Locus:

Yes, of course it does.

To remove a sitting Justice would require first impeachment in the House, and then a trial in the Senate. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court preceding, with the Senate acting as the jury (if President being impeached, not clear who precedes otherwise).

There is no rule or law on what the standard of proof is during impeachment trials, so each Senator is free to decide for themselves what the standard is.

Some will use reasonable doubt, while some will use preponderance of the evidence. I suppose some could even put the burden on the person being tried, although I would imagine they would never say that out loud (how embarrassing).

The key is that 2/3’s of the Senate have to vote to convict, so it is a very high burden.

Personally, I cannot imagine even 50% voting to convict with a naked allegation with no corroboration.

This is why I cannot imagine Kavanaugh being convicted in the Senate, given the state of the evidence (zero – just a naked assertion).

If a woman were to come forward and accuse Justice Breyer of sexually assaulting her in high school should Breyer be removed from the court even if no corroborating evidence can be found?

@ JP, StevoR

“Obviously innocent” Kavanaugh? Sod off!

Forget it, MikeN is spiraling down in full Trump mode.
On the other thread, he flat-out said that Dr Ford is a crisis actor paid to smear Trump’s pick , whoever he was going to be.
Never mind that Dr Ford told about Kavanaugh to her husband, her therapist and a few others, something like 6 years ago. Or was able to name the usual partners-in-party of Kavanaugh. Or was dating one of Kavanaugh classmate (I hesitate to say ‘friend’).

For those interested in keeping a summary of the “she said, he said” situation, there is this handy article. The title gives a hint of their conclusion.
https://splinternews.com/guilty-1829557079

“Obviously innocent” Kavanaugh? Sod off!

Did you not watch or hear Christine Balsey Ford’s testimony or his other victims? Or Kavanaugh’s unconvincing, defensive, subject changing snarling conspiracy theory puking perjuring response to their credible and convincing accounts? Or the fact that BK’s classmates then refuted his already clearly absurd lies about his drinking and the meaning of slang terms etc ..

Have you been hiding under a rock these past months?

Thinking of the past btw; you know the Right has often declared the “obviously guilty innocent” often too starting with Trump and Roy Moore’s sexual assaults and continuing back to Dubya and the WMDs that weren’t there in Iraq and Ollie North Iran-Contra in Reagun days and Senator Joe McCarthy’s vicious life-destroying slanders and lies, ad nauseam, yeah?

Unless you provide some sort of intelligent analysis with those assertions, your opinion is totally worthless. Why are they obviously guilty and why is he obviously innocent?

Apologies for the bolding error there. Intended only the Job application bit in bold. Sorry and please fix if possible.

Yeah and .. ??? Relevance?

I think you may have missed the whole point of the post here.

Again, this is a job application NOT a trial for attempted rape.

Personally, I’d be very happy if Kavanaugh was actually criminally charged and booted from his present job but I’d settle for him not being on SCOTUS and being exposed for what he did in his past.

That’s a rape that wouldn’t be completed not “completely” natch & apologies.

Please feel free to edit and fix and delete accordingly Greg Laden.

Mea culpa.

Kavanaugh is lucky he didn’t complete the rape or end up as a murderer. He could well have been saved from being convicted as both a rapist and a killer back then had things gone a bit differently. It wasn’t his judgement that stopped him being either and he certainly lacks the character, intelligence and decency to be a judge at all let alone one on the Highest Court in the land.

Yes. They were laughing at her whilst Brett Kavanaugh had his hand over her mouth and she thought he might accidentally kill her during his rape* of her. These things are not mutually incompatible nor is the most terrifying thing necessarily the same thing that the the one that has the biggest impact.

So, your point here is ______?

* A rape that wouldn’t be completely because the Judge was sober as a drunkard in vat of beer – at that point Christine Blasey Ford wouldn’t know that she wouldn’t be imminently physically penetrated during this rape and therefore that it would only be an attempted rape nor that she would actually survive to tell the tale later and continue her life.