Absolutely. I have no idea whether she’s lying or telling the truth. I’m only sharing the issue I have with memory testimony that's decades old in any forum
Last edited:
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Nominating Kavanaugh was part of the deal Kennedy struck with Trump for him to retire.But I did form the opinion that the Repubs could have found someone better for the seat. Kavanaugh clearly had an overdeveloped sense of entitlement, a drinking problem, and a very tenuous grasp on the concept of honesty. I'm sure there was at least one other person on the Federalist Society list they shoved in Trump's pocket that didn't have that baggage.
Republicans who claim to fear the radical left will take actions that only increase the possibility of a truly radical left. If the GOP rams this nomination through, it has zero argument against anything the Democrats might do if they grab all the levers of power. The GOP is playing an extreme partisan game and the result will be extreme partisanship on both sides. None of this is good for our country.
Agreed.... since it looks very plausible that Dems will control all levers of power in January. I fully expect them to blow up the Senate filibuster.
People have the right to have as much sex and they want. Who is stopping them? But there are consequences to sexual activity run amok. What abortion advocates really want is to kill the child so that the parents don't have to take responsibility.So it’s not so much the unborn fetus as it is controlling women’s sex lives? I’ve always suspected this was the reason most right wingers were anti choice. Thanks for saying it out loud.
We should expect the Ds to get their shit together and start acting like Rs. They will do things because they can. Heads GFY. Tails GFY.
People have the right to have as much sex and they want. Who is stopping them? But there are consequences to sexual activity run amok. What abortion advocates really want is to kill the child so that the parents don't have to take responsibility.
Just a thought on the GOP's need to confirm a SCOTUS Justice in what would likely be record time...
What abortion advocates really want is to kill the child so that the parents don't have to take responsibility.
The chances the Roe V Wade gets reversed with 9 conservative judges is zero.What abortion advocates really want is to drastically reduce the number of abortions that take place in this country, using improved sex educuation and wide access to contraception as part of heath care.
IT WORKS.
Historically, since Roe v. Wade, the number of abortions go down over a Democratic POTUS's term and either stay the same or go up over a Republican POTUS's term.
So if you are antibortion, you ought to be voting for Joe Biden.
If Roe v. Wade is overturned, we will see a dramaic shift toward botched illegal "coat hanger" abortions. Gee, that soulds great, right?
Instead, address the CAUSES of unwanted preganancy and help to PREVENT them. That is the Democrats plan.
Are you RIDIN' WITH BIDIN Now?
The chances the Roe V Wade gets reversed with 9 conservative judges is zero.
As Schumer points out this is low (and REALLY STUPID) even for Trump...Is he trying to argue that RBG would want a moron like him nominating another Justice when we're so close to the election?
I'm beginning to think that he really is desperate to say or do anything to remain in office and out of jail. I think he really knows the SDNY will come after him full bore...
Can you recite the name of your first grade teacher (when your memory cells were only six years old)?Absolutely. I have no idea whether she’s lying or telling the truth. I’m only sharing the issue I have of memory testimony that old in any forum
read the article i quoted above. again there's a ton that goes into memory stuff. when i was early out of law school our firm represented the archdiocese of miami. we defended repressed memory, recovered memory cases. the point is that we don't know if she told the truth or not. what's more she may have absolutely 100 percent been telling the truth but it actually wasn't the truth. that's why it's critical to make a contemporaneous record. to come back thirty years, sad and as unfair as it may be to the victim, runs the risk of creating another victim who's falsely accused. and to belabor the point, it's why we as a society have a short sol for these claimsCan you recite the name of your first grade teacher (when your memory cells were only six years old)?
Your second grade teacher?
Your third grade teacher?
All three?
And don't fudge. How could you possibly remember such inconsequential, boring nonimportant facts about your elementary teachers that you never saw again, after decades of ruining your brain and reasoning ability with college weekends, law school, all-day legal seminars and other generic drinking and kids and phone calls from ex-wives?
And then, do you think you might possibly have have remembered if some adult had touched you inappropriately when you were a kid?
If, at this point, your weary brain can still remember the name of the first girl that touched you "like that," isn't it at least possible she might remember when she was touched inappropriately by someone else?
If you admit you remember things from 30-40 years ago, it would be interesting to hear your explanation why you don't think women can remember from that long ago.
You dodged the question Donny Jr.read the article i quoted above. again there's a ton that goes into memory stuff. when i was early out of law school our firm represented the archdiocese of miami. we defended repressed memory, recovered memory cases. the point is that we don't know if she told the truth or not. what's more she may have absolutely 100 percent been telling the truth but it actually wasn't the truth. that's why it's critical to make a contemporaneous record. to come back thirty years, sad and as unfair as it may be to the victim, runs the risk of creating another victim who's falsely accused. and to belabor the point, it's why we as a society have a short sol for these claims
Can't wait thirty years, chief. Not hard to understand. that's why most states carry a two year statute of limitations. and no i don't remember shit from thirty years ago. instead of asking stupid questions go back and read the article i posted from a female attorney handling sexual assault cases. But of course you believe her; thirty years later - because she represents the party you blindly support. as i said before, she might be lying, she might be telling the truth, she might be telling the truth and it's a lie. memory, repressed memory, recovered memory aren't simple matters - but people's reputations shouldn't hang in the balance of something brought up from over thirty years ago. have to memorialize stuff. make a record. that's what is fair to all.You dodged the question Donny Jr.
What was the first name of the first girl that touched you "like that," and how long ago was that?
If you can remember, then so can she... except in your mind.
I don’t know if she’s telling the truth or not, but people do misremember things, which is different than forgetting them. Many studies to back it up. Check out Malcolm Gladwell’s Revisionist History episode on it...You dodged the question Donny Jr.
What was the first name of the first girl that touched you "like that," and how long ago was that?
If you can remember, then so can she... except in your mind.
his questions are ridiculousI don’t know if she’s telling the truth or not, but people do misremember things, which is different than forgetting them. Many studies to back it up. Check out Malcolm Gladwell’s Revisionist History episode on it...
Memories are crazy things. 9/11 was a traumatic day for nearly all of us - the kind of day when we're all certain that we'll never forget what we were doing or how we heard the news or what we did. Well, I found out this year on 9/11 that my wife and I have very different memories of how we first heard about it, if we watched it live or not (we lived in Hawaii) and all sorts of other little things we remember. We were together, but don't agree on the details. We're both certain our memory is correct and the truth is that neither of us probably correct.You dodged the question Donny Jr.
What was the first name of the first girl that touched you "like that," and how long ago was that?
If you can remember, then so can she... except in your mind.
You would have had to been up really early in the morning to see it live in Hawaii.Memories are crazy things. 9/11 was a traumatic day for nearly all of us - the kind of day when we're all certain that we'll never forget what we were doing or how we heard the news or what we did. Well, I found out this year on 9/11 that my wife and I have very different memories of how we first heard about it, if we watched it live or not (we lived in Hawaii) and all sorts of other little things we remember. We were together, but don't agree on the details. We're both certain our memory is correct and the truth is that neither of us probably correct.
I know. I went to work early in my job and remember getting up a lot earlier than normal because we had some things scheduled at work and I needed to be there early for them. I remember flipping on the TV to see the news and saw the second WTC hit live. My wife says neither of us saw either WTC hit live. My memory is super clear of it, but she says hers is too. There's a lot more that we disagree on too, but that in particular is a biggie.You would have had to been up really early in the morning to see it live in Hawaii.
5 or 6 isn’t that early for people with jobs & ambition...You would have had to been up really early in the morning to see it live in Hawaii.
so creepy. ugh.I know. I went to work early in my job and remember getting up a lot earlier than normal because we had some things scheduled at work and I needed to be there early for them. I remember flipping on the TV to see the news and saw the second WTC hit live. My wife says neither of us saw either WTC hit live. My memory is super clear of it, but she says hers is too. There's a lot more that we disagree on too, but that in particular is a biggie.
Like I said, waaay too early.5 or 6 isn’t that early for people with jobs & ambition...
zzzzzzzzzzing...5 or 6 isn’t that early for people with jobs & ambition...
5 or 6 isn’t that early for people with jobs & ambition...
I normally got up at 0500, but my memory is getting up about 0300 that day. Clear as could be too. I’m doubting my memory now because wives are never wrong. Yes, Dear!Are you just trolling? By 9:30 am local NYC time both Towers had been struck. The latest that would be in Hawaii was 3:30 am...
As Schumer points out this is low (and REALLY STUPID) even for Trump...Is he trying to argue that RBG would want a moron like him nominating another Justice when we're so close to the election?
I'm beginning to think that he really is desperate to say or do anything to remain in office and out of jail. I think he really knows the SDNY will come after him full bore...
This is true, although there is a big difference between eyewitness testimony and victim testimony. I'm curious how reliability differs between the two.Not getting into this case, but overall reliability of first person eyewitness testimony is pretty bad. There are a lot of studies.
Memories are crazy things. 9/11 was a traumatic day for nearly all of us - the kind of day when we're all certain that we'll never forget what we were doing or how we heard the news or what we did. Well, I found out this year on 9/11 that my wife and I have very different memories of how we first heard about it, if we watched it live or not (we lived in Hawaii) and all sorts of other little things we remember. We were together, but don't agree on the details. We're both certain our memory is correct and the truth is that neither of us probably correct.