Kavanaugh
- Thread starter twenty02
- Start date
No it is not the same burden of proof as a trial. We now have the blueprint to insure that either side can stop anybody they want (particularly males) if they can just find one classmate or acquaintance to suddenly remember a nominee doing something horrible to them.
Be prepared for the even shittier government you are going to get out of this because only an idiot or megalomaniac would put themselves through that kind of horseshit.
Okay, well...that already didn't happen. So is your advice to just sit on your hands quietly?
I really don't know what to believe, and my main issue is not with BK (wow, this guy is so famous now, that he has even appropriated the initials BK on an IU message board), unless, of course if he did it, and is now lying about it (that's another whole ball of wax that we may never know for sure). My main issue is with those who are so quick to dismiss this. At first, it was because it was anonymous. That was removed as a barrier almost immediately, but the dismissiveness remained. Some posters here are bending over backward, putting forth all sorts of reasons, and totally dismissing Ford. Heck, Hack called her story BS.
If this would have come out, and BK would have said something like an apology, but he was drunk a lot back on those days (like he did in his joke about his school), and if that did happen, he was repentant and is a much better man now, I think a lot of people wouldn't have their heels so dug in.
Of course, I could be wrong about that last part.
What has been missing is any form of specific corroboration. If other parties are coming forward to say that, yes, they were aware of this back in the day, then that's enough to scuttle Kavanaugh in my mind.
He wasn't where? His buddy Judge has a Kavanaugh story in the book so it seems likely he was at some parties. If he was at some parties, how does he know he wasn't at "this" party since she hasn't been able to identify what party it was.
Boys Club, Fight Club, whatever. I’m sure all four will eventually. Do it in front of the FBI or under oath and I’ll pay attention. Otherwise, nope.
Not true that Kavanaugh can't be exhonerated in my eyes. With the letter Fro posted above we now have a trail that can lead us directly to whether Ford is lying or not. One has to analyze this like an attorney or a detective. Assume Ford's account is true. Then the challenge is to find where her account breaks down. That would prove her account contains falsehoods.
1. Ford said she didn't tell anyone until 2012 (or whenever it was).
2. Christina King says she heard about it in school, so someone talked about it. If that someone was Ford, she lied in saying she didn't tell anyone. If no one heard it from Ford, then it had to be heard from either Kavanaugh or Judge, the only other witnesses (assuming Ford's account).
3. INterview people from both schools and find those who claim to have heard about it and ask who told them, what else they heard, such as who else was at the party.
One other note. King writes "Many of us heard about it in school..." Again, thinking like a detective, first, gossip travels really fast in school, we all know that. But here's my question. If this was on the grape vine, then wouldn't Ford have known that other people know about it? If so, why wouldn't she have participated in those conversations? That raises a red flag in my mind. I get that she wouldn't want to talk about it, but what if girls are talking about it? That bears investigation too. Who was talking about it? Were those people not in Ford's social circle (King was a year older)?
Chill out, Crazy. Really. Calm down. If you're concerned about the US falling to pieces, look rather at Trump and his consequences.
Last edited:
If he is guilty.
You are again assuming that she has him correctly pegged as assaulting her. If you had someone accuse you of something you did not do, would you come out and apologize? I sure as shit would not. If you felt you were innocent you would be a fool to open the door to possible possible accusations by apologizing in the manner you described.
Good for you. Do you think everyone reacts to trauma the same way you do? Again, a little research on what the brain does after trauma would behoove you. Everyone reacts differently.
Well - he and his friend said they never did anything like what she describes so that is obviously why he can confidently say it wasn't him.
Yes...I should not have left that qualifier out. Thanks for keeping me honest.
What happens when ladies come forward immediately is what is happening to Dr. Ford now, on a smaller scale. Talk to Steve Alford about that. Or many, many others.
At no point did I say it was him. The comment you quoted was about the party atmosphere at these elite prep schools. Poor things, forced into a life of prosperity.
So you didn't party in high school? Or are you just jealous because his parents went to school longer than your parents and thus made more money than yours did?
Get up to speed Sparky - my response about jealousy was in reference to martian saying that - "One thing they are all appear guilty of, being spoiled rich kids. I don't blame them for the partying, knowing they face a life of wealth and privilege has to be daunting and some alcohol would take the edge off that."Yes, that's why everyone is so against him. They are jealous.
The difference being that you can get to a truthful outcome. Yeah, Alford rallied around his star athlete, but in the end the truth did come out. If she had waited a decade before making her accusation, Pierce probably would have gone free. The fact that she was willing to stand up allowed for a fair investigation and actually put him behind bars eventually. I feel you are arguing for my POV with that.
I am trying to be sympathetic to them. Going by the books Judge wrote, it is obvious they needed to have that same hard partying lifestyle that RAF pilots in WWII needed to get through facing death every day. There is partying, and there is extreme partying. His books suggested the latter. Clearly they faced issues they were incapable of coping with otherwise.
I'm so sorry to hear that about you and your sister. That's awful. But, would you be cool with those two men being nominated for the Supreme Court?
You seem to forget that Blasey Ford isn't the one nominated for the Supreme Court. We aren't doing confirmation hearings to gauge her life in the wake of the alleged assault.
I have no idea why you think the way Blasey Ford's life has turned out in the wake of an alleged sexual assault is germane to the discussion. If it turns out to be true, but she went on with her life, does that somehow make the incident less?
OK, Judge pretty much says they were drunk every night. That is a problem behavior no matter the income. I could see, as I said, RAF pilots not sure they if they would die the next day having that habit (though the German pilots didn't so who knows). I can see someone who has absolutely nothing want to escape that existence in such a way. I don't see why people who have everything going for them want to escape reality.
So, if I'm reading hunky correctly:
Your lack of empathy for rich teenagers = disgusting
His lack of empathy for a woman's delayed reaction to being sexually attacked (allegedly) = justified
Got it.
But I haven't actually said anything bad about rich teenagers. Rich, drunk, teenagers may be a different story. Our esteemed guest from the Purdue boards isn't putting that together.
Because — as has been widely reported — Ford initially didn’t want to come forward. Her representatives respected her request for confidentiality. Did you really not know this? How could you express such adamant opinions when you were so poorly informed?
Maybe we’d know more if the allegations were investigated.
I wouldn't judge the reasons why people turn to substance abuse and agree that it is problem behavior regardless of the income. People are driven to it for all kinds of reasons and it's generally sad whatever they are. IMHO, we're better off focused on what Kavanaugh has done to move past that and whether the allegation in question has merit.
I haven't actually said this disqualifies him in any way from being a judge, even a Supreme. In fact, I've generally said I may disagree with him tremendously on issues but I see no valid reason to vote against him. But in reading what is attributed to Judge, the lifestyle of these elite prep kids was indicative of a problem in their culture somewhere.
Yeah and we have the added benefit of pushing off a Supreme Court nominee until the Democrats get a shot at controlling the Senate...or, if you believe the esteemed Senator from Hawaii, until the next Presidential election.
Funny how that worked out. And some of the left want to run Feinstein out of the party. She played her hand to maximum benefit.
The Tat for the Garland Tit has been played.
I'm not convinced it was a case of coping. It might have been carte blanche to have fun. The first swallow of alcohol made them feel freer, more uninhibited, more able to have fun. So they took a second swallow. One swallow leads to another. Then they discover that inebriated girls are easier to seduce...and so the story goes.
There's plenty of time to investigate the accusation and still have Kavanaugh confirmed if nothing comes of it. If your primary concern is having a solid, well-vetted Supreme Court Justice, examining this issue shouldn't concern you. If your primary concern is politics, than your mileage may vary.
There's no indicator he's currently a serial predator. He's a liar, even a perjurer, but will that have any effect on his conservative decisions on the SC? Not likely. He's no Anthony Kennedy but Trump won't make the same "mistake" Reagan made when Bork got voted down. (The irony is thick.) Whoever gets appointed will be a lock-step conservative justice.
Another option Democrats have is to have him testify (thus perjuring himself again), let him become a justice and continue to investigate, gradually putting together a case for his impeachment. Impeach him when they control Congress and voila! they've turned the seat into a liberal one.
More irony from someone lacking a sense of humor. The Management forced me to abandon that handle. Aloha and others were bent about it. Seems like someone was offended . . .
I still think it's an excellent handle.
Especially considering how seriously people around here take themselves and their precious virgin handles... If we wanted a solid well vetted SCJ, why did Senator Feinstein sit on the alleged allegation?
This is why Feinstein is the true author of the Kavanaugh debacle. The proper action to take after receiving the allegation would have been to inform the committee chair of the development, especially if judicial hygiene was the priority. Chuck Grassley could have developed a process before the hearing to probe the allegation, bringing in outside counsel and perhaps engaging local law enforcement to help out.
But more importantly, it would have been the proper action to take, rather than hiding material information about a nominee from the rest of the committee assigned to vet him. Whatever Feinstein’s motivations might have been, she buried the allegation for almost two months. Her fellow Senate Democrats might feel frustrated that they didn’t get let in on the secret, but it shouldn’t have been a secret at all to the Judiciary Committee members of either party. Feinstein single-handedly obstructed the committee’s ability to do its job properly, and in doing so set up a situation in which both the accuser and accused have been damaged, and the credibility of the process completely shredded.
We could have already had an investigation completed. Dead honesty, I want a well vetted judge, but I also want one that I believe is going to make rulings that I agree with. I am not attached to Kavanaugh, I am very attached to getting a conservative jurist on the court. It is the number one reason I voted for Trump's boorish ass in the first place.But more importantly, it would have been the proper action to take, rather than hiding material information about a nominee from the rest of the committee assigned to vet him. Whatever Feinstein’s motivations might have been, she buried the allegation for almost two months. Her fellow Senate Democrats might feel frustrated that they didn’t get let in on the secret, but it shouldn’t have been a secret at all to the Judiciary Committee members of either party. Feinstein single-handedly obstructed the committee’s ability to do its job properly, and in doing so set up a situation in which both the accuser and accused have been damaged, and the credibility of the process completely shredded.
Do I wish that things had to be that way, no. But the court has become the defacto political decider on all of the truly contentious issues in this country. That is why all of these confirmations are going to continue to be so contentious. In the face of a do nothing Congress, packing the Supreme Court with people that agree with you political philosophy becomes more necessary. And we all know that is the case.
Yes, that is what it is. It is more the spoiled part that is important ("carte blanche to have fun"). My coping part was sarcasm, maybe not done properly. It doesn't necessarily have to do with money, I've certainly known poorer kids whose parents gave them "carte blanche to have fun".
Similar threads
