She doesn't remember whose house it was, how she got there, how she got home, or what year it was. Yet Kavanaugh lied because he doesn't remember this attempted make-out session?
Kavanaugh
- Thread starter twenty02
- Start date
I voted for Obama in 2008. Never supported Clinton then and played "Ding Dong the Witch is Dead" on my computer when she dropped out finally.
In 2016 I voted for Hillary after a lot of thought in both the primary/general, but I wasn't sold on Bernie being electable and obviously Trump is Bill Clinton on super steroids in regards to allegedly sexually assaulting people/having affairs.
The ersatz emotion around here is illustrative.
Ted Kennedy received a two-month suspended sentence and became The Lion of the Senate. Maybe Brett Kavanaugh copped a feel.
I don’t know with certainty that you support Trump but if so I don’t see how you have room to mock anyone’s moral compass.
What’s morals have to do with running the Country? The Kennedy family had no morals at all.
Ha ha.
That girl stuck to her story that it was me until it was proven to her that I wasn't there and the actual guy she had been making out with was identified and admitted it. Then she recognized the guy as the actual guy instead of me. We did look a little bit alike and the girl was drinking too. Black guys have gone to prison because of false accusations from women. I'm sure white guys have too but I would be shocked if it was proportional.He's not a former poster, or even an IU fan. This is "hunkgolden" from the PU freeboard...
I'm not the one claiming Kavanuagh shouldn't be appointed so my compass is just fine. FWIW - I didn't vote for Hillary or Donald.
Has anyone noticed times, they are a changing. 10 years ago, maybe not even 4 years ago, Franken would never have been forced out. Weinstein clearly was not forced out back then, Moonves wasn't forced out back then. There is a huge societal difference from the era of Kennedy or Clinton.
That said, I have no idea about Kavanaugh. She has agreed to testify, the fair thing for me to do is wait and see.
That said, I have no idea about Kavanaugh. She has agreed to testify, the fair thing for me to do is wait and see.
I'd like to know her upside in all this. I don't see any. It's not like undermining the Kavanaugh appointment is the be-all and end-all in the liberal war against conservative ideology.
Christine Blasey Ford (born c. 1967)[2] is a professor in clinical psychology at Palo Alto University. Her work specializes in designing statistical models for research projects. She has been a visiting professor at Pepperdine University, a research psychologist for Stanford’s Department of Psychiatry, and a professor at the Stanford School of Medicine Collaborative Clinical Psychology Program.[1]
In general, university professors gain or lose their reputation based on their objective scholarship. Lying in public isn't a good way to advance one's career. Why would she do this if it weren't true? I'm not saying that proves anything, but really, what does she personally stand to gain here?
To wit:
Indeed, Tiede has witnessed a growing willingness among administrators to terminate faculty for statements that damage the public image of the school; individual faculty have been summarily dismissed for offending taxpayers and the general public. As evidence of the growing sensitivity on college campuses, Tiede cited the the growing presence of trigger warnings on syllabi.
Last edited:
If I went to trial on the false accusation based on nothing more than our words I guess you'd have voted to convict me. I know it didn't go to trial but that has happened to other guys. BTW you're one of my favorites here so don't take that personally.
Bear in mind, no one's talking about puttingIf I went to trial on the false accusation based on nothing more than our words I guess you'd have voted to convict me. I know it didn't go to trial but that has happened to other guys. BTW you're one of my favorites here so don't take that personally.
She's a registered dem and a professor at a college in California. It never occurred to you that her "upside" is becoming the hero who stopped the Kavanaugh nomination?
Really? Because Hillary Clinton won the popular vote for POTUS and she wanted to "bury" Bill's victims.
And she lost to the world's biggest idiot.
Ha ha.
Senor Bing; you think you have it bad, think of the Asians from the1.4Billion Chinese, 110million Japanese and not to mention the Koreans and the 400 million S.E Asians. Based on my experiences, most Mid-Westerners think most Asians look alike.
Thank god I have an English public/boarding school accent and am a bit of an eye candy to most races.
At this point 35 years later exactly how is that going to be determined? She said, he said.
If I went to trial on the false accusation based on nothing more than our words I guess you'd have voted to convict me. I know it didn't go to trial but that has happened to other guys. BTW you're one of my favorites here so don't take that personally.
No offense taken. Having to live as a minority, both racially and politically for most of my life, my skin's pretty thick. Fyi. The latest news is that she is willing to testify now.
Here's what I think:
1. She should testify and Kavanaugh has the right to testify in his defense.
2. She might be telling the truth and her memory might be accurate. If they can convince Senators that she's telling the truth than he should be voted down. Or he should withdraw his nomination.
3. She might be lying or her memory might not be accurate like my accuser's wasn't accurate and that may become evident. I think they should still vote him down because I'm a Democrat and would like to see someone more moderate in his seat.
But I don't think he should be voted down only because of a false accusation.4. Since I don't know whether it's true or not I sympathize with Kavanaugh because of my personal experience.
5. I sympathize with her because she might be telling the truth at least about her memory and I'm a human.
BTW the Hoosiers rolled as I hoped. It was a good game for an IU fan but hot as he!!. Next week could show IU is a force in the B1G or that they might be middle of the pack.
Which ones not?Thank god I have an English public/boarding school accent and am a bit of an eye candy to most races.
He said she said attempted make out session? She doesn't remember what year it happened, whose house it was, how she got there, or how she got home...but she remembers him trying to remove her one piece swimsuit?
Eye candy? I prefer to be thought of as beefcake!Senor Bing; you think you have it bad, think of the Asians from the1.4Billion Chinese, 110million Japanese and not to mention the Koreans and the 400 million S.E Asians. Based on my experiences, most Mid-Westerners think most Asians look alike.
Thank god I have an English public/boarding school accent and am a bit of an eye candy to most races.
Sure. I think we all get that. But shouldn't there still be some standard of evidence or corroboration? Absent that, there would potentially never be anyone confirmed. Anyone could claim a 35 year old memory about anyone for anything. Next.
Was there ever any doubt? She'll be the hero to all of the Bill and Hillary Clinton voters who are now suddenly outraged.
Right. I guess the question is, for a SC justice nominee, how do you evaluate a he-said-she-said scenario? Of course it's a slippery slope because simply believing her creates a precedent for anyone undermining each and every nominee from here to eternity. At the same time, if it raises doubts about his sterling reputation, what to do? Tricky situation. I think you have to have faith in the future and only appoint justices with an unambiguously sterling reputation.Here's what I think:
1. She should testify and Kavanaugh has the right to testify in his defense.
2. She might be telling the truth and her memory might be accurate. If they can convince Senators that she's telling the truth than he should be voted down. Or he should withdraw his nomination.
3. She might be lying or her memory might not be accurate like my accuser's wasn't accurate and that may become evident. I think they should still vote him down because I'm a Democrat and would like to see someone more moderate in his seat.
4. Since I don't know whether it's true or not I sympathize with Kavanaugh because of my personal experience.
5. I sympathize with her because she might be telling the truth at least about her memory and I'm a human.
BTW the Hoosiers rolled as I hoped. It was a good game for an IU fan but hot as he!!. Next week could show IU is a force in the B1G or that they might be middle of the pack.
And it's not like she is just now pulling the accusation out of thin air...she talked about it to her therapist years before he became a SC nominee.
I think you have a point about the slippery slope. I think political partisans on both sides are capable of falsely accusing nominees they really don't like of sexual misconduct and capable of finding someone to make the accusations. But I admit I'm biased against politicians because I don't like many on either side.
I didn't drink in high school and I have never raped or tried to rape someone.
He had an unambiguously sterling reputation until a week ago. He had one after 6 or 7 FBI background checks. He had one after every step up the career ladder through the judiciary system in this country. He suddenly did not have one when he was about to be a Supreme Court Justice who would cement the court as conservative for probably the next decade.
And that reputation is ruined on an accusation of a supposed event 35 years ago where the accusers memory is hazy on every detail except for an attempted assault by Kavanaugh.
I am all about making sure that guys who assault women have the book thrown at them but this kind of thing is extremely hard to support. An accusation is basically seen as a conviction anymore (see sglowrider's post above). Just an accusation like this can ruin a career. Say Kavanaugh is completely innocent, how does he clear his reputation now. What about Bing. Say the actual offender never showed up and his military career was sunk over something he did not do. Sorry, I need more than I kind of remember something 35 years ago before I ruin someone's life.
No disagreement on that. The disagreement is the standard required to impeach one's reputation.
I haven't read much of this thread, because it just got too damn long, but I've gathered a couple things.
#1
The other side has done some despicable ass things, so who cares if our side has done these same things.
#2
It happened a long time ago so it isn't a big deal now.
Let's be clear, sexual assault is despicable. I don't give a damn when it happened. It should disqualify you to be a bagger at the grocery store and every job better than that. Period. Regardless of party.
#1
The other side has done some despicable ass things, so who cares if our side has done these same things.
#2
It happened a long time ago so it isn't a big deal now.
Let's be clear, sexual assault is despicable. I don't give a damn when it happened. It should disqualify you to be a bagger at the grocery store and every job better than that. Period. Regardless of party.
I don’t think people dispute that but having one person make a claim from 35 years ago is a low bar to have a persons career ruined.
It’s a really really hard difficult concept and situation. I’m honestly not sure how to proceed in such a situation.
Only 2 of the 65 women (who supposedly vouched for Kavanaugh's character at this time) will go on record as supporting him, per Politico.
Yes it should. IF it happened. That is the BIG problem we have in this instance, with this accusation.
She says 2 guys were involved now. They both deny it. When she talked to her therapist several years ago, she said it was 4. She does not remember when it happened exactly. She does not remember where it happened exactly. She waited over 30 years before bringing it up to anyone. Unlike in similar cases in the "me too" movement, there are not a bunch of other women coming out with accusations. The only others who have come out have said he was a stand up guy.
Similar threads
