Kavanaugh

mace1229 said:

Gern Blansten said:

mace1229 said:

Gern Blansten said:

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

Gern Blansten said:

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

PJ_Soul said:

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

oftenreading said:

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

Interesting to remember that no one thought ANY of this through this guy’s last 30 years in his career.  Law school, civil court, DC appeals court, nothing.  None of his friends were wanted for assault, none were even questioned.  Not even the guy who helped him supposedly drug and have sex with women, none of the folks who signed his yearbook with Rennet or whatever the word is in there were even asked about assaults.  not a peep.  Now they’re suddenly like “oh, THAT Brett Kavanaugh?!?”

Just saying that before all of the conspiracists start throwing out crazy stuff, and before we all try to attack and ruin someone’s personal life or career because we don’t agree with their politics or hate Trump, be human beings first.  There’s a process before someone is considered guilty in this country, let’s go through that first.  

By the way, in case people forgot like it seems they did about Brett for the last 30 years, the process doesn’t include a circus hearing like we have planned on Thursday, or even an FBI investigation.  It involves bringing evidence to the police, and bringing charges against the person you’re accusing.  Not writing a letter to a senator.  

Again, I just want to pump the conspiracy breaks here.  There’s of course a chance Ford is a victim.  There’s also a chance this another Duke Lacrosse team.

Maybe go back and read the thread where issues like this are discussed before just churning the same excuses again. 

Excuses?  Sorry, but I’m living in the world of facts, and unfortunately for her, having someone make a claim isn’t a fact.  Neither is a an eye witness unless they can prove what they’re saying.  I’ll believe a rape test, physical evidence from the scene, photos, videos, etc.  A great example is Cosby- there was a LOT of evidence to convict him, and convict and punish him they have done.  Our justice system isn’t based on claims, it’s based on evidence, and it always will be.  It’s not nice to those who decide not to come forward when these acts happen, but that’s how it works.

have you read this thread though? As others and myself have mentioned, there are very good reasons why you can't just rely on facts they way you're suggesting, and there is a tons of info out there that you could go through to understand why that is in fact NOT how it works. Are you planning on just ignoring all of it?

As has also been pointed out, the confirmation hearings are not a court of law. They're basically a job interview. Since when do job interviews require facts that stand up in a court of law before the applicant is rejected?

I haven’t read the thread, and I don’t plan on it- fill me in on the reasons you can’t go through the legal process.  I have empathy for the accused in these situations as much as I do for the victim- both are human beings until the gavel hits the bench.  You can’t go around making claims about people and disrupting or maybe worse their careers or personal
lives without repercussion- that’s why the legal system exists- so both parties are protected and we don’t have a Wild West of no rule and everyone just shouts over everyone.

100% agree with the fact that this is similar to a job interview, you’re absolutely correct.  That’s part of my point, it’s not the place for this type of claim.  If I were interviewing someone (and I’ve done hundreds of them) and someone came to me telling me that a candidate if spoken with had raped someone (but there was no court case) I would disregard it because they need to go to the police, not me.

Ford asked for the FBI to get involved.  Did you miss that part?

You don’t ask for the FBI to get involved, you go to the police- did you miss THAT part? Jesus, folks, there’s a course of action to follow.  The FBI isn’t around to take orders from citizens, never has been.

Actually in this case the White House could ask the FBI to get involved.  Ford wants them to do that.  The WH doesn't want to do that.

That seems to suggest that Ford is telling the truth.  And it suggests that the WH/Kavanaugh are hiding something.

I've heard that repeated many times, and I disagree with that logic.
Did Hilary welcome an FBI investigation to prove she was innocent? Of course not, no one does.  Innocent people don't want to be investigated just as much as guilty people, so wanting or not wanting one has little relevance to me.
If you want t use the unwelcoming of an FBI investigation as part of your evidence of guilt, that can go down a whole new rabbit hole.

VICTIM: 
Q: You claim to have been assaulted.  Is that true?
A: Yes
Q: Would you like the FBI to investigate that assault?
A: Yes

Accused:
Q: You have been accused of assault. Did you?
A: No
Q: Would you like the FBI to investigate that assault?
A: No

Give me a fucking break

So then you would say anyone dismissing an investigation is guilty?
Really puts a lot of things in a  new perspective then

mace1229 said:

Gern Blansten said:

mace1229 said:

Gern Blansten said:

mace1229 said:

Gern Blansten said:

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

Gern Blansten said:

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

PJ_Soul said:

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

oftenreading said:

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

Interesting to remember that no one thought ANY of this through this guy’s last 30 years in his career.  Law school, civil court, DC appeals court, nothing.  None of his friends were wanted for assault, none were even questioned.  Not even the guy who helped him supposedly drug and have sex with women, none of the folks who signed his yearbook with Rennet or whatever the word is in there were even asked about assaults.  not a peep.  Now they’re suddenly like “oh, THAT Brett Kavanaugh?!?”

Just saying that before all of the conspiracists start throwing out crazy stuff, and before we all try to attack and ruin someone’s personal life or career because we don’t agree with their politics or hate Trump, be human beings first.  There’s a process before someone is considered guilty in this country, let’s go through that first.  

By the way, in case people forgot like it seems they did about Brett for the last 30 years, the process doesn’t include a circus hearing like we have planned on Thursday, or even an FBI investigation.  It involves bringing evidence to the police, and bringing charges against the person you’re accusing.  Not writing a letter to a senator.  

Again, I just want to pump the conspiracy breaks here.  There’s of course a chance Ford is a victim.  There’s also a chance this another Duke Lacrosse team.

Maybe go back and read the thread where issues like this are discussed before just churning the same excuses again. 

Excuses?  Sorry, but I’m living in the world of facts, and unfortunately for her, having someone make a claim isn’t a fact.  Neither is a an eye witness unless they can prove what they’re saying.  I’ll believe a rape test, physical evidence from the scene, photos, videos, etc.  A great example is Cosby- there was a LOT of evidence to convict him, and convict and punish him they have done.  Our justice system isn’t based on claims, it’s based on evidence, and it always will be.  It’s not nice to those who decide not to come forward when these acts happen, but that’s how it works.

have you read this thread though? As others and myself have mentioned, there are very good reasons why you can't just rely on facts they way you're suggesting, and there is a tons of info out there that you could go through to understand why that is in fact NOT how it works. Are you planning on just ignoring all of it?

As has also been pointed out, the confirmation hearings are not a court of law. They're basically a job interview. Since when do job interviews require facts that stand up in a court of law before the applicant is rejected?

I haven’t read the thread, and I don’t plan on it- fill me in on the reasons you can’t go through the legal process.  I have empathy for the accused in these situations as much as I do for the victim- both are human beings until the gavel hits the bench.  You can’t go around making claims about people and disrupting or maybe worse their careers or personal
lives without repercussion- that’s why the legal system exists- so both parties are protected and we don’t have a Wild West of no rule and everyone just shouts over everyone.

100% agree with the fact that this is similar to a job interview, you’re absolutely correct.  That’s part of my point, it’s not the place for this type of claim.  If I were interviewing someone (and I’ve done hundreds of them) and someone came to me telling me that a candidate if spoken with had raped someone (but there was no court case) I would disregard it because they need to go to the police, not me.

Ford asked for the FBI to get involved.  Did you miss that part?

You don’t ask for the FBI to get involved, you go to the police- did you miss THAT part? Jesus, folks, there’s a course of action to follow.  The FBI isn’t around to take orders from citizens, never has been.

Actually in this case the White House could ask the FBI to get involved.  Ford wants them to do that.  The WH doesn't want to do that.

That seems to suggest that Ford is telling the truth.  And it suggests that the WH/Kavanaugh are hiding something.

I've heard that repeated many times, and I disagree with that logic.
Did Hilary welcome an FBI investigation to prove she was innocent? Of course not, no one does.  Innocent people don't want to be investigated just as much as guilty people, so wanting or not wanting one has little relevance to me.
If you want t use the unwelcoming of an FBI investigation as part of your evidence of guilt, that can go down a whole new rabbit hole.

VICTIM: 
Q: You claim to have been assaulted.  Is that true?
A: Yes
Q: Would you like the FBI to investigate that assault?
A: Yes

Accused:
Q: You have been accused of assault. Did you?
A: No
Q: Would you like the FBI to investigate that assault?
A: No

Give me a fucking break

So then you would say anyone dismissing an investigation is guilty?
Really puts a lot of things in a  new perspective then

As I mentioned before...it "suggests" that the accuser is telling the truth and the accused is hiding something

simple logic

Thats like saying you don't mind being audited if you know you did your taxes right.
No one wants to be audited, no ones wants an FBI investigation on them, regardless of guilt or innocence.  That to me is simply logic.

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

Look, I just hope you guys are as aggressive about getting to the bottom of Keith Ellison’s situation as you are with Kavanaugh.  If you care about the women, which you all claim, then it shouldn’t matter the position/party of the man involved.  Flowers, Broderick, Monahan, Lewinski, Ford- all of them are victims in one way or another.  Seems like people here were silent last month when news broke of his violence towards Monahan, yet not the same reaction with regards to Kavanaugh.

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

RoleModelsinBlood31 said:

Interesting to remember that no one thought ANY of this through this guy’s last 30 years in his career.  Law school, civil court, DC appeals court, nothing.  None of his friends were wanted for assault, none were even questioned.  Not even the guy who helped him supposedly drug and have sex with women, none of the folks who signed his yearbook with Rennet or whatever the word is in there were even asked about assaults.  not a peep.  Now they’re suddenly like “oh, THAT Brett Kavanaugh?!?”

Just saying that before all of the conspiracists start throwing out crazy stuff, and before we all try to attack and ruin someone’s personal life or career because we don’t agree with their politics or hate Trump, be human beings first.  There’s a process before someone is considered guilty in this country, let’s go through that first.  

By the way, in case people forgot like it seems they did about Brett for the last 30 years, the process doesn’t include a circus hearing like we have planned on Thursday, or even an FBI investigation.  It involves bringing evidence to the police, and bringing charges against the person you’re accusing.  Not writing a letter to a senator.  

Again, I just want to pump the conspiracy breaks here.  There’s of course a chance Ford is a victim.  There’s also a chance this another Duke Lacrosse team.

one thing that really knocked me off my chair is "of course there's a chance Ford is a victim". a chance? a CHANCE?

Knocked you off your chair? Maybe it’s different in Canada but here our legal system assumes innocence of the accused until they are PROVEN guilty.  So yeah, all that any accuser gets is a chance, that’s how our legal system works.

PJ_Soul said:

rgambs said:

Can someone give me a quick summary of the yearbook thing?
My data signal is weak and if I navigate away from here I won't make much progress.

Here are a few paragraphs from the NYT story about it. I think this part pretty much tells the story of what it's about:

"Brett Kavanaugh’s page in his high school yearbook offers a glimpse of the teenage years of the man who is now President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee: lots of football, plenty of drinking, parties at the beach. Among the reminiscences about sports and booze is a mysterious entry: “Renate Alumnius.”

The word “Renate” appears at least 14 times in Georgetown Preparatory School’s 1983 yearbook, on individuals’ pages and in a group photo of nine football players, including Judge Kavanaugh, who were described as the “Renate Alumni.” It is a reference to Renate Schroeder (now Renate Schroeder Dolphin), then a student at a nearby Catholic girls’ school.

Two of Judge Kavanaugh’s classmates say the mentions of Renate were part of the football players’ unsubstantiated boasting about their conquests.

“They were very disrespectful, at least verbally, with Renate,” said Sean Hagan, a Georgetown Prep student at the time, referring to Judge Kavanaugh and his teammates. “I can’t express how disgusted I am with them, then and now.”.............

.........When Ms. Dolphin signed the Sept. 14 letter, she wasn’t aware of the “Renate” yearbook references on the pages of Judge Kavanaugh and his football teammates.

“I learned about these yearbook pages only a few days ago,” Ms. Dolphin said in a statement to The New York Times. “I don’t know what ‘Renate Alumnus’ actually means. I can’t begin to comprehend what goes through the minds of 17-year-old boys who write such things, but the insinuation is horrible, hurtful and simply untrue. I pray their daughters are never treated this way. I will have no further comment.”

pjhawks said:

PJ_Soul said:

rgambs said:

Can someone give me a quick summary of the yearbook thing?
My data signal is weak and if I navigate away from here I won't make much progress.

Here are a few paragraphs from the NYT story about it. I think this part pretty much tells the story of what it's about:

"Brett Kavanaugh’s page in his high school yearbook offers a glimpse of the teenage years of the man who is now President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee: lots of football, plenty of drinking, parties at the beach. Among the reminiscences about sports and booze is a mysterious entry: “Renate Alumnius.”

The word “Renate” appears at least 14 times in Georgetown Preparatory School’s 1983 yearbook, on individuals’ pages and in a group photo of nine football players, including Judge Kavanaugh, who were described as the “Renate Alumni.” It is a reference to Renate Schroeder (now Renate Schroeder Dolphin), then a student at a nearby Catholic girls’ school.

Two of Judge Kavanaugh’s classmates say the mentions of Renate were part of the football players’ unsubstantiated boasting about their conquests.

“They were very disrespectful, at least verbally, with Renate,” said Sean Hagan, a Georgetown Prep student at the time, referring to Judge Kavanaugh and his teammates. “I can’t express how disgusted I am with them, then and now.”.............

.........When Ms. Dolphin signed the Sept. 14 letter, she wasn’t aware of the “Renate” yearbook references on the pages of Judge Kavanaugh and his football teammates.

“I learned about these yearbook pages only a few days ago,” Ms. Dolphin said in a statement to The New York Times. “I don’t know what ‘Renate Alumnus’ actually means. I can’t begin to comprehend what goes through the minds of 17-year-old boys who write such things, but the insinuation is horrible, hurtful and simply untrue. I pray their daughters are never treated this way. I will have no further comment.”

but that was just a joke wasn't it? i thought comedy didn't upset you?  I don't find it funny of course.

PJ_Soul said:

pjhawks said:

PJ_Soul said:

rgambs said:

Can someone give me a quick summary of the yearbook thing?
My data signal is weak and if I navigate away from here I won't make much progress.

Here are a few paragraphs from the NYT story about it. I think this part pretty much tells the story of what it's about:

"Brett Kavanaugh’s page in his high school yearbook offers a glimpse of the teenage years of the man who is now President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee: lots of football, plenty of drinking, parties at the beach. Among the reminiscences about sports and booze is a mysterious entry: “Renate Alumnius.”

The word “Renate” appears at least 14 times in Georgetown Preparatory School’s 1983 yearbook, on individuals’ pages and in a group photo of nine football players, including Judge Kavanaugh, who were described as the “Renate Alumni.” It is a reference to Renate Schroeder (now Renate Schroeder Dolphin), then a student at a nearby Catholic girls’ school.

Two of Judge Kavanaugh’s classmates say the mentions of Renate were part of the football players’ unsubstantiated boasting about their conquests.

“They were very disrespectful, at least verbally, with Renate,” said Sean Hagan, a Georgetown Prep student at the time, referring to Judge Kavanaugh and his teammates. “I can’t express how disgusted I am with them, then and now.”.............

.........When Ms. Dolphin signed the Sept. 14 letter, she wasn’t aware of the “Renate” yearbook references on the pages of Judge Kavanaugh and his football teammates.

“I learned about these yearbook pages only a few days ago,” Ms. Dolphin said in a statement to The New York Times. “I don’t know what ‘Renate Alumnus’ actually means. I can’t begin to comprehend what goes through the minds of 17-year-old boys who write such things, but the insinuation is horrible, hurtful and simply untrue. I pray their daughters are never treated this way. I will have no further comment.”

but that was just a joke wasn't it? i thought comedy didn't upset you?  I don't find it funny of course.

Kay, this is getting boring, but to clarify, I never once said that no jokes upset or offend me. I also never said, obviously, that all jokes are funny.