is ONLY the Justice branch of government which has the power to prove innocence or guilt. Without that power, "innocent until proven guilty becomes "anyone accused of a crime is innocent. PERIOD"

Collins did not honor the due process of Congress, which, while not having the power to conduct a trial proving innocence or guilt, does have the power to use sworn testimony under oath. Since the anyone swearing under oath can be charged with a felony if what they say can be established to be false, Congress must grant the sworn testimony the assumption of truth spoken under the rubric of "innocent ( speaking truthfully) until proven guilty( of not speaking truthfully- a felony). There was no criminal case being conducted because that can only be conducted by the Justice Department- NOT by Congress. If it were conducted by the Justice Department both sides would have been permitted to call witnesses, to see discovery, to cross-examine witnesses and so forth. None of that is permitted in a congressional hearing. The only "innocent until proven guilty" which comes to bear in a Congressional hearing pertains to the sworn testimony pursuant to the threat of losing one's liberty if not true. The innocence of guilt pertaining to whether Kavanaugh is guilty not within the powers of Congress to address,

Kavanaugh was NOT accused of sexual assault within a context in which he can lose his liberty. He can only lose his liberty in the context of a congressional hearing if it can be established that he lied under oath- exactly the same as Ford- and even then, it may require a separate process conducted by the Justice branch of government.

Collins acted as judge and jury, accusing Ford of Not being in her right mind because she asserted that Kavanaugh was innocent of any crime which anyone might accuse him of- being that in that contest there is no way to prove innocence or guilt.

Before the FBI Investigation, the pro-Kavanaugh sect was saying it was useless because the FBI cannot draw conclusions. There were four affidavits submitted to the hearing corroborating Fords story. Mark Judge supposedly entered an affidavit- or some kind of statement. but he would be an accessory to the crime and Congress cannot grant immunity. Congress did not allow corroborating witnesses to testify and certainly not to be cross-examined. That may be because Congress knows it does not have the power to conduct a trial which may establish innocence or guilt. Ford asked to be interviewed by the FBI but was not allowed. The entire process was a sham.

And yet our President announced that Kavanaugh had been proven innocent by Congress! No secret that our president lacks the attention span to understand the Constitution.

End of blocked comment.

I have already seen frequent demands on social media that Ford be prosecuted. If that were to occur it would not be in a congressional hearing, it would be in the justice system and Kavanaugh could not escape being part of the investigation in which Ford is the accused and assumed to be innocent until proven guilty.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why are social impact investors trying so hard to defeat smaller shelters for the homeless?

  "Social Impact” developers in Portland, Maine seek to squelch a referendum for smaller shelters called for by qualified practitioners with concrete experience in the field. A large sign says Vote C to support the Homeless, small handmade sign next to it says Untrue! That sign is paid for by developers who want / Photo by Jess Falero In   the 1970s under Governor Longley , Maine became a centrally managed economy that expanded Maine’s wealth gap and merged, almost seamlessly, the public and private and the non-profit and for-profit economic sectors into one mutually beneficial wealth-concentration & distribution system. Currently, mutually benefitting factions are coming together once again in hopes of building a mega-shelter for the homeless in a Portland, Maine industrial development district. In addition to beds for the homeless, the project will include, dining, and locker facilities, as well as offices and an attached health clinic. The promotion  describes the ...

Mayor LePage on Baldacci Reducing Funding To Municipalities

Tweet This  http://goo.gl/Et0wWS As Governor, LePage seems on track to implement the Steve Woods plan of nudging the inhabitants of rural towns to move into urban centers. Steve Woods was then the would be CEO of the corporate state. In the video Mr Woods explains that the inhabitants of 108 Maine Towns are not serving the corporation as they should be. Mr Woods says the 108 municipalities of Maine are costing the  corporation five times as much as the corporations recieves from these instrumentalities in sales tax revenue. Mr Woods speaks as a man managing a corporation not as a would be Governor of a state. He speaks in calm Obamaesque tones signaling that we can surely trust this erudite man so pro-active for the cause of state corporatism . The corporate state replaced Maine's constitution back in 1976 when Governor Longely called in the heads of Maine industry to restructure Maine as corporatio n, kicking the old fashioned Maine constitution out of ...

FaceBook Blocking- in-Q-Tel and the Private Hegemony Of Power

TWEET THIS:  http://goo.gl/9y2MiH  Recently a message appeared  on my screen , being identified as from Facebook. It brought up the Facebook login screen and warned against sending friend requests to people that one does not know in one's circle of friends , family, work, and classmates I first received the message several months ago. The first message included a list of twenty names of people who did not respond to my friend request over all the years that I have been on Facebook. It asked that I delete all the requests and suggested that I stop sending friend requests for a week. The next was a list of 7 names - some of them very recent requests, which I did not think were given adequate response time. The third message to appear  told  that I am blocked for a week from adding friends and displayed a list of five names- all very recent requests- all in response to those with whom I interacted on Facebook- and one within the last hour of receiving t...