Poll

Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?

Yay!
Nay!
Who cares? The SCOTUS doesn't matter anyways.

Author Topic: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?  (Read 72399 times)

JanetJackson

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 530
  • Location: United States
    • How I actually made $50 just for taking a survey and being in the healthcare marketplace
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #600 on: September 27, 2018, 06:03:15 PM »
"Question that Kavanaugh doesn't want to answer:"

"Senator, I was at the top of my class, and did all these great things."

"Swimmer at Stanford"

Oh wait getting things mixed up..

“Brock Turners grow up to be Brett Kavanaughs who make the rules for Brock Turners....”

ixtap

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1278
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #601 on: September 27, 2018, 06:04:42 PM »
So the GOP line is Ford got assaulted...just not by Kavanaugh?

No, I think that as of right now the GOP line is that this whole thing is a liberal hit job, totally fabricated for political reasons.

And part of me kind of wishes that was true, because it would look like some kind of justice for the Merrick Garland debacle if it WAS just a purely partisan hit job.  They made no bones about scuttling Garland for partisan reasons, after all, so it would be delicious irony if liberals had returned the favor.  Sadly, this looks like an actual history of assault against multiple women who want to testify under oath, and nobody willing to defend him under oath, so the odds of it being a "sham" as Lindsey Graham claims are pretty slim.

I still think he'll be confirmed without so much as an investigation into these accusations.  They are not legally required to investigate.  Republicans have total control of two of the three branches of government, and they will use that control to take control of the third branch tomorrow.  Voters have no say.  Public opinion doesn't matter.  The only thing that matters is McConnell holding together 51 republican senators despite today's testimonies, so he can basically say "We don't care if it's true or not, we're putting him on the SC anyway" and then it will happen, and nobody else can do a damn thing about it.

In the long run, the electoral consequences of that kind of abuse are probably detrimental to the GOP and to the country as a whole, but that's not exactly at the forefront of the thought processes right now.

The last statement is what I don't get all these guys just want to swing their power dicks but aren't thinking about the magnitude this could have on the future of their party.

I doubt it. Every Trump supporter on my FB feed has posted horrible things about women who accuse men of power and/or made jokes about sexual harassment and assault.

boarder42

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7854
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #602 on: September 27, 2018, 06:08:02 PM »
So the GOP line is Ford got assaulted...just not by Kavanaugh?

No, I think that as of right now the GOP line is that this whole thing is a liberal hit job, totally fabricated for political reasons.

And part of me kind of wishes that was true, because it would look like some kind of justice for the Merrick Garland debacle if it WAS just a purely partisan hit job.  They made no bones about scuttling Garland for partisan reasons, after all, so it would be delicious irony if liberals had returned the favor.  Sadly, this looks like an actual history of assault against multiple women who want to testify under oath, and nobody willing to defend him under oath, so the odds of it being a "sham" as Lindsey Graham claims are pretty slim.

I still think he'll be confirmed without so much as an investigation into these accusations.  They are not legally required to investigate.  Republicans have total control of two of the three branches of government, and they will use that control to take control of the third branch tomorrow.  Voters have no say.  Public opinion doesn't matter.  The only thing that matters is McConnell holding together 51 republican senators despite today's testimonies, so he can basically say "We don't care if it's true or not, we're putting him on the SC anyway" and then it will happen, and nobody else can do a damn thing about it.

In the long run, the electoral consequences of that kind of abuse are probably detrimental to the GOP and to the country as a whole, but that's not exactly at the forefront of the thought processes right now.

The last statement is what I don't get all these guys just want to swing their power dicks but aren't thinking about the magnitude this could have on the future of their party.

I doubt it. Every Trump supporter on my FB feed has posted horrible things about women who accuse men of power and/or made jokes about sexual harassment and assault.

You're probably right even women I know have posted memes.

DarkandStormy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1144
  • Age: 29
  • Location: Midwest, USA
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #603 on: September 27, 2018, 07:11:26 PM »
The Wall Street Journal is reporting Kavanaugh watched Ford's testimony. He testified under oath he did not. He'll like about anything.

Regardless of legal guilt or innocence, he showed his ass today as a political operative not worthy of serving as a judge on any court.

bacchi

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3186
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #604 on: September 27, 2018, 08:12:56 PM »
The Wall Street Journal is reporting Kavanaugh watched Ford's testimony. He testified under oath he did not. He'll like about anything.

Regardless of legal guilt or innocence, he showed his ass today as a political operative not worthy of serving as a judge on any court.

He was lying about his drinking.

Which brings up a point someone else made: They both could be telling the truth.

* Ford was sexually assaulted by Kavanaugh.
* Kavanaugh doesn't remember it, and can deny it, because he was such a heavy drinker. It may also have been a not uncommon occurrence -- getting drunk and getting aggressive with women.

He doesn't want that line of questioning pursued because his hard-partying broski ways will come out more than they have already, ruining his evangelical cred.*



* However, as sol mentioned above, almost half of evangelicals, per a Marist poll, would still support Kavanaugh even if there was evidence of sexual assault. They want the abortion SC vote very badly.

DavidAnnArbor

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1803
  • Age: 53
  • Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #605 on: September 27, 2018, 08:25:26 PM »

"Now, pitying himself, he says he wants his dignity. He abdicated that long before anyone heard Christine Blasey Ford’s name."

Great piece from Counterpunch that covers a whole sweep of what makes Kavanaugh so awful, from torture, the privileged background, and how he is almost a psychopath in his indifference to human suffering.

https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/09/27/what-brett-kavanaugh-really-learned-in-high-school-make-the-rules-break-the-rules-and-prosper/

September 27, 2018
"What Brett Kavanaugh Really Learned in High School: Make the Rules, Break the Rules and Prosper"
by JoAnn Wypijewski

GrayGhost

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 374
  • Location: USA
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #606 on: September 27, 2018, 08:51:14 PM »
^ You must realize that that article won't convince anyone who isn't already thoroughly anti-Kavanaugh. Which seems to be nearly 3/4ths of this thread, so you're probably going to get some pats on the back, but still, it doesn't mean it will convince anyone.

Quote
If I was facing a bunch of serious allegations that I know are patently false, the first thing I'd be pushing for is to get someone to investigate.  The investigation would clear my name and show the people making claims for the liars they are . . . especially if they're all easily dismissed bullshit claims.

I'd be really angry and want to do everything possible to stop the investigation if I had something to hide though.

I don't know what Kavenaugh has to hide (the allegations may not be true, he just may be hiding some other dark secret) . . . but he's certainly acting like someone guilty of something.

Sounds a lot like saying those who have nothing to hide shouldn't fear mass surveillance or warantless searches...

~

At this point, it seems that the Ford allegation is the most credible one. Even then, even if it is mostly true, there's a significant chance that it did not happen, or that the attacker was not Kavanaugh.
« Last Edit: September 27, 2018, 09:03:02 PM by GrayGhost »

JLee

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5017
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #607 on: September 27, 2018, 09:00:14 PM »
You must realize that that article won't convince anyone who isn't already thoroughly anti-Kavanaugh.

If anyone can watch his performance from today and not be anti, then nothing is going to change their mind anyway.

His outright refusal to answer questions was so apparent and obvious - entirely unacceptable in this setting.

GrayGhost

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 374
  • Location: USA
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #608 on: September 27, 2018, 09:08:58 PM »
I'll take a look at that later if I get a chance. I'm curious though, what would make you think that Kavanaugh is acceptable for a seat on the SCOTUS?

PS, and slightly off topic, just heard about Sen Booker's "indescretion" back in 92. I don't think it is sexual assault. He was kissing someone, he tried to advance things, she rejected him physically, that was that. Heck, reading the original column... he leans in for a hug and is met with an "overwhelming kiss" makes it sound almost like HE was sexually assaulted, if the bar for sexual assault really is so low.

I hate to say it, because there is a lot of sexual crime that should be addressed and pursued by the criminal justice system, but there is also a bit of witch hunting going on, by both sides.
« Last Edit: September 27, 2018, 09:13:23 PM by GrayGhost »

redbirdfan

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 106
  • Location: Seattle
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #609 on: September 27, 2018, 10:41:52 PM »
I'm convinced Kavanaugh did it.  He reminds me of a relative of mine who does in fact have a drinking problem.  Let's be honest.  1) it's crazy that he's pulling out a calendar from 1982 as proof that he didn't do ("weekends away); 2) there are numerous dates on his own calendar that match the people and the approximate time of the incident "skis w/ PJ, Judge and Timmy" in the summer of '82.  3) He outright lied about the Renate Alumnus thing.  She obviously didn't think it was because she was one of them after hearing about it.  4) He wrote about having to "piece his night together" in the past but today denied that he's ever lost bits of memory as a result of drinking.  5) He is completely against a FBI investigation.  That was quite obvious today.  There is a LOT of information we could get through an FBI investigation:

1. Names of any friends of Kavanaugh with a home near the Country Club.
2. Dates on which Judge worked at the Safeway.
3. Address of "Timmy"
4. Address of P.J.
5. Address of Judge
6. Confirmation of Renate Alumnus meaning, Devil's Triangle, Boof
7. Testimony of Judge, Timmy, PJ and Leyland under oath.

People are casually saying, yes something happened, but it wasn't Kavanaugh.  That doesn't seem likely given that she knew him (by id) prior to the incident.  You don't usually mistake id when you already know the identity of the person.  That's completely different that picking a stranger out of a lineup.  There was nothing about Kavanaugh's performance that made me think he didn't have a drinking problem or that he wouldn't be an aggressive drunk.  I don't say this lightly.  I think people who have/have had alcoholics in their lives can notice some of the signs of defensive/evasive aggression.   

Graham reminded me of someone "banging the table" when they don't have the law or facts on their side.  Kavanaugh is too outwardly political to be a credible SC Justice.  Who comes up with a Clinton conspiracy out of the gate?  Would any organization affiliated with left-leaning organizations get a fair shake in front of him?  Doesn't seem likely.  He lacks the temperament and self reflection to be an honest jurist. 

The Republicans likely know that Kavanaugh is not telling the truth.  Not to play the Hillary card, but if Hillary just wrote a letter to the House Oversight Comm. that said under penalty of felony, I don't recall doing anything wrong regarding Benghazi or regarding my email server, I'm pretty sure that would NOT be considered sufficient. 

Kavanaugh should not be on the Supreme Court.

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7492
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #610 on: September 27, 2018, 10:51:32 PM »
Kavanaugh should not be on the Supreme Court.

And yet, here we are.  The committee votes to approve him tomorrow, and the full Senate will confirm him next week, and there's not a damn thing anyone can do about it.  At this point it wouldn't matter if Kavanaugh went on tv and said "haha j/k I totally tried to rape that slut!" he would still get confirmed.

Tonight, the American Bar Association is calling for a delay in the confirmation vote until after the FBI can complete an investigation.  Which only makes sense, if you want to get to the bottom of this.  Kavanaugh, Trump, Grassley, and McConnell have all tried to prevent that investigation from happening, for some unknown reason that sure looks like criminal intent.  It's not like their nomination process is going to be materially affected by a one week delay, so what's the rush? 

Why in the world would anyone say "we don't want an investigation" at this point?  Because that's the official line of the entire GOP right now, with the possible exception of Susan Collins who has only hinted that gee wouldn't it be nice to know what's really going on?

sol

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7492
  • Age: 41
  • Location: Pacific Northwest
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #611 on: September 28, 2018, 12:18:22 AM »
For those only loosely following along, the best humorous summary of today's hearings that I've seen was provided by The Daily Show:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbJgtZbU8LU

Note: adult language on cable tv.

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3743
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #612 on: September 28, 2018, 01:33:40 AM »
Dr Ford said that the attack happened at a party in the summer of 1982 attended by Kavanaugh, Mark Judge, PJ and one other boy.  Kavanaugh's diary corroborates that he went out drinking with Mark Judge, PJ and two other boys on 1st July 1982.

Kavanaugh says neither he nor his friends lived near Columbia Country Club/ Bethesda, the general location where Dr Ford says the party took place.  Kavanaugh said that both Judge and PJ had cars that they gave him lifts to school in.  Either of them could easily have driven him to the location of the party.

Kavanaugh says that the party presumably happened on the weekend and all his weekends were busy.  His diary entry about the party with his friends is for Thursday.

Dr Ford said that both Kavanaugh and PJ had been drinking: there is ample corroborating evidence of Kavanaugh's and Judge's drinking.

Under oath, Kavanaugh was unable to deny knowing both Dr Ford or her friend Ms Keyser.

Transcript of the testimony here -
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/national/wp/2018/09/27/kavanaugh-hearing-transcript/?utm_term=.ac9f6722c58a

I don't see how anyone reading the transcript could conclude anything other than that Dr Ford is convincing and Kavanaugh is not.  Even without the different demeanours on show.

It's also quite clear to me that Graham intervened, and Grassley blew up the agreed procedures to let him, at the first possible chance after the 1st July diary entry came to light, as a planned and deliberate attempt to divert the hearing away from any further fact finding.
« Last Edit: September 28, 2018, 02:39:35 AM by former player »

runbikerun

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 354
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #613 on: September 28, 2018, 01:59:28 AM »
Two things have become abundantly clear:

1. Kavanaugh is not a good enough candidate for the Supreme Court. Even assuming he's entirely innocent of the accusations that have been made, the process has made it very clear that he can't reasonably be trusted to be impartial. There is no way he can ever be seen as a fair judge in any case involving the Democratic party. And if one of the senators on the panel ends up becoming President down the line - how on earth can Kavanaugh claim impartiality in that situation?

2. He's going to be confirmed anyway, because the Republican party is terrified that the Democrats will win the Senate in a few weeks and refuse to confirm any of Trump's picks. Why are they scared this will happen? Because it's exactly what they did with Merrick Garland. Reversing Roe v Wade has become the sole purpose of the entire Republican party: there is nothing they will not sell out in advancement of that goal, not even basic principles.

Roadrunner53

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1653
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #614 on: September 28, 2018, 04:49:22 AM »
Alter boy, pure as the driven snow. Sniveling, crying, choked up, wriggling his nose, drinking gallons of water. How dare anyone accuse this 1982 virgin, library geek and avid player of sports. He is innocent, just ask him. No need for FBI to investigate, he said so. Seems he made up new meanings for the word Boof and Devils Triangle. Funny, he says they mean flatulence and a card game. LOL! Google it.

Poor little him, his reputation is smeared. It is all about him and his world. What about Ford? What about the other women?

Kavanaugh showed his true colors by being a lying, belligerent, hot headed, cry baby.

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3743
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #615 on: September 28, 2018, 05:03:11 AM »
Alter boy, pure as the driven snow. Sniveling, crying, choked up, wriggling his nose, drinking gallons of water. How dare anyone accuse this 1982 virgin, library geek and avid player of sports. He is innocent, just ask him. No need for FBI to investigate, he said so. Seems he made up new meanings for the word Boof and Devils Triangle. Funny, he says they mean flatulence and a card game. LOL! Google it.

Poor little him, his reputation is smeared. It is all about him and his world. What about Ford? What about the other women?

Kavanaugh showed his true colors by being a lying, belligerent, hot headed, cry baby.

Cable news is saying that the White House altered the Wikipedia definition of Devils Triangle after Kavanaugh testified.  The links certainly seem to have changed from when I in my innocence googled it yesterday.

Cache_Stash

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 291
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #616 on: September 28, 2018, 05:07:14 AM »
So the GOP line is Ford got assaulted...just not by Kavanaugh?

No, I think that as of right now the GOP line is that this whole thing is a liberal hit job, totally fabricated for political reasons.

And part of me kind of wishes that was true, because it would look like some kind of justice for the Merrick Garland debacle if it WAS just a purely partisan hit job.  They made no bones about scuttling Garland for partisan reasons, after all, so it would be delicious irony if liberals had returned the favor.  Sadly, this looks like an actual history of assault against multiple women who want to testify under oath, and nobody willing to defend him under oath, so the odds of it being a "sham" as Lindsey Graham claims are pretty slim.

I still think he'll be confirmed without so much as an investigation into these accusations.  They are not legally required to investigate.  Republicans have total control of two of the three branches of government, and they will use that control to take control of the third branch tomorrow.  Voters have no say.  Public opinion doesn't matter.  The only thing that matters is McConnell holding together 51 republican senators despite today's testimonies, so he can basically say "We don't care if it's true or not, we're putting him on the SC anyway" and then it will happen, and nobody else can do a damn thing about it.

In the long run, the electoral consequences of that kind of abuse are probably detrimental to the GOP and to the country as a whole, but that's not exactly at the forefront of the thought processes right now.

The last statement is what I don't get all these guys just want to swing their power dicks but aren't thinking about the magnitude this could have on the future of their party.

I doubt it. Every Trump supporter on my FB feed has posted horrible things about women who accuse men of power and/or made jokes about sexual harassment and assault.

Is this what you are eluding to:

Every Trump supporter you know has posted horrible things about sexual harassment and assault therefore all Trump supporters are misogynists or worse?

Cache_Stash

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 291
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #617 on: September 28, 2018, 05:20:12 AM »
I have a question.

Is it possible that they are both right?  But, maybe she just remembered the wrong guy?  They both seemed credible in my estimation. 

Evidence we do have:

Four people were named by Dr. Ford to have been present at the party.  All of them, under penalty of perjury denied/refuted that the event every happened including her friend.  Three of the four weren't in the room, so their deposition is meaningless.  The only other person present was one of the four and he refuted that it never happened.

That's all we have for evidence other than his calendar (which I would throw out because I don't think it documents every day or every day well enough from what I can tell).

So does anyone here have any doubts, however unlikely, that it may not have been Kavanaugh?

Or are you absolutely positive that it happened and it was him.

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3743
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #618 on: September 28, 2018, 05:31:33 AM »
I have a question.

Is it possible that they are both right?  But, maybe she just remembered the wrong guy?  They both seemed credible in my estimation. 

Evidence we do have:

Four people were named by Dr. Ford to have been present at the party.  All of them, under penalty of perjury denied/refuted that the event every happened including her friend.  Three of the four weren't in the room, so their deposition is meaningless.  The only other person present was one of the four and he refuted that it never happened.

That's all we have for evidence other than his calendar (which I would throw out because I don't think it documents every day or every day well enough from what I can tell).

So does anyone here have any doubts, however unlikely, that it may not have been Kavanaugh?

Or are you absolutely positive that it happened and it was him.

Dr Ford knew Kavanaugh well enough to name two of his drinking buddies.  There's no suggestion she got those names from anywhere except her memory, right?  And Kavanaugh's calendar confirms the names of those two people as two of his drinking buddies.

Kavanaugh has been unable under oath to deny knowing Dr Ford or her friend.

This quite clearly isn't a case where Dr Ford is trying to identify a stranger.  She is 100% certain of her identification of him. 

Kavanaugh has denied any incident.  In the famous words of a woman in a somewhat similar case in the UK, when it was put to her that the defendant denied his involvement she said "well he would, wouldn't he?"

Cache_Stash

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 291
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #619 on: September 28, 2018, 05:40:33 AM »
I have a question.

Is it possible that they are both right?  But, maybe she just remembered the wrong guy?  They both seemed credible in my estimation. 

Evidence we do have:

Four people were named by Dr. Ford to have been present at the party.  All of them, under penalty of perjury denied/refuted that the event every happened including her friend.  Three of the four weren't in the room, so their deposition is meaningless.  The only other person present was one of the four and he refuted that it never happened.

That's all we have for evidence other than his calendar (which I would throw out because I don't think it documents every day or every day well enough from what I can tell).

So does anyone here have any doubts, however unlikely, that it may not have been Kavanaugh?

Or are you absolutely positive that it happened and it was him.

Dr Ford knew Kavanaugh well enough to name two of his drinking buddies.  There's no suggestion she got those names from anywhere except her memory, right?  And Kavanaugh's calendar confirms the names of those two people as two of his drinking buddies.

Kavanaugh has been unable under oath to deny knowing Dr Ford or her friend.

This quite clearly isn't a case where Dr Ford is trying to identify a stranger.  She is 100% certain of her identification of him. 

Kavanaugh has denied any incident.  In the famous words of a woman in a somewhat similar case in the UK, when it was put to her that the defendant denied his involvement she said "well he would, wouldn't he?
"

You didn't answer the question.  You just threw up a bunch of stuff and most of it isn't evidence based.

Your use of the term "Drinking Buddies" shows a bias.  They were his friends.  I had friends in High School.  I never in my life have used the term "Drinking Buddies" to identify any of them.

MasterStache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #620 on: September 28, 2018, 05:49:07 AM »
I have a question.

Is it possible that they are both right?  But, maybe she just remembered the wrong guy?  They both seemed credible in my estimation. 

Evidence we do have:

Four people were named by Dr. Ford to have been present at the party.  All of them, under penalty of perjury denied/refuted that the event every happened including her friend.  Three of the four weren't in the room, so their deposition is meaningless.  The only other person present was one of the four and he refuted that it never happened.

That's all we have for evidence other than his calendar (which I would throw out because I don't think it documents every day or every day well enough from what I can tell).

So does anyone here have any doubts, however unlikely, that it may not have been Kavanaugh?

Or are you absolutely positive that it happened and it was him.

They can't possibly both be right. Because Ford testified that she was 100% certain it was Kavanaugh. She doesn't seem to have some hazy memory of the event. Kavanaugh didn't seem convincing at all. In fact he sounded very rude and egotistical. When asked about his drinking he went on and on about his academic record and how great the school was and routinely evaded the question by trying to redirect it. He painted himself as the perfect little virgin choir boy. He spewed some bullshit about the vile things he wrote in yearbooks.

When all is said and done it will once again become purely political. Republicans will push the nomination through without a thorough investigation so they can have their conservative Supreme Court. And all the bullshit they spewed about caring about Ford and sympathizing will prove to be pure posture.

I have a better question for you. Who stand to gain more? What does Ford gain from knowingly lying about the accuser? Certainly not a cabinet position. I am sure it's costing her a fortune.  We all know what Kavanaugh stands to gain.
« Last Edit: September 28, 2018, 05:57:52 AM by MasterStache »

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3743
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #621 on: September 28, 2018, 05:51:16 AM »
I have a question.

Is it possible that they are both right?  But, maybe she just remembered the wrong guy?  They both seemed credible in my estimation. 

Evidence we do have:

Four people were named by Dr. Ford to have been present at the party.  All of them, under penalty of perjury denied/refuted that the event every happened including her friend.  Three of the four weren't in the room, so their deposition is meaningless.  The only other person present was one of the four and he refuted that it never happened.

That's all we have for evidence other than his calendar (which I would throw out because I don't think it documents every day or every day well enough from what I can tell).

So does anyone here have any doubts, however unlikely, that it may not have been Kavanaugh?

Or are you absolutely positive that it happened and it was him.

Dr Ford knew Kavanaugh well enough to name two of his drinking buddies.  There's no suggestion she got those names from anywhere except her memory, right?  And Kavanaugh's calendar confirms the names of those two people as two of his drinking buddies.

Kavanaugh has been unable under oath to deny knowing Dr Ford or her friend.

This quite clearly isn't a case where Dr Ford is trying to identify a stranger.  She is 100% certain of her identification of him. 

Kavanaugh has denied any incident.  In the famous words of a woman in a somewhat similar case in the UK, when it was put to her that the defendant denied his involvement she said "well he would, wouldn't he?
"

You didn't answer the question.  You just threw up a bunch of stuff and most of it isn't evidence based.

Your use of the term "Drinking Buddies" shows a bias.  They were his friends.  I had friends in High School.  I never in my life have used the term "Drinking Buddies" to identify any of them.

I provided corroborating evidence that the two people named by Dr Ford as being present at a drinking party with Kavanaugh were people Kavanaugh went to drinking parties with.

You are asking "is there any doubt as to the identity of Kavanaugh".  Dr Ford was unequivocal, and her evidence as to identity (which in the specific circumstances necessarily includes the identity of his companions) is unchallenged.  Kavanaugh does not challenge her evidence of identity: he denies it but provides no evidence to refute it.

Whether "drinking buddies" is merely accurate or shows bias is irrelevant to 1) the existence of the corroborating evidence I mention and 2) any evidence provided in relation to the incident: I am not a witness and nothing I say affects the evidence available.

Cache_Stash

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 291
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #622 on: September 28, 2018, 06:14:32 AM »
I have a question.

Is it possible that they are both right?  But, maybe she just remembered the wrong guy?  They both seemed credible in my estimation. 

Evidence we do have:

Four people were named by Dr. Ford to have been present at the party.  All of them, under penalty of perjury denied/refuted that the event every happened including her friend.  Three of the four weren't in the room, so their deposition is meaningless.  The only other person present was one of the four and he refuted that it never happened.

That's all we have for evidence other than his calendar (which I would throw out because I don't think it documents every day or every day well enough from what I can tell).

So does anyone here have any doubts, however unlikely, that it may not have been Kavanaugh?

Or are you absolutely positive that it happened and it was him.

Dr Ford knew Kavanaugh well enough to name two of his drinking buddies.  There's no suggestion she got those names from anywhere except her memory, right?  And Kavanaugh's calendar confirms the names of those two people as two of his drinking buddies.

Kavanaugh has been unable under oath to deny knowing Dr Ford or her friend.

This quite clearly isn't a case where Dr Ford is trying to identify a stranger.  She is 100% certain of her identification of him. 

Kavanaugh has denied any incident.  In the famous words of a woman in a somewhat similar case in the UK, when it was put to her that the defendant denied his involvement she said "well he would, wouldn't he?
"

You didn't answer the question.  You just threw up a bunch of stuff and most of it isn't evidence based.

Your use of the term "Drinking Buddies" shows a bias.  They were his friends.  I had friends in High School.  I never in my life have used the term "Drinking Buddies" to identify any of them.

I provided corroborating evidence that the two people named by Dr Ford as being present at a drinking party with Kavanaugh were people Kavanaugh went to drinking parties with.

You are asking "is there any doubt as to the identity of Kavanaugh".  Dr Ford was unequivocal, and her evidence as to identity (which in the specific circumstances necessarily includes the identity of his companions) is unchallenged.  Kavanaugh does not challenge her evidence of identity: he denies it but provides no evidence to refute it.

Whether "drinking buddies" is merely accurate or shows bias is irrelevant to 1) the existence of the corroborating evidence I mention and 2) any evidence provided in relation to the incident: I am not a witness and nothing I say affects the evidence available.

Did you know her friend said she never met Kavanaugh? 

The statements of those other people that Dr Ford said was there doesn't count as evidence?

Do you have any doubts?  Step up.  Answer the question.  Doubts or no?



Cache_Stash

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 291
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #623 on: September 28, 2018, 06:17:21 AM »
I have a question.

Is it possible that they are both right?  But, maybe she just remembered the wrong guy?  They both seemed credible in my estimation. 

Evidence we do have:

Four people were named by Dr. Ford to have been present at the party.  All of them, under penalty of perjury denied/refuted that the event every happened including her friend.  Three of the four weren't in the room, so their deposition is meaningless.  The only other person present was one of the four and he refuted that it never happened.

That's all we have for evidence other than his calendar (which I would throw out because I don't think it documents every day or every day well enough from what I can tell).

So does anyone here have any doubts, however unlikely, that it may not have been Kavanaugh?

Or are you absolutely positive that it happened and it was him.

Dr Ford knew Kavanaugh well enough to name two of his drinking buddies.  There's no suggestion she got those names from anywhere except her memory, right?  And Kavanaugh's calendar confirms the names of those two people as two of his drinking buddies.

Kavanaugh has been unable under oath to deny knowing Dr Ford or her friend.

This quite clearly isn't a case where Dr Ford is trying to identify a stranger.  She is 100% certain of her identification of him. 

Kavanaugh has denied any incident.  In the famous words of a woman in a somewhat similar case in the UK, when it was put to her that the defendant denied his involvement she said "well he would, wouldn't he?
"

You didn't answer the question.  You just threw up a bunch of stuff and most of it isn't evidence based.

Your use of the term "Drinking Buddies" shows a bias.  They were his friends.  I had friends in High School.  I never in my life have used the term "Drinking Buddies" to identify any of them.

I provided corroborating evidence that the two people named by Dr Ford as being present at a drinking party with Kavanaugh were people Kavanaugh went to drinking parties with.

You are asking "is there any doubt as to the identity of Kavanaugh".  Dr Ford was unequivocal, and her evidence as to identity (which in the specific circumstances necessarily includes the identity of his companions) is unchallenged.  Kavanaugh does not challenge her evidence of identity: he denies it but provides no evidence to refute it.

Whether "drinking buddies" is merely accurate or shows bias is irrelevant to 1) the existence of the corroborating evidence I mention and 2) any evidence provided in relation to the incident: I am not a witness and nothing I say affects the evidence available.

Did you know her friend said she never met Kavanaugh? 

The statements of those other people that Dr Ford said was there doesn't count as evidence?

Do you have any doubts?  Step up.  Answer the question.  Doubts or no?

What does this prove?

nereo

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8787
  • Location: la belle province
    • Here's how you can support science today:
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #624 on: September 28, 2018, 06:39:29 AM »
Kavanaugh's testimony yesterday sealed it for me, even if one completely ignored the issue of whether he did or didn't do what Ford has accused him of.

No one deserves to serve on the supreme court. Not Kavanakugh, not the current 8 justices nor any of the previous ones. It is an honor and a privilege to be on the court, and is a pool of hundreds - if not thousands - of top tier, experienced, best-in-class candidates who could perform the duties required with distinction and integrity.  A justice must take arguments and criticisms from all sides and all Americans while ultimately evaluating what the constitution says, what the framers intended and the precedence that has been set by the lower courts.

Brett Kavanaugh has lost sight of all of that. Most of all he came off as entitled to the post.  "I have done everything you asked" and "I have top grades - an impeccable career" were his go-to responses, yet neither are sufficient for the post nor relevant to the hearing at hand. His cries about this being an elaborate character-assasination were far more troubling.  The constitution clearly gives senators this role, and while a great deal of politicking was certainly going on, he showed distain for the entire process.  The open skepticism he showed for our nation's top investigative body to do its job and provide useful information was nothing short of appalling. 

Part of a justice's workload is to hear cases from felons and determine whether their rights are being violated (see Miranda v. Arizona). Kavanaugh did not even attempt impartiality with members of the US Senate. His strategy with each of the Democrat's questions was to run out the clock while highlighting how great his academic career had been, but this was not a hearing to determine if he was legally and experienced. There has never been a question that Kavanaugh has met a minimal accepted standard.

Ultimately I found Ford's testimony to be gut-wrenching and credible. I found Kavanaugh to be combative and evasive.  While I would personally prefer a candidate who is more centrist and would be more in the mold of Justice Kennedy, the constitution makes clear that its this president and senate that will nominate and approve a candidate, and political will being what it is I have no doubt it will be someone who holds very conservative views.  But Kavanaugh does not deserve the honor to be a member of the Supreme Court of the UNited States.

FrugalToque

  • Global Moderator
  • Bristles
  • *****
  • Posts: 478
  • Location: Canada
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #625 on: September 28, 2018, 06:43:31 AM »

Did you know her friend said she never met Kavanaugh? 

The statements of those other people that Dr Ford said was there doesn't count as evidence?

Do you have any doubts?  Step up.  Answer the question.  Doubts or no?

Yes, we know that her friend said that.  Though notably not under oath at the time, there's no reason to remember a small summer gathering at some house when you were 15 years old 36 years ago.  Unless, of course, you were raped (or nearly raped) at the party.  I'm very confident, in my teenage summers, I visited many houses with random groups of friends that I now don't recall.  Unless something terrible happened to me, like I got beat up, or something great happened to me, that would easily slip out of my memory.

Also, the deal with "evidence" is that there's a difference between a public statement and testimony under oath as part of an FBI investigation.

For myself, I have very little doubt about Dr. Ford's testimony.  Judge Kavanaugh's testimony, however, raises a number of red flags about his poor temperament and belligerence.

Toque.

shenlong55

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 369
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Kentucky
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #626 on: September 28, 2018, 06:49:24 AM »
I have a question.

Is it possible that they are both right?  But, maybe she just remembered the wrong guy?  They both seemed credible in my estimation. 

Evidence we do have:

Four people were named by Dr. Ford to have been present at the party.  All of them, under penalty of perjury denied/refuted that the event every happened including her friend.  Three of the four weren't in the room, so their deposition is meaningless.  The only other person present was one of the four and he refuted that it never happened.

That's all we have for evidence other than his calendar (which I would throw out because I don't think it documents every day or every day well enough from what I can tell).

So does anyone here have any doubts, however unlikely, that it may not have been Kavanaugh?

Or are you absolutely positive that it happened and it was him.

Again, this is not true and I think it shows your bias when you try to characterize a failure to remember an event as a denial/refutation of the event happening.

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3743
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #627 on: September 28, 2018, 06:59:39 AM »
Did you know her friend said she never met Kavanaugh? 

The statements of those other people that Dr Ford said was there doesn't count as evidence?

Do you have any doubts?  Step up.  Answer the question.  Doubts or no?

Yes I know what her friend has said.  She has said that she does not recall the party but that she believes Dr Ford.

Judge and PJ appear to have said they have no memory or recollection of the party (as per the transcript of the hearing).   Those statements neither add to or detract from Dr Ford's identification of Kavanaugh.

Let me ask you something.  Dr Ford has said that in the summer of 1982 Kavanaugh was out drinking at a party with Judge and PJ  Kavanaugh has not denied going out drinking with Judge and PJ, and there is an entry in his calendar about going out drinking with Judge and PJ.  If Dr Ford did not meet Kavanaugh at a party that summer, how could she have known that Kavanaugh was out drinking with Judge and PJ that summer?  Unless you think she is lying as part of a deep State conspiracy, of course.

FrugalToque

  • Global Moderator
  • Bristles
  • *****
  • Posts: 478
  • Location: Canada
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #628 on: September 28, 2018, 07:01:37 AM »
Four people were named by Dr. Ford to have been present at the party.  All of them, under penalty of perjury denied/refuted that the event every happened including her friend.  Three of the four weren't in the room, so their deposition is meaningless.  The only other person present was one of the four and he refuted that it never happened.

I wasn't aware that Mark Judge made a statement under oath, but I see now that he swore under oath that he couldn't recall anything like that - which isn't much considered he also said he's a recovering alcoholic who wrote an autobiography called "Wasted: Tales of a Gen X Drunk".

But let's remember that if he cops to Ford's version of events, he's also accessory (and inadvertent saviour via his clumsiness), so it's not like he's an unbiased source, either.

My suspicion is that the number of credible women who credibly accuse Kavanaugh of sexual assault will become so overwhelming, all doubt will disappear.

Toque.

Mariposa

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 348
  • Location: NYC
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #629 on: September 28, 2018, 07:08:16 AM »
I think that, sadly, if the senate judiciary committee is going through with the vote this morning, they probably have Flake's vote, and Kavanaugh's more likely than not to be confirmed next week.

I agree with Michelle Goldberg's assessment:

"But thanks to the Republican majority in the Senate, Kavanaugh didn’t have to be convincing to Democrats. His performance was for the conservative base, to whom he now appears as a martyr to the vicious left, a paragon of a man brought low by the inquisitorial forces of #MeToo. What seemed to the left like a tantrum over thwarted entitlement was, to the right, a moving display of indignation. “That was simply tremendous — appropriately angry, personal, wrenching, detailed, persuasive,” tweeted Rich Lowry, editor of National Review. “He helped himself immensely.”

In her opening statement, Blasey described why she’d been reluctant to go public with her story. “I believed that if I came forward, my voice would be drowned out by a chorus” of Kavanaugh’s powerful supporters, she said. She may have been correct. By the time the hearing ended, the right seemed more committed to Kavanaugh than ever, and his confirmation appeared inevitable. “Judge Kavanaugh showed America exactly why I nominated him,” tweeted President Trump. He did indeed."

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/27/opinion/blasey-ford-kavanaugh-hearing.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fopinion&action=click&contentCollection=opinion&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=4&pgtype=sectionfront


Cache_Stash

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 291
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #630 on: September 28, 2018, 07:10:48 AM »
I'm asking the question to determine what the posters on this board think about guilt.  Whether or not he is qualified for the position is not the purpose of my question.  I can already see that most posters here feel he isn't qualified.

oldtoyota

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3059
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #631 on: September 28, 2018, 07:11:02 AM »
Reversing Roe v Wade has become the sole purpose of the entire Republican party: there is nothing they will not sell out in advancement of that goal, not even basic principles.

I think they imply it's the sole purpose, but they really want to line their pockets with more dollar bills. These folks are, in some cases, ordering abortions for their girlfriends (in one case supplying a smoothie with an abortion pill in it to a girlfriend). So these guys? I doubt they care one bit about abortion. They want money.

Another idea: There is compromising information on some of them, and that is why they are so gung-ho on Kavanaugh.

Another idea: They know they'll be caught in the Russian web, so they want Kavanaugh to shut that down somehow.

This is bigger than abortion as far as I can tell.

Cache_Stash

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 291
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #632 on: September 28, 2018, 07:13:44 AM »
I think that, sadly, if the senate judiciary committee is going through with the vote this morning, they probably have Flake's vote, and Kavanaugh's more likely than not to be confirmed next week.

I agree with Michelle Goldberg's assessment:

"But thanks to the Republican majority in the Senate, Kavanaugh didn’t have to be convincing to Democrats. His performance was for the conservative base, to whom he now appears as a martyr to the vicious left, a paragon of a man brought low by the inquisitorial forces of #MeToo. What seemed to the left like a tantrum over thwarted entitlement was, to the right, a moving display of indignation. “That was simply tremendous — appropriately angry, personal, wrenching, detailed, persuasive,” tweeted Rich Lowry, editor of National Review. “He helped himself immensely.”

In her opening statement, Blasey described why she’d been reluctant to go public with her story. “I believed that if I came forward, my voice would be drowned out by a chorus” of Kavanaugh’s powerful supporters, she said. She may have been correct. By the time the hearing ended, the right seemed more committed to Kavanaugh than ever, and his confirmation appeared inevitable. “Judge Kavanaugh showed America exactly why I nominated him,” tweeted President Trump. He did indeed."

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/27/opinion/blasey-ford-kavanaugh-hearing.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fopinion&action=click&contentCollection=opinion&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=4&pgtype=sectionfront

That is a lucid and unbiased in my estimation.  Pretty much parallels my thoughts.  YMMBTD

I'm a red panda

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7337
  • Location: United States
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #633 on: September 28, 2018, 07:14:26 AM »
Reversing Roe v Wade has become the sole purpose of the entire Republican party: there is nothing they will not sell out in advancement of that goal, not even basic principles.

I think they imply it's the sole purpose, but they really want to line their pockets with more dollar bills. These folks are, in some cases, ordering abortions for their girlfriends (in one case supplying a smoothie with an abortion pill in it to a girlfriend). So these guys? I doubt they care one bit about abortion. They want money.

Another idea: There is compromising information on some of them, and that is why they are so gung-ho on Kavanaugh.

Another idea: They know they'll be caught in the Russian web, so they want Kavanaugh to shut that down somehow.

This is bigger than abortion as far as I can tell.

They're rich. Abortion is OK for them. They'll send their girlfriend's to Canada and England. 
Abortion is not OK for poor people.

Honestly- I think it's about 90% about abortion. 

hoping2retire35

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1403
  • Location: UPCOUNTRY CAROLINA
  • just want to see where this appears
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #634 on: September 28, 2018, 07:15:28 AM »
I am ready for the "Lock her up!" chants. This is defamation of character, libel and slander; she has nothing, not even her best friend. Feinstein too; she sat for months on supposed 'evidence.' Whether he gets it or not I hope he sues her and her employer goes out of business.

I don't even understand what she is getting at; she willing went into a room with him then changed her mind so she yelled; he covered her mouth while she yelled in his hear, then what...he ran away? Oh no, rubbing her shoulders, while drunkenly mumbling or whatever, you know drunk flirting; she shows her dis-appreciation of it and he stopped. Ok, for the benefit of the doubt for all this, we will go along with a strict Judeo-Christian ethic and say what he did was immoral(edit; assuming it even happened). But seriously, all this for two weeks. I get why the media is doing this, they need ratings, something to talk about, etc; but you people?
« Last Edit: September 28, 2018, 07:26:56 AM by hoping2retire35 »

GreenEggs

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 567
  • Location: Here & There
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #635 on: September 28, 2018, 07:15:42 AM »
Kavanaugh's really going to be one nasty mean SOB after all this.

Cache_Stash

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 291
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #636 on: September 28, 2018, 07:20:08 AM »
Kavanaugh's really going to be one nasty mean SOB after all this.

I guess you know him better than I.  I didn't know he was a vindictive type.

runbikerun

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 354
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #637 on: September 28, 2018, 07:24:25 AM »
I am ready for the "Lock her up!" chants. This is defamation of character, libel and slander; she has nothing, not even her best friend. Feinstein too; she sat for months on supposed 'evidence.' Whether he gets it or not I hope he sues her and her employer goes out of business.

I don't even understand what she is getting at; she willing went into a room with him then changed her mind so she yelled; he covered her mouth while she yelled in his hear, then what...he ran away? Oh no, rubbing her shoulders, while drunkenly mumbling or whatever, you know drunk flirting; she shows her dis-appreciation of it and he stopped. Ok, for the benefit of the doubt for all this, we will go along with a strict Judeo-Christian ethic and say what he did was immoral. But seriously, all this for two weeks. I get why the media is doing this, they need ratings, something to talk about, etc; but you people?

This is loathsome.

PoutineLover

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 992
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #638 on: September 28, 2018, 07:24:56 AM »
I am ready for the "Lock her up!" chants. This is defamation of character, libel and slander; she has nothing, not even her best friend. Feinstein too; she sat for months on supposed 'evidence.' Whether he gets it or not I hope he sues her and her employer goes out of business.

I don't even understand what she is getting at; she willing went into a room with him then changed her mind so she yelled; he covered her mouth while she yelled in his hear, then what...he ran away? Oh no, rubbing her shoulders, while drunkenly mumbling or whatever, you know drunk flirting; she shows her dis-appreciation of it and he stopped. Ok, for the benefit of the doubt for all this, we will go along with a strict Judeo-Christian ethic and say what he did was immoral. But seriously, all this for two weeks. I get why the media is doing this, they need ratings, something to talk about, etc; but you people?
Wait, is this a joke? That's not at all what was alleged and if you've been following the case you'd know that.
The reason we care (or at least why I care) is that a man who has been credibly accused of sexual assault is potentially (probably) going to be elevated to the highest court of the country, where he will have the power to influence millions of people's lives. There is a pretty high standard of moral integrity and honesty required to reach that level that he has pretty clearly violated, even if the allegations turn out to be false. Which I really don't think they are, having watched both of them testify. He came off as a dishonest asshole who would say anything to save his skin, except give a straight answer. She has a credible story and wants an investigation to find the truth, while he wants this whole thing to go away to he can get a cushy lifetime appointment.

oldtoyota

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3059
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #639 on: September 28, 2018, 07:25:37 AM »
I am ready for the "Lock her up!" chants. This is defamation of character, libel and slander; she has nothing, not even her best friend. Feinstein too; she sat for months on supposed 'evidence.' Whether he gets it or not I hope he sues her and her employer goes out of business.

I don't even understand what she is getting at; she willing went into a room with him then changed her mind so she yelled; he covered her mouth while she yelled in his hear, then what...he ran away? Oh no, rubbing her shoulders, while drunkenly mumbling or whatever, you know drunk flirting; she shows her dis-appreciation of it and he stopped. Ok, for the benefit of the doubt for all this, we will go along with a strict Judeo-Christian ethic and say what he did was immoral. But seriously, all this for two weeks. I get why the media is doing this, they need ratings, something to talk about, etc; but you people?

Did you listen to the testimony? She did not willingly go into a room with him. You've lost credibility because you've missed a major point. She was on her way to the bathroom and was pushed from behind into a bedroom.

This post of yours isn't accurate and seems to deliberately change the testimony to fit the argument you want to make.

shenlong55

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 369
  • Age: 36
  • Location: Kentucky
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #640 on: September 28, 2018, 07:30:07 AM »
Kavanaugh's really going to be one nasty mean SOB after all this.

I guess you know him better than I.  I didn't know he was a vindictive type.

Did you watch the hearing yesterday...?

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12287
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #641 on: September 28, 2018, 07:30:17 AM »
Quote
If I was facing a bunch of serious allegations that I know are patently false, the first thing I'd be pushing for is to get someone to investigate.  The investigation would clear my name and show the people making claims for the liars they are . . . especially if they're all easily dismissed bullshit claims.

I'd be really angry and want to do everything possible to stop the investigation if I had something to hide though.

I don't know what Kavenaugh has to hide (the allegations may not be true, he just may be hiding some other dark secret) . . . but he's certainly acting like someone guilty of something.

Sounds a lot like saying those who have nothing to hide shouldn't fear mass surveillance or warantless searches...

I don't really see how.

Mass surveillance is an invasion of privacy that is executed against everyone without cause.
Warrantless searches are an invasion of privacy that are executed on targeted individuals without cause.
An investigation of sexual allegations made against someone is an invasion of privacy of both the accuser and accused with cause.

Without an investigation, we have two people making claims and not enough evidence to make a judgement.  Investigating an accusation removes some of the 'he said/she said' and gives additional information that can only benefit the party telling the truth.  I've mentioned several times that I have no idea if the allegations are true or false.  Neither do you.  That's the purpose of an investigation . . . to shed some light on the issue and get a better understanding of what really happened.  Standing in the way of this only benefits the person who is lying.

Dabnasty

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1235
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #642 on: September 28, 2018, 07:31:07 AM »
I'm asking the question to determine what the posters on this board think about guilt.  Whether or not he is qualified for the position is not the purpose of my question.  I can already see that most posters here feel he isn't qualified.

I suspect this question isn't being answered more directly because it doesn't really pertain to the matter at hand and it should go without saying. Of course there is doubt. I have doubts and any responsible person judging the situation based on the evidence should as well. In fact, up to the point where I can watch recorded evidence of the event, I'll have some doubt. If this were a criminal investigation where Kavanaugh faced the possibility of jail time I would see the evidence as insufficient, but that's not what's happening here.

I do think there is sufficient evidence to move on for the sake of the country. I do not think doing so would set the precedent that erroneous claims can be made in the future for political gains, which is the issue that would concern me the most had he been passed over at the first sign of an accusation, but we're well beyond that at this point.

Cache_Stash

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 291
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #643 on: September 28, 2018, 07:31:45 AM »
I am ready for the "Lock her up!" chants. This is defamation of character, libel and slander; she has nothing, not even her best friend. Feinstein too; she sat for months on supposed 'evidence.' Whether he gets it or not I hope he sues her and her employer goes out of business.

I don't even understand what she is getting at; she willing went into a room with him then changed her mind so she yelled; he covered her mouth while she yelled in his hear, then what...he ran away? Oh no, rubbing her shoulders, while drunkenly mumbling or whatever, you know drunk flirting; she shows her dis-appreciation of it and he stopped. Ok, for the benefit of the doubt for all this, we will go along with a strict Judeo-Christian ethic and say what he did was immoral(edit; assuming it even happened). But seriously, all this for two weeks. I get why the media is doing this, they need ratings, something to talk about, etc; but you people?

This is a completely unhelpful post.  You are definitely biased.

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3743
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #644 on: September 28, 2018, 07:35:17 AM »
h2r35 has always seemed a decent poster to me, so I did a double take on their post and deemed it a sarcastic imaginative rendering of Republican thought processes.

Although probably more accurate than sarcastic.

Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3402
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #645 on: September 28, 2018, 07:37:50 AM »

Did you know her friend said she never met Kavanaugh? 

The statements of those other people that Dr Ford said was there doesn't count as evidence?

Do you have any doubts?  Step up.  Answer the question.  Doubts or no?

Yes, we know that her friend said that.  Though notably not under oath at the time, there's no reason to remember a small summer gathering at some house when you were 15 years old 36 years ago.  Unless, of course, you were raped (or nearly raped) at the party.  I'm very confident, in my teenage summers, I visited many houses with random groups of friends that I now don't recall.  Unless something terrible happened to me, like I got beat up, or something great happened to me, that would easily slip out of my memory.

Also, the deal with "evidence" is that there's a difference between a public statement and testimony under oath as part of an FBI investigation.

For myself, I have very little doubt about Dr. Ford's testimony.  Judge Kavanaugh's testimony, however, raises a number of red flags about his poor temperament and belligerence.

Toque.

This exactly. I am the exact same age as Dr. Ford. There are plenty of people I hung out with in high school at random times whose names and faces I can't remember at all. This was illustrated to me about three weeks ago, when a good friend of mine from HS was in town. In the course of the conversation, I told him about seeing the Facebook post of a former HS student in our grade -- someone who we both knew at the time. He couldn't remember her name or her face.

hoping2retire35

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1403
  • Location: UPCOUNTRY CAROLINA
  • just want to see where this appears
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #646 on: September 28, 2018, 07:38:39 AM »

Did you listen to the testimony? She did not willingly go into a room with him. You've lost credibility because you've missed a major point. She was on her way to the bathroom and was pushed from behind into a bedroom.

This post of yours isn't accurate and seems to deliberately change the testimony to fit the argument you want to make.
No, I've got better things to do than watch a 45 min vid. I am an anonymous internet poster, we all are, none of us have credibility.

He made a drunken pass at her, you know at a high school party, with, you guessed it, beer. Her vibe was 'No' and he left. She sounds like the most unviolated woman in the United States of America and this is a disgrace to every woman who has been sexually assaulted.

GuitarStv

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 12287
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #647 on: September 28, 2018, 07:40:00 AM »
I am ready for the "Lock her up!" chants. This is defamation of character, libel and slander; she has nothing, not even her best friend. Feinstein too; she sat for months on supposed 'evidence.' Whether he gets it or not I hope he sues her and her employer goes out of business.

I don't even understand what she is getting at; she willing went into a room with him then changed her mind so she yelled; he covered her mouth while she yelled in his hear, then what...he ran away? Oh no, rubbing her shoulders, while drunkenly mumbling or whatever, you know drunk flirting; she shows her dis-appreciation of it and he stopped. Ok, for the benefit of the doubt for all this, we will go along with a strict Judeo-Christian ethic and say what he did was immoral(edit; assuming it even happened). But seriously, all this for two weeks. I get why the media is doing this, they need ratings, something to talk about, etc; but you people?

I'm going to repeat a post I made earlier because it asks questions that I think apply to your post as well as they do to Jrr's:

Here's Ford's testimony on the event - she clearly states she thinks he was going to rape her:
Quote
Brett and Mark came into the bedroom and locked the door behind them. There was music already playing in the bedroom. It was turned up louder by either Brett or Mark once we were in the room. I was pushed onto the bed and Brett got on top of me. He began running his hands over my body and grinding his hips into me. I yelled, hoping someone downstairs might hear me, and tried to get away from him, but his weight was heavy. Brett groped me and tried to take off my clothes. He had a hard time because he was so drunk, and because I was wearing a one-piece bathing suit under my clothes. I believed he was going to rape me. I tried to yell for help. When I did, Brett put his hand over my mouth to stop me from screaming. This was what terrified me the most, and has had the most lasting impact on my life. It was hard for me to breathe, and I thought that Brett was accidentally going to kill me. Both Brett and Mark were drunkenly laughing during the attack. They both seemed to be having a good time. Mark was urging Brett on, although at times he told Brett to stop. A couple of times I made eye contact with Mark and thought he might try to help me, but he did not.

Attempted [whatever crime] isn't based on the subjective experience of the victim.  I believe it's based on what a reasonable observer would think.  There's quite a big distance to cover between grinding on somebody and forcefully penetrating them with any body part. 

Are you reading the same thing that I am?

- Two people were involved in the attack
- Locked bedroom door
- Loud music turned up to drown out screams
- Victim is knocked down
- Assailant #1 climbs on top
- Sexual grinding
- Groping
- Assailant attempts to tear clothing away, but is drunk and has difficulty removing bathing suit
- Victim screams, silenced by assailant covering her mouth
- Victim can't breathe

Does the above not pretty clearly qualify as attempted rape?  If not, what would need to happen for it to qualify?


Kris

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3402
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #648 on: September 28, 2018, 07:41:53 AM »
I am ready for the "Lock her up!" chants. This is defamation of character, libel and slander; she has nothing, not even her best friend. Feinstein too; she sat for months on supposed 'evidence.' Whether he gets it or not I hope he sues her and her employer goes out of business.

I don't even understand what she is getting at; she willing went into a room with him then changed her mind so she yelled; he covered her mouth while she yelled in his hear, then what...he ran away? Oh no, rubbing her shoulders, while drunkenly mumbling or whatever, you know drunk flirting; she shows her dis-appreciation of it and he stopped. Ok, for the benefit of the doubt for all this, we will go along with a strict Judeo-Christian ethic and say what he did was immoral. But seriously, all this for two weeks. I get why the media is doing this, they need ratings, something to talk about, etc; but you people?

This is loathsome.

Yes it is.

former player

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3743
  • Location: Avalon
Re: Brett Kavanaguh: Yay or Nay?
« Reply #649 on: September 28, 2018, 07:42:34 AM »
h2r35 has always seemed a decent poster to me, so I did a double take on their post and deemed it a sarcastic imaginative rendering of Republican thought processes.

Although probably more accurate than sarcastic.


Apologies. Apparently every word of my thoughts as expressed in my previous post was wrong.