“Even weaker than a he-said, she-said case”
- Thread starter mohoosier
- Start date
That “report” was a farce. She literally only had one side of the story. I can promise you she wouldn’t issue a report like that in her real job. If she did, she wouldn’t last long.
There’s already been several attorneys that worked with her that are appalled by that “report”. And, several long time prosecutors have commented that Dr. Ford was the best witness they’ve ever seen in this type of situation. Incredibly credible. And truthful.
And when Mitchell started to close in on the date the gathering may have been held, Lindsey Graham jumped in to save K. And she was never heard from again. There’s a reason the senate pubs jumped in when they did- they didn’t like where the questioning was going.
She clearly knew who was paying for her services- and produced something that she knew they would like. Because she didn’t actually conduct much questioning of K, the report doesn’t mean anything.
It’s very similar to when an insurance company hires a peer review doctor/RME/IME to essentially cut off care from a certain date- you always know what the report will say before you receive a copy of it. Or, when an attorney hires an expert witness. I’ve literally never seen an expert witness take the other side’s view.
Whatever makes you sleep at night Mo.
I just hope the FBI is able to investigate everything that they deem necessary- we already know they’ve been shackled for the first 3 days of the investigation, and have an artificial deadline of Friday to investigate.
Why don’t people want to know the damn truth??? What the pubs have done so far is an exercise in pure partisan politics, and raw exercise of power. The truth doesn’t factor into the equation for them.
*snicker* I have to hand it to Lindsay Graham and the GOP talking points writers. They've got everybody focused on whether Kavanaugh is guilty of a crime, which of course might have been the issue had Ford gone to the police when the alleged attack is alleged to have happened . . .
. . . but that's not the real point of the conversation. The real point of the conversation is whether Kavanaugh is fit to be a member of the SCOTUS, and based on what we saw last week the answer is clearly a definitive "not on your damned life". The man has a badly flawed character, has no hope of being impartial when political elements are present in a case, and frankly has likely been proved a liar, if the analyses I've seen are accurate.
Aaaaaand, back to the evidence. 12 years as a circuit court judge, 6 FBI investigations and in one afternoon setting you can assess his character - damn, you are good!!
Oh, I never said it wasn't a crime. I just said that whether it's a crime isn't the issue for a congressional hearing regarding confirmation of a SCOTUS nominee.
It's a crime, too, in addition to being part of the reason Kavanaugh should not be confirmed.
Kavanaugh's ranting and raving on international TV is enough to make me doubt whether he is fit to be a Supreme Court justice. The Supreme Court routinely handles emotional issues, but Kavanaugh acted like he had never encountered one before.
His behavior in privileged high school amounts only to so many sprinkles dropped on the icing in the cake.
Hell, @Sope Creek has assessed the character of every conservative on this board and many more he sees on TV. He has this character evaluation on his device and he simply copies and pastes the same stuff.
I see you, too, CO.
BTW, this is your third ad hominem towards me today. I don't know whether we're playing baseball or basketball*, but if it's baseball that's strike 3. If it's basketball, then you have only 2 fouls left.
It can't be football; you'd have been ejected for targeting!
One could just as easily say that righteous indignation at injustice is a quality to be sought after in a SC Justice.
One could, if only that righteous indignation were applied to an injustice affecting someone else and something other than his own sense of being entitled to something.
I see you, too, CO.
BTW, this is your third ad hominem towards me today. I don't know whether we're playing baseball or basketball*, but if it's baseball that's strike 3. If it's basketball, then you have only 2 fouls left.
It can't be football; you'd have been ejected for targeting!
Actually I thought I paid you a compliment. It's not easy to evaulate character in the manner that you do it. You pull it off with ease.
According to many liberals, being a victim of injustice is a useful quality for any judge. Don't you remember the former president, and constitutional law professor, saying personal life experiences should be employed when deciding cases? That was a new one on me and one I never learned in law school.
Opinions are like....well, you know....
The author of that piece has hers, you have yours, and I have mine.
And here we are.
Still stuck in your craw this morning, CO?
You are flem with many of your posts. Don't try to flatter yourself.
Or should you say - “it really is normal behavior for a person and his family when attacked in such a fashion, let alone on a national stage, and actually I would think it strange and suspect had he not reacted in some way, but because I hate Trump’s guts so much and I’ve been so blinded by politics, I’ll just sheepishly follow the Left’s lead and call him an alcoholic”.
It may hurt a little, but try prying your eyes open.
I shouldn't say the things you suggest. Instead, I should say what I have already said.
I don't think that Kavanaugh behaves in a way that is normal or honest for someone who believes they have been unfairly accused of a serious crime while drunk out of their gourd. If I were a chronic excessive drinker while in high school, as Kavanaugh demonstrably was, I would be much less sure of my memory. If, indeed, I had no memory of any such party or any such attack I would have to seriously entertain the possibility that I had had a blackout...like my BFF Kavanaugh reports having during that same period. I should have to admit that the level of drinking I did at the time made such a blackout a distinct possibility. I should also be compelled to admit that my behavior while drunk had caused me to do things that were illegal and aggressive...e.g., the New Haven brawl I had instigated. In short, I should give a report much more like Mark Judge gives...he has no memory of such an event.
So, no. Given all the information we now have I don't find Kavanaugh's approach at all normal or understandable. Or plausible.
BINGO. Well done.
Pretty clear when he cried it was only when he was referencing that he may not ascend to the S.C. and he kept referencing all the good things he did, while completely downplaying the bad. That’s common- no one really views themself as a bar person.
If anyone wonder what white entitlement (especially of the male variety) looks like, just go watch his testimony. You couldn’t find a better example. It’s pretty clear he feels like it’s his right to be on the S.C., and not a privilege. And that he’ll do whatever he has to do to get there.
His body language/some verbal responses were terrible. Had he been someone we interviewed back when I was in loss prevention (again, using techniques taught to the FBI), it wouldn’t be a matter of what he did or whether he knew something.
The inquiry/interview after that performance would’ve been focused on what he knew- and to what degree he was involved with the wrongdoing we were investigating. Because it would be been clear that person wasn’t being entirely truthful.
And I’ve said this before- his anger wasn’t genuine. Compare his Fox News interview to the hearing- that wasn’t the same person. It’s obvious he decided to go all in on “Trump mode”- and decided to deflect, attack and blame rather than be truthful about what he had done. A person that is falsely accused is genuinely angry, and it just doesn’t go away. His anger went up and down during the hearing- and was non existent inthe Fox News interview. It was as if two different people have those two performances.
Hey, I just posted it. Thought it relevant. Had it been from a Dem appointed attorney questioning a Dem nominee, you would think differently I’m sure.
The facts here are relevant, regardless of what a few might think. Also, as Obama would say - “win an election”...in other words, this is not a criminal case (although many think it is), it’s a court of opinion and that opinion rests with the Senate Judiciary Committee and ultimately the Senate at large (no, they won’t ask you for your opinion), and the Republicans happen to be the ruling Party.
So, as they read her report it will have relevancy as Dr. Ford’s story doesn’t add up and hasn’t been corroborated in any way.
I know that one! Opinions are like Trump. Everybody has one.
Glad you admitted that it wasn’t exactly legit. Thanks MO!
Now, the FBI findings will be another story. Hopefully they’ll be able to conduct a thorough investigation, despite the limits placed on it for the first three days or so. And the artificial one week deadline.
Based on reporting so far, it appears as if they aren’t interviewing a lot of key witnesses. But, there’s still some time left.
We’ll see.
Make your argument. So far all you have is a bare assertion that to any objective observer would be ludicrous on its face. But maybe we've all missed something that you've seen . . . so have at it. I'm all eyes.
For the record, I think his anger was genuine, and was sourced in having to account for himself - something he hasn't had to do much apparently - and in public to boot.
It was a pitiful performance. The man was all but dissembling in public. And I think he would have dissembled had Lindsay Graham not intervened with theatrics clearly designed and intended to keep Kavanaugh from incriminating himself under the questioning of the GOP prosecutor. I gotta hand it to Graham . . . his ploy worked exceptionally well.
I agree. I didn’t write that post cleanly- you clarified it nicely. His anger was essentially derived from the possible denial of his sense of entitlement.it had zero to do with being sorry about what he had done in the past.
And don’t forget when Graham jumped in. It was when Mitchell was focusing in on July 1,1982 on his calendar. They day that lined up neatly with Ford’s allegations. I don’t think that was a coincidence.
Lol. This is top notch armchair psychology right here.
You didn’t mention white privilege but you made it up nicely with the all encompassing “entitlement”.
Please.....
I have been under contract as an expert witness about 10 times, and in 5 cases went to trial. In three others I let the attorneys who hired me know, at some early point, that the scientific facts were not on their side. Of course they thanked me, paid me for my work up to then, and went looking for another expert who could be paid to take their side.
So, of course you never see an expert at trial go against the team that hired her/him. They figure that out much sooner. I would like to think that many experts are ethical enough to not say what they know to be untrue, under oath , for God's sake. I have certainly opposed experts who took goofy positions they had to know to be false, however.
I am always upfront when contracted about how my views will be my views, not the lawyers. I will research anything, but the conclusions will be mine. Maybe it prevents me from getting jobs that I don't want to have anyway!
Mocking an assault victim is just despicable. Its just ugly -- and one would expect more from a POTUS even this cretin where the bar is soooo low already.
Stand by your man defense.
You just don’t get it do you? Trump is doing just what we Trump voters want him to do. The Democrats don’t have a snowballs chance of winning in November.
Doesn’t this look remarkably familiar? You have half a country bolstered by a National Media standing on an emotional plea.
Then you have one guy....standing with the other half of the country saying what they are thinking unabashedly and one News outlet willing to explore the possibility they are right.
Has anything really changed from 2 years ago? I say no it hasn’t. The question is, after November if and in my opinion when the House and Senate stay Republican, and Kav is on the S.C., will it change? If it doesn’t then 2020 is gonna another further disappointment. He should have been easy to defeat to begin with....2020 will be even more difficult.
Then you have one guy....standing with the other half of the country saying what they are thinking unabashedly and one News outlet willing to explore the possibility they are right.
Has anything really changed from 2 years ago? I say no it hasn’t. The question is, after November if and in my opinion when the House and Senate stay Republican, and Kav is on the S.C., will it change? If it doesn’t then 2020 is gonna another further disappointment. He should have been easy to defeat to begin with....2020 will be even more difficult.
Alrighty then.
You may want to invest in a support animal for November, because you’re going to be disappointed.
By the way, I’m a conservative. Which is entirely different from a Trumpster.
Thanks for posting that. To clarify, I worked for a litigation firm on the defense side- and you wouldn’t see a report (disclosed in discovery or as an exhibit at trial) from an expert that runs counter to that side’s theory of the case.
You are absolutely correct on that there were times where we hired someone to investigate something, the facts weren’t on our side, and that info never made it into a trial setting/discovery exchanges.
Which is perfectly fine- that’s the way the legal system operates. And it’s always good to get a fair call on balls and strikes in the case. Generally, those cases would eventually settle out immediately prior to trial or during trial.
Props to you for having integrity. I wish more experts that testify had your approach.
I’ve seen a LOT of situations in my current job (past 11.5 years) where “experts” haven’t had much integrity.
Let’s just say there’s several people (hack MD’s/DO’s) that are going to a special place somewhere when they pass on from this earth for doing what they’re doing to severely injured workers here in Texas.
That’s more of what I was referencing.
Latest posts
-
-
Trump supporter just lit himself on fire outside the courthouse...- Latest: Aloha Hoosier
-
-
-