Kavanaugh
Comments
-
HughFreakingDillon said:
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.PJ_Soul said:How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?explain to me, if you will, how exactly his life would be ruined by not getting THIS lifetime appointment when he already has one? If its reputation , thats something that can be repaired wth contrition or if tge accusations are false, once the truth is revealed.what he potentially goes through will fall far far far short of what these women will be forced to endure for speaking up._____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
ok, but the fact that SCOTUS appointments are made by politicians makes this political. thinking that either side isn't going to appoint people that will make decisions that line up with them politically is naive. just because we on the left feel that our politics are the correct ones doesn't make it any less a political game.njnancy said:
Frothing at the mouth and ramming this nomination through are some sayings that do not sound right at this time. I do not think that there is a conga line of democrats saying 'we got us a victim, we got us a victim'. Democrats do have the right to feel that the Republicans think they own the court. They held Scalia's seat open for over a year, Kennedy resigned 2 months ago. Let's put good people on the court regardless of their politics. Rushing and cutting corners is not the way that a lifetime appointment should be conducted. It makes the whole process suspect.HughFreakingDillon said:
ok, I'll ask again: what makes this accusation more credible than another? I'm not saying it's not, I'm wondering what makes one accusation, with little to no information, "credible". is an accusation credible for no other reason than it is an accusation?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Pushing someone through just to push someone through shouldn't be a factor though.HughFreakingDillon said:
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.PJ_Soul said:How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?
Democrats or Republicans politics shouldn't be a factor either - the accusation is the accusation. The judge not being a sexual assaulter should be enough to warrant a pause to investigate - whether democrats pushing the information out is moot. If he was not in risk of being a sexual assaulter - which a judge shouldn't be then there would be nothing to push.
Even if I report my friend stealing a Benaroya vinyl just because I'm angry at him, doesn't mean the police should not act on it.
And this was not some woman who out of nowhere just threw out an accusation. It is clearly credible enough to look into. And that should take president over "LETS GET THIS FUCKER THROUGH ASAP!"
he's probably guilty. PROBABLY.
politics shouldn't be a factor, but it is, obviously. democrats can put themselves on a pedestal all they want claiming they "just want the facts" when in reality a lot of them are just frothing at the mouth that they might flip the house in the mid-terms making it possible to block any potential trump nominee. especially this one. would they be grandstanding as much as they are if trump had nominated a moderate?
there literally is no such thing as "put good people on the court regardless of their politics" anymore. both sides are only interested in winning for their side.By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0 -
Maybe both sides can agree to not put sexual assaulter there atleast...HughFreakingDillon said:
ok, but the fact that SCOTUS appointments are made by politicians makes this political. thinking that either side isn't going to appoint people that will make decisions that line up with them politically is naive. just because we on the left feel that our politics are the correct ones doesn't make it any less a political game.njnancy said:
Frothing at the mouth and ramming this nomination through are some sayings that do not sound right at this time. I do not think that there is a conga line of democrats saying 'we got us a victim, we got us a victim'. Democrats do have the right to feel that the Republicans think they own the court. They held Scalia's seat open for over a year, Kennedy resigned 2 months ago. Let's put good people on the court regardless of their politics. Rushing and cutting corners is not the way that a lifetime appointment should be conducted. It makes the whole process suspect.HughFreakingDillon said:
ok, I'll ask again: what makes this accusation more credible than another? I'm not saying it's not, I'm wondering what makes one accusation, with little to no information, "credible". is an accusation credible for no other reason than it is an accusation?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Pushing someone through just to push someone through shouldn't be a factor though.HughFreakingDillon said:
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.PJ_Soul said:How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?
Democrats or Republicans politics shouldn't be a factor either - the accusation is the accusation. The judge not being a sexual assaulter should be enough to warrant a pause to investigate - whether democrats pushing the information out is moot. If he was not in risk of being a sexual assaulter - which a judge shouldn't be then there would be nothing to push.
Even if I report my friend stealing a Benaroya vinyl just because I'm angry at him, doesn't mean the police should not act on it.
And this was not some woman who out of nowhere just threw out an accusation. It is clearly credible enough to look into. And that should take president over "LETS GET THIS FUCKER THROUGH ASAP!"
he's probably guilty. PROBABLY.
politics shouldn't be a factor, but it is, obviously. democrats can put themselves on a pedestal all they want claiming they "just want the facts" when in reality a lot of them are just frothing at the mouth that they might flip the house in the mid-terms making it possible to block any potential trump nominee. especially this one. would they be grandstanding as much as they are if trump had nominated a moderate?
there literally is no such thing as "put good people on the court regardless of their politics" anymore. both sides are only interested in winning for their side."Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"0 -
Why would they? They each put one in the White House.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Maybe both sides can agree to not put sexual assaulter there atleast...HughFreakingDillon said:
ok, but the fact that SCOTUS appointments are made by politicians makes this political. thinking that either side isn't going to appoint people that will make decisions that line up with them politically is naive. just because we on the left feel that our politics are the correct ones doesn't make it any less a political game.njnancy said:
Frothing at the mouth and ramming this nomination through are some sayings that do not sound right at this time. I do not think that there is a conga line of democrats saying 'we got us a victim, we got us a victim'. Democrats do have the right to feel that the Republicans think they own the court. They held Scalia's seat open for over a year, Kennedy resigned 2 months ago. Let's put good people on the court regardless of their politics. Rushing and cutting corners is not the way that a lifetime appointment should be conducted. It makes the whole process suspect.HughFreakingDillon said:
ok, I'll ask again: what makes this accusation more credible than another? I'm not saying it's not, I'm wondering what makes one accusation, with little to no information, "credible". is an accusation credible for no other reason than it is an accusation?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Pushing someone through just to push someone through shouldn't be a factor though.HughFreakingDillon said:
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.PJ_Soul said:How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?
Democrats or Republicans politics shouldn't be a factor either - the accusation is the accusation. The judge not being a sexual assaulter should be enough to warrant a pause to investigate - whether democrats pushing the information out is moot. If he was not in risk of being a sexual assaulter - which a judge shouldn't be then there would be nothing to push.
Even if I report my friend stealing a Benaroya vinyl just because I'm angry at him, doesn't mean the police should not act on it.
And this was not some woman who out of nowhere just threw out an accusation. It is clearly credible enough to look into. And that should take president over "LETS GET THIS FUCKER THROUGH ASAP!"
he's probably guilty. PROBABLY.
politics shouldn't be a factor, but it is, obviously. democrats can put themselves on a pedestal all they want claiming they "just want the facts" when in reality a lot of them are just frothing at the mouth that they might flip the house in the mid-terms making it possible to block any potential trump nominee. especially this one. would they be grandstanding as much as they are if trump had nominated a moderate?
there literally is no such thing as "put good people on the court regardless of their politics" anymore. both sides are only interested in winning for their side.hippiemom = goodness0 -
let's see how this plays out now with more than one accuser.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Maybe both sides can agree to not put sexual assaulter there atleast...HughFreakingDillon said:
ok, but the fact that SCOTUS appointments are made by politicians makes this political. thinking that either side isn't going to appoint people that will make decisions that line up with them politically is naive. just because we on the left feel that our politics are the correct ones doesn't make it any less a political game.njnancy said:
Frothing at the mouth and ramming this nomination through are some sayings that do not sound right at this time. I do not think that there is a conga line of democrats saying 'we got us a victim, we got us a victim'. Democrats do have the right to feel that the Republicans think they own the court. They held Scalia's seat open for over a year, Kennedy resigned 2 months ago. Let's put good people on the court regardless of their politics. Rushing and cutting corners is not the way that a lifetime appointment should be conducted. It makes the whole process suspect.HughFreakingDillon said:
ok, I'll ask again: what makes this accusation more credible than another? I'm not saying it's not, I'm wondering what makes one accusation, with little to no information, "credible". is an accusation credible for no other reason than it is an accusation?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Pushing someone through just to push someone through shouldn't be a factor though.HughFreakingDillon said:
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.PJ_Soul said:How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?
Democrats or Republicans politics shouldn't be a factor either - the accusation is the accusation. The judge not being a sexual assaulter should be enough to warrant a pause to investigate - whether democrats pushing the information out is moot. If he was not in risk of being a sexual assaulter - which a judge shouldn't be then there would be nothing to push.
Even if I report my friend stealing a Benaroya vinyl just because I'm angry at him, doesn't mean the police should not act on it.
And this was not some woman who out of nowhere just threw out an accusation. It is clearly credible enough to look into. And that should take president over "LETS GET THIS FUCKER THROUGH ASAP!"
he's probably guilty. PROBABLY.
politics shouldn't be a factor, but it is, obviously. democrats can put themselves on a pedestal all they want claiming they "just want the facts" when in reality a lot of them are just frothing at the mouth that they might flip the house in the mid-terms making it possible to block any potential trump nominee. especially this one. would they be grandstanding as much as they are if trump had nominated a moderate?
there literally is no such thing as "put good people on the court regardless of their politics" anymore. both sides are only interested in winning for their side.By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0 -
Why were there no accusations of sexual misconduct when Gorsuch went through confirmation? If this is all partisan politics, why not do the same to Gorsuch?
0 -
Obama's parents planted a fake birth announcement in the Honolulu news when Barack was born because they knew a biracial president was inevitable. So yeah, I can believe this woman planted the seed with the therapist.Spiritual_Chaos said:HughFreakingDillon said:
ok, I'll ask again: what makes this accusation more credible than another? I'm not saying it's not, I'm wondering what makes one accusation, with little to no information, "credible". is an accusation credible for no other reason than it is an accusation?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Pushing someone through just to push someone through shouldn't be a factor though.HughFreakingDillon said:
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.PJ_Soul said:How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?
Democrats or Republicans politics shouldn't be a factor either - the accusation is the accusation. The judge not being a sexual assaulter should be enough to warrant a pause to investigate - whether democrats pushing the information out is moot. If he was not in risk of being a sexual assaulter - which a judge shouldn't be then there would be nothing to push.
Even if I report my friend stealing a Benaroya vinyl just because I'm angry at him, doesn't mean the police should not act on it.
And this was not some woman who out of nowhere just threw out an accusation. It is clearly credible enough to look into. And that should take president over "LETS GET THIS FUCKER THROUGH ASAP!"
he's probably guilty. PROBABLY.
politics shouldn't be a factor, but it is, obviously. democrats can put themselves on a pedestal all they want claiming they "just want the facts" when in reality a lot of them are just frothing at the mouth that they might flip the house in the mid-terms making it possible to block any potential trump nominee. especially this one. would they be grandstanding as much as they are if trump had nominated a moderate?1. Corroboration
In 2012, Ford described her account of the alleged attack to a therapist. Notes taken during this therapy session were provided to and reviewed by the Washington Post. Ford apparently did not name Kavanaugh during the 2012 session, however, her recollection of the event six years ago and shared with her therapist tracks with the allegations leveled against Kavanaugh in the letter which set this entire process in motion.
The prosecutors note, “To believe that this is a made-up tale to prevent Kavanaugh’s confirmation, Ford would have had to plant the seeds of this story in 2012. That makes no sense.”
0 -
maybe he never drank to excess, which seems to be the common theme with Kavanaugh.dignin said:Why were there no accusations of sexual misconduct when Gorsuch went through confirmation? If this is all partisan politics, why not do the same to Gorsuch?
_____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
it's not. I'm not saying they invented this accusation. I am saying that they have been given a ball. they are running with it.dignin said:Why were there no accusations of sexual misconduct when Gorsuch went through confirmation? If this is all partisan politics, why not do the same to Gorsuch?By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0 -
focus seems to be on the alleged assualts. critical element to these are his state of drunkenness at the time these were said to have occured.sounds to me like he drank like I did back then. Plenty of nights I am sure I was fucked up but have no recollection of a given night if asked.which is to say according to his memory(suspect due to excess alcohol consumption) this didnt happen. but still certainly could have. so we look to other evidence like his friend and his writings subsequent.I'm inclined to not give too much credence to his denials...Post edited by mickeyrat on_____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
didnt trump make a point during his introduction as nominee Kavanaugh having worked closely with women? as if to suggest he championed women?was that just initial cover for whats believed to be his stance on issues predominate to women? or something more sinister?_____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
mrussel1 said:
Obama's parents planted a fake birth announcement in the Honolulu news when Barack was born because they knew a biracial president was inevitable. So yeah, I can believe this woman planted the seed with the therapist.Spiritual_Chaos said:HughFreakingDillon said:
ok, I'll ask again: what makes this accusation more credible than another? I'm not saying it's not, I'm wondering what makes one accusation, with little to no information, "credible". is an accusation credible for no other reason than it is an accusation?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Pushing someone through just to push someone through shouldn't be a factor though.HughFreakingDillon said:
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.PJ_Soul said:How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?
Democrats or Republicans politics shouldn't be a factor either - the accusation is the accusation. The judge not being a sexual assaulter should be enough to warrant a pause to investigate - whether democrats pushing the information out is moot. If he was not in risk of being a sexual assaulter - which a judge shouldn't be then there would be nothing to push.
Even if I report my friend stealing a Benaroya vinyl just because I'm angry at him, doesn't mean the police should not act on it.
And this was not some woman who out of nowhere just threw out an accusation. It is clearly credible enough to look into. And that should take president over "LETS GET THIS FUCKER THROUGH ASAP!"
he's probably guilty. PROBABLY.
politics shouldn't be a factor, but it is, obviously. democrats can put themselves on a pedestal all they want claiming they "just want the facts" when in reality a lot of them are just frothing at the mouth that they might flip the house in the mid-terms making it possible to block any potential trump nominee. especially this one. would they be grandstanding as much as they are if trump had nominated a moderate?1. Corroboration
In 2012, Ford described her account of the alleged attack to a therapist. Notes taken during this therapy session were provided to and reviewed by the Washington Post. Ford apparently did not name Kavanaugh during the 2012 session, however, her recollection of the event six years ago and shared with her therapist tracks with the allegations leveled against Kavanaugh in the letter which set this entire process in motion.
The prosecutors note, “To believe that this is a made-up tale to prevent Kavanaugh’s confirmation, Ford would have had to plant the seeds of this story in 2012. That makes no sense.”
Please tell me that you don't really believe this.0 -
It was 1961. They knew that the Civil Rights Act of 64 was inevitable, as old Dixie would fall in line. Oh yeah... they knew.. they knew. Their diabolical plan was put in motion early.njnancy said:mrussel1 said:
Obama's parents planted a fake birth announcement in the Honolulu news when Barack was born because they knew a biracial president was inevitable. So yeah, I can believe this woman planted the seed with the therapist.Spiritual_Chaos said:HughFreakingDillon said:
ok, I'll ask again: what makes this accusation more credible than another? I'm not saying it's not, I'm wondering what makes one accusation, with little to no information, "credible". is an accusation credible for no other reason than it is an accusation?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Pushing someone through just to push someone through shouldn't be a factor though.HughFreakingDillon said:
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.PJ_Soul said:How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?
Democrats or Republicans politics shouldn't be a factor either - the accusation is the accusation. The judge not being a sexual assaulter should be enough to warrant a pause to investigate - whether democrats pushing the information out is moot. If he was not in risk of being a sexual assaulter - which a judge shouldn't be then there would be nothing to push.
Even if I report my friend stealing a Benaroya vinyl just because I'm angry at him, doesn't mean the police should not act on it.
And this was not some woman who out of nowhere just threw out an accusation. It is clearly credible enough to look into. And that should take president over "LETS GET THIS FUCKER THROUGH ASAP!"
he's probably guilty. PROBABLY.
politics shouldn't be a factor, but it is, obviously. democrats can put themselves on a pedestal all they want claiming they "just want the facts" when in reality a lot of them are just frothing at the mouth that they might flip the house in the mid-terms making it possible to block any potential trump nominee. especially this one. would they be grandstanding as much as they are if trump had nominated a moderate?1. Corroboration
In 2012, Ford described her account of the alleged attack to a therapist. Notes taken during this therapy session were provided to and reviewed by the Washington Post. Ford apparently did not name Kavanaugh during the 2012 session, however, her recollection of the event six years ago and shared with her therapist tracks with the allegations leveled against Kavanaugh in the letter which set this entire process in motion.
The prosecutors note, “To believe that this is a made-up tale to prevent Kavanaugh’s confirmation, Ford would have had to plant the seeds of this story in 2012. That makes no sense.”
Please tell me that you don't really believe this.0 -
mrussel1 said:
It was 1961. They knew that the Civil Rights Act of 64 was inevitable, as old Dixie would fall in line. Oh yeah... they knew.. they knew. Their diabolical plan was put in motion early.njnancy said:mrussel1 said:
Obama's parents planted a fake birth announcement in the Honolulu news when Barack was born because they knew a biracial president was inevitable. So yeah, I can believe this woman planted the seed with the therapist.Spiritual_Chaos said:HughFreakingDillon said:
ok, I'll ask again: what makes this accusation more credible than another? I'm not saying it's not, I'm wondering what makes one accusation, with little to no information, "credible". is an accusation credible for no other reason than it is an accusation?Spiritual_Chaos said:
Pushing someone through just to push someone through shouldn't be a factor though.HughFreakingDillon said:
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.PJ_Soul said:How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?
Democrats or Republicans politics shouldn't be a factor either - the accusation is the accusation. The judge not being a sexual assaulter should be enough to warrant a pause to investigate - whether democrats pushing the information out is moot. If he was not in risk of being a sexual assaulter - which a judge shouldn't be then there would be nothing to push.
Even if I report my friend stealing a Benaroya vinyl just because I'm angry at him, doesn't mean the police should not act on it.
And this was not some woman who out of nowhere just threw out an accusation. It is clearly credible enough to look into. And that should take president over "LETS GET THIS FUCKER THROUGH ASAP!"
he's probably guilty. PROBABLY.
politics shouldn't be a factor, but it is, obviously. democrats can put themselves on a pedestal all they want claiming they "just want the facts" when in reality a lot of them are just frothing at the mouth that they might flip the house in the mid-terms making it possible to block any potential trump nominee. especially this one. would they be grandstanding as much as they are if trump had nominated a moderate?1. Corroboration
In 2012, Ford described her account of the alleged attack to a therapist. Notes taken during this therapy session were provided to and reviewed by the Washington Post. Ford apparently did not name Kavanaugh during the 2012 session, however, her recollection of the event six years ago and shared with her therapist tracks with the allegations leveled against Kavanaugh in the letter which set this entire process in motion.
The prosecutors note, “To believe that this is a made-up tale to prevent Kavanaugh’s confirmation, Ford would have had to plant the seeds of this story in 2012. That makes no sense.”
Please tell me that you don't really believe this.
"Mostly I think that people react sensitively because they know you’ve got a point"0 -
ha!! creepy scene for sure.0
-
Yes I did, and that is not "convicting him in the court of public opinion", as the rest of what I've said made clear IMO. Him being disqualified because of all this is not a conviction - not even in the figurative sense. And I find it disturbing that that is how people are treating this, considering the position that is being filled.cincybearcat said:
You said that even if no more info becomes available he should be disqualified as a candidate....did you not?PJ_Soul said:
No, I am not okay with convicting him in the court of public opinion without further investigation. If that is what you think I have been saying you just don't get it.cincybearcat said:Look we don’t know what happened. You are ok with convicting him in the court of public opinion without any more investigation. I’m not a fan of the guy and really pissed that republicans in the senate didn’t do their duty when obama was president, so I’m ok with Dems trying to stall ok this and trying to block to see if they can gain control and get a more moderate candidate.
But I’m not willing to say he’s guilty without an investigation. I don’t think a vote should occur before one though.
Post edited by PJ_Soul onWith all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata0 -
Exactly.Spiritual_Chaos said:
Pushing someone through just to push someone through shouldn't be a factor though.HughFreakingDillon said:
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.PJ_Soul said:How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?
Democrats or Republicans politics shouldn't be a factor either - the accusation is the accusation. The judge not being a sexual assaulter should be enough to warrant a pause to investigate - whether democrats pushing the information out is moot. If he was not in risk of being a sexual assaulter - which a judge shouldn't be then there would be nothing to push.
Even if I report my friend stealing a Benaroya vinyl just because I'm angry at him, doesn't mean the police should not act on it.
And this was not some woman who out of nowhere just threw out an accusation. It is clearly credible enough to look into. And that should take president over "LETS GET THIS FUCKER THROUGH ASAP!"
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata0 -
Absolutely.mickeyrat said:HughFreakingDillon said:
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.PJ_Soul said:How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?explain to me, if you will, how exactly his life would be ruined by not getting THIS lifetime appointment when he already has one? If its reputation , thats something that can be repaired wth contrition or if tge accusations are false, once the truth is revealed.what he potentially goes through will fall far far far short of what these women will be forced to endure for speaking up.
With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata0 -
I don't know, I just tend to think that sexual crimes reported on at the national/international level would suck pretty bad. And how is the truth revealed in a case of wrongful accusations of this nature? it's like proving there is no god. unless the accuser admits to lying, there is no "truth will come out".mickeyrat said:HughFreakingDillon said:
because in the current climate, many people think that every accusation is credible, no matter what. the overwhelming majority are credible, but that's not 100%, especially where politics are concerned.PJ_Soul said:How is it too much to ask that a SCOTUS judge not have sexual assault accusations against them that very well could be true?? Especially when the resistance to actually figuring out if they are true is so strong?My God, the standards that some people apply to people for such positions are at an all time low.And it shocks me that people would allow Kavanagh "losing his dream job" to be a legitimate concern. This position Trump is trying to put him in is so far beyond that. At the end of the day, a SCOTUS judge nominee needs to be beyond reproach, and we all know that Kavanaugh is not, even if this allegation is false... which I doubt. People seem to overestimating the chances of a woman putting herself in the position this woman is currently in. Please, someone give me any motive on her part that justifies it.
the resistance is so strong because of the timing of the vote. there's a lot on the line for both parties. potentially decades worth of law making that could tip to one side or the other, and if it makes all the difference in the world if the vote happens before or after the mid-terms. so you can see why people are skeptical about the motivations on BOTH sides.
as far as we know right now, no, there is no motive on her part to go through what she's going through. but what if we found one out later, like piles of cash in an offshore account, but it was too late and this man's life is ruined?
now, after what we are hearing from other women and Avenatti, it's unlikely that this is untrue. But I'd like to know what, in your opinion, makes one sexual assault allegation credible and one not credible? is it motive for coming forward alone?explain to me, if you will, how exactly his life would be ruined by not getting THIS lifetime appointment when he already has one? If its reputation , thats something that can be repaired wth contrition or if tge accusations are false, once the truth is revealed.what he potentially goes through will fall far far far short of what these women will be forced to endure for speaking up.
I hate having to say this so often, but it seems to be necessary: I'm not defending this guy. I'm guessing he did what she is accusing him of.
But it just seems to me that no one gives a fuck if she's lying. it's "oh well, he's still a judge, men have been assholes for centuries, so if this one is collateral damage, so be it". I just think that's a dangerous road to go down.By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.9K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help