kavanaugh

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Got Stripers

Ford was wrong thinking that she could keep this from getting out, DC could use an army of plumbers to plug all the leaks on both sides of the aisle. Feinstein on receipt of the letter should have reached out to Ford and insisted for her cooperation if she was that concerned about his confirmation. Clearly this should have come out on receipt or at least concerns should have been raised, even if you couldn't put a name to the accusations.

The where is the evidence argument is crap, someone please tell me what kind of evidence exists in a sexual assault case, not like they had smart phones back then and were putting it out on YouTube. I'm sure the thousands of women and boys out there who come forward later in life would be so happy at the outpouring of support and empathy. I would also suggest that a victim of this type of assault isn't ever going to forget who did it, I'm not buying into her mistaking him for someone else.

I was a skinny kid growing up in high school and I can remember every single person by first and last name who bullied me and caused me severe emotional distress. Do I remember the exact day, date or event those traumas happened, no I don't; but I remember vividly who the F-heads were. Point is when anyone experiences severe trauma at the hands of another, you don't EVER forget their faces or their names.

I have empathy for her, for him (if proven innocent of the charges) and the families of both. Public office is not for the weak of heart, but this isn't some low level cabinet post and these are serious charges and speak to his character. I'm not as forgiving as some might be of what might have happened when the man was 17, because at 17 you should be responsible for your behavior; almost everyone on this board would be held accountable at that age.

"The where is the evidence argument is crap"

The hell it is.

"what kind of evidence exists in a sexual assault case"

In cases of assault, there can be all manner of physical evidence. In cases of harassment, usually not so much. It's a tough problem, the common lack of evidence. I don't think the solution is to abandon the presumption of evidence.

Al Sharpton falsely accused white cops of rape. The Duke lacrosse players were falsely accused of rape. Rolling Stone falsely accused a UVA student of rape.

This doesn't mean that all accusers of lying, nor does it mean that the guilty don't deserve severe punishment. But it does mean, that especially in this political climate where nothing matters except winning (especially on the left), that you need more than an accusation.

"I'm not buying into her mistaking him for someone else. "

You don't have to buy it. You just have to admit that there's no proof. She lied about her fear of flying. All 4 witnesses she put there, including a woman who has been a lifelong friend, refuse to corroborate her story. That's evidence. Evidence that she's mistaken, or perhaps lying, I can't know.

" can remember every single person by first and last name who bullied me and caused me severe emotional distress."

So can I. I can also point to cases, as I have done, where people were falsely accused, often for liberal political gain. The fact that you and I can remember the names of our tormentors, means absolutely nothing in this case. You aren't her, neither am I.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

That's not fair, you know he doesn't like Trump and besides he has ..................

Accusations are not evidence. They are accusations.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

That photo was debunked as you can clearly see the shadow.

So now we are making people resign bc of jokes that are not funny?

I didn't say he should resign because he's not funny. I just said he's not funny.

This photo was shown to be a fake?

If all there were, were accusations, especially if they were from conservative women, then he should not have had to resign. Fair enough? Any hypocrisy there on my part? Any at all?

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by The Dad Fisherman

So What....

Brent Kavanaugh is a lawyer and a very experienced washington politician, he knows exactly what game he is playing and what the stakes are, he played this game himself for years.
Through that network, Kavanaugh was mentored by D.C. Appeals Court Judge Laurence Silberman, known among his colleagues for planting leaks in the press for partisan advantage.
When, as I came to know, Kavanaugh took on the role of designated leaker to the press of sensitive information from Starr's operation, we all laughed that Larry had taught him well. (Of course, that sort of political opportunism by a prosecutor is at best unethical, if not illegal.)
But the cabal's godfather was Ted Olson, the then-future solicitor general for George W. Bush and now a sainted figure of the GOP establishment (and of some liberals for his role in legalizing same-sex marriage). Olson had a largely hidden role as a consigliere to the "Arkansas Project" — a multi-million dollar dirt-digging operation on the Clintons, funded by the eccentric right-wing billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife and run through The American Spectator magazine, where I worked at the time.
Both Ted and Brett had what one could only be called an unhealthy obsession with the Clintons — especially Hillary. While Ted was pushing through the Arkansas Project conspiracy theories claiming that Clinton White House lawyer and Hillary friend Vincent Foster was murdered (he committed suicide), Brett was costing taxpayers millions by peddling the same garbage at Starr's office.
A detailed analysis of Kavanaugh's own notes from the Starr Investigation reveals he was cherry-picking random bits of information from the Starr investigation — as well as the multiple previous investigations — attempting vainly to legitimize wild right-wing conspiracies. For years he chased down each one of them without regard to the emotional cost to Foster’s family and friends, or even common decency.
Kavanaugh was not a dispassionate finder of fact but rather an engineer of a political smear campaign. And after decades of that, he expects people to believe he's changed his stripes.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"He is a comedian "

Ha ha ha, a 60 year-old man pretending to grope a sleeping soldier, oh please stop my stomach hurts from laughing so hard. not a soldier Leean Tweedan or something like that. On the trip w/him. Staunch conservative who wasn't upset w/the picture until he bc a Senator. On a comedy tour to visit the soldiers together.

Has Franken denied that he did anything wrong? Yes, in fact he did. Admitted to nothing. I thought he apologized. If he confessed, well that's pretty good evidence he acted stupidly.Never confessed - I believe he denied.

Here's the photo. If this is genuine and not doctored, it looks like he's touching her in a way I wouldn't let him touch my wife. Is this not the photo?It is but everyone says you can see shadows below the hands.

"you think the Dems are the party that is morally bankrupt"

I think politicians in general, on both sides, are corrupt. If you want to talk about degree, the democrats are worse, every day and twice on Sunday.

So we disagree on that statement. I see some/(many but not all) Republicans and having bc morally bankrupt. Falling in lockstep w/Trump - environment, fiscal policies, etc. Allow his lies and scummy deeds to go unchecked (more news today about that Trump and Eric talked about Stormy D. even thought he repeatedly said he didn't). They have risen to a level of anger and pettiness previously not seen. You can see it here.

So the Repubs are corrupt but the Dems are some degree more corrupt yet that "degree" causes you to hate the Dems. the way you do - wow.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

So we disagree on that statement. I see some/(many but not all) Republicans and having bc morally bankrupt. Falling in lockstep w/Trump - environment, fiscal policies, etc. Allow his lies and scummy deeds to go unchecked (more news today about that Trump and Eric talked about Stormy D. even thought he repeatedly said he didn't). They have risen to a level of anger and pettiness previously not seen. You can see it here.

So the Repubs are corrupt but the Dems are some degree more corrupt yet that "degree" causes you to hate the Dems. the way you do - wow.

"So the Repubs are corrupt "

Some, sadly yes. There are tens of millions of, any group that size has bad apples.

"the Dems are some degree more corrupt"

A lot more.

"that "degree" causes you to hate the Dems"

I dislike their policies, and especially dislike their methods. I see Republicans trying to talk about issues, and the democrat response is, way too often, an accusation of hate. I hate the identity politics. I keep hearing liberals talking about the Kavanaugh case in terms of race. Everyone involved is white, why is it a racial issue?

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Accusations are not evidence. They are accusations.

Truth has nothing to do with it.
"You've got to deny, deny, deny and push back on these women, If you admit to anything and any culpability, then you're dead."

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

Truth has nothing to do with it.
"You've got to deny, deny, deny and push back on these women, If you admit to anything and any culpability, then you're dead."

Truth has everything to do with it for me, and unfortunately, in this case we likely won't ever know the truth. And in this country, according to our vision of justice, when we can't establish what happened, we treat the accused as if he's innocent. That's our system, and sometimes it's tough to swallow, but we don't apply it selectively. Again, that's exactly why Lady Justice has the blindfold.

And if the democrats want to establish that an accusation is enough to establish guilt, what do they suspect will happen when they are in the majority, and they want to fill SCOTUS seats? Are they this short-sighted?

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Truth has everything to do with it for me, and unfortunately, in this case we likely won't ever know the truth. And in this country, according to our vision of justice, when we can't establish what happened, we treat the accused as if he's innocent. That's our system, and sometimes it's tough to swallow, but we don't apply it selectively. Again, that's exactly why Lady Justice has the blindfold.

And if the democrats want to establish that an accusation is enough to establish guilt, what do they suspect will happen when they are in the majority, and they want to fill SCOTUS seats? Are they this short-sighted?

I think without term and contribution limits this will never end.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I keep hearing liberals talking about the Kavanaugh case in terms of race. Everyone involved is white, why is it a racial issue?

I Didn't think people where talking about it in terms of race.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

I Didn't think people where talking about it in terms of race.

The senators are not making race an issue. The entire liberal media is, "look at all these old white guys judging poor Dr Ford".

I don't see a racial component to this.

[Pete F.]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I hate the identity politics.

I can see why you would
A new paper finds that Republicans are more likely than Democrats to support their party because of their own cultural identity
https://www.economist.com/democracy-...ntity-politics
Who’s Campaigning on Identity Politics?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/30/o...migration.html
Why identity politics benefits the right more than the left
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...t-trump-racism
The Republicans are now the party of identity politics
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...s-donald-trump
People don’t vote for what they want. They vote for who they are.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlo...=.4fd8d23ebaca
Republicans and their identity politics are destroying America
https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-bl...are-destroying
this is the one you should read
Democrats Are Wrong About Republicans. Republicans Are Wrong About Democrats.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...out-democrats/

[Sea Dangles]

A lot of “what if” going around from the left. Haha
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

I can see why you would
A new paper finds that Republicans are more likely than Democrats to support their party because of their own cultural identity
https://www.economist.com/democracy-...ntity-politics
Who’s Campaigning on Identity Politics?
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/30/o...migration.html
Why identity politics benefits the right more than the left
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...t-trump-racism
The Republicans are now the party of identity politics
https://www.theguardian.com/commenti...s-donald-trump
People don’t vote for what they want. They vote for who they are.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlo...=.4fd8d23ebaca
Republicans and their identity politics are destroying America
https://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-bl...are-destroying
this is the one you should read
Democrats Are Wrong About Republicans. Republicans Are Wrong About Democrats.
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...out-democrats/

I read the one about how Republican identity politics are destroying America. That was a real eye-opener. The very first sentence labeled Republicans as racist.

If you think that Republicans focus on identity politics more than Democrats, well, suffice to say I disagree. That's practically all you hear from democrats these days.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

The senators are not making race an issue. The entire liberal media is, "look at all these old white guys judging poor Dr Ford".That is not racism. Just pointing out the lack of diversity (age, sex and race) on the panel, how it didn't change from the Thomas hearings and how they did not want to question her so they farmed it out.

I don't see a racial component to this.

I don't see a racial component either.

And I think if K has problems at this point it isn't what he may or may not have done to Ford.

[scottw]

McConnell should give them another week...the dems look incredibly stupid and they are doing a great job getting out the vote...for the republicans

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I read the one about how Republican identity politics are destroying America. That was a real eye-opener.

.

I didn't think anyone read his posts...let that be a lesson for you...

[Nebe]

Originally Posted by scottw

McConnell should give them another week...the dems look incredibly stupid and they are doing a great job getting out the vote...for the republicans

Actually.. they look pretty smart to me.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Pete F.]

A long read by a writer from the Brookings Institute, I would gladly read a considered opinion for why.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...anaugh/571936/

[scottw]

Originally Posted by Nebe

Actually.. they look pretty smart to me.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

in that case....2 more weeks....we are going to need to close a lot of bridges if Kavanaugh ends up on the court and the republicans have success in the election.... I'm not sure how the snowflakes will cope

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

I don't see a racial component either.

And I think if K has problems at this point it isn't what he may or may not have done to Ford.

"Just pointing out the lack of diversity (age, sex and race) on the panel"

Who cares? Why does gender and skin color correlate with due process?

"And I think if K has problems at this point it isn't what he may or may not have done to Ford"

I respect you for saying that, and you may well be right.

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Pete F.

A long read by a writer from the Brookings Institute, I would gladly read a considered opinion for why.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/ar...anaugh/571936/

A lot of doubts, uncertainty, and questions there. Sounds like the kind of article you really like. Good for him though. He actually was able to squeak out a decision.

[Pete F.]

Upcoming Supreme Court decision
One precedent at risk concerns the Constitution’s double jeopardy clause, which forbids subsequent prosecutions for the same crimes. The Supreme Court has made one exception, saying that the federal government and the states are independent sovereigns, meaning that the same conduct can be prosecuted separately in state and federal courts.

In 2016, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, called for a fresh look at whether the exception makes sense. “The matter warrants attention in a future case in which a defendant faces successive prosecutions by parts of the whole U.S.A.,” she wrote.

The court will consider the question in Gamble v. United States, No. 17-646.

Its answer may have implications for the legal problems faced by associates of Mr. Trump. Should he pardon them for federal crimes, a Supreme Court ruling narrowing the definition of double jeopardy could complicate attempts by state prosecutors to pursue parallel charges.

[Jim in CT]

big scoop in the new york times today, it’s reported that when in college, Kavanaugh threw ice over someone during a bar fight.

Just how pathetic are these people? What’s next, that he said nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah in kindergarten? is this a joke?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

big scoop in the new york times today, it’s reported that when in college, Kavanaugh threw ice over someone during a bar fight.

Just how pathetic are these people? What’s next, that he said nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah in kindergarten? is this a joke?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I believe what was reported was that he threw ice starting a bar fight.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[detbuch]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

big scoop in the new york times today, it’s reported that when in college, Kavanaugh threw ice over someone during a bar fight.

Just how pathetic are these people? What’s next, that he said nyah nyah nyah nyah nyah in kindergarten? is this a joke?

You mean K was actually in a bar fight. And throwing stuff at people. Sounds like the man has some bonifide stones. Respect.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by detbuch

You mean K was actually in a bar fight. And throwing stuff at people. Sounds like the man has some bonifide stones. Respect.

I wish he'd punch Blumenthal in the face.....

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by detbuch

You mean K was actually in a bar fight. And throwing stuff at people. Sounds like the man has some bonifide stones. Respect.

Hiding behind a 6 11, 250 guy? I wouldn't call that having stones.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[PaulS]

Truth be told he was probably a great athlete and in fantastic shape
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[wdmso]

Trump mocking Brett Kavanaugh accuser at rally


POTUS character assassination.... where lindsey grahams outrage now?