If the Kavanaugh accusations are true...

[Go Braves]

Would you mind if they also interviewed those who knew him back then and knew him to be a good person who would never do the things he's being accused of? That way, instead of it just being "she said/he said", it would be "200 people say one thing while another 200 people say the opposite".

Well yeah, of course. It's why Kavanaugh himself should be wanting the FBI investigation into these allegations if there's folks who are willing to say - in FBI interviews where they can't just lie without consequence - just that. His roommate at Yale has said that he was in the habit of getting very drunk - more often than typical even for that era - being belligerent, sexually aggressive. He believes the allegations. He should be interviewed by the FBI. So should Kavanaugh's buddies, professors.

All Trump needs to do is pull his head out & go ahead ask for the FBI investigation instead of saying inane crap that does nothing productive.

 

[LostMarbels]

Well since you bring up taxes, yes, honest folks running for the POTUS or up for a SCOTUS seat should absolutely submit them & have them thoroughly checked for corruption.

But that's separate from the accusations against Kavanaugh. There was an empty seat on SCOTUS for what - 400 days? - that's dragging things out. Wanting to investigate serious allegations, to vet somebody up for a lifetime appointment thoroughly, that's prudent.

We cant even get politicians to not redact phone calls you want get their taxes?!

 

[Go Braves]

Why are you completely overlooking the fact that the democrats had this information since July and never questioned him on it a single time? This is political games! If the accusation is true, the democrats used a rape victim as political fodder to delay a hearing.

Well first of all Saucy, I have addressed that in other posts. Please don't assume that if you haven't personally seen something it doesn't exist. Democrats have been rightfully upset about that, spoken up about it. I do think Feinstein was in a pickle on account of how Dr. Ford had wanted to remain confidential & yet it was information that needed to be known. Trump has proven Dr. Ford to be 100% correct in fearing that she'd been attacked if she spoke up.

Nor did they handle it privately. They sat on it until the last second.

They didn't just sit on it, Saucy. They did handle it privately, out of respect. That doesn't mean that them not talking about it publicly meant that it wasn't being talked about. Raj Shah revealed Dr. Ford's name to aides before she spoke out publicly. He's claiming that he never told Kavanaugh's buddy, Whelan. Dr. Ford sent a time-stamped email before she went public about how Whelan had been snooping out her Linkedin page. Whelan also peddled a truly unhinged & sickeningly irresponsible conspiracy theory that blamed an entirely innocent man on attempted rape.

What's fair to Kavenaugh is that these questions should've come up and forward DURING his hearing or even back in July to give the FBI proper time to investigate.Now it just looks like a stall tactic.

Well since you're beating a dead horse, let's throw the horse in about how there was a seat left open for 400 days on account of Merrick Garland, a moderate without any sexual assault claims against him, was refused to even be given a hearing. Justice Kennedy just retired not that long back. The voting deadline that was set is entirely arbitrary. There is no reason for it to be rushed. This is not all about Trump. Whoever takes that seat will be sitting on it for probably a decade or longer after Trump is dead, so to not properly & thoroughly vet him now is reckless & unpatriotic.

And you're buying in on it because you don't like the guy.

Saucy, I have to chuckle when you make your assumptions about me. I want the Federal Bureau of Investigation to be allowed to investigate the allegations, as both of the victims who've publicly come forward have wanted. As he should want. This is about the integrity of the Supreme Court of the United States. Him being confirmed without those allegations impacts more than just him.

 

[NotreDame]

You tell me -- what is the official criteria for a reputation?



Sue me for libel, then.

Just stop with the inflammatory and baseless allegation. That’s the fix.

 

[Gigimo]

Well since you bring up taxes, yes, honest folks running for the POTUS or up for a SCOTUS seat should absolutely submit them & have them thoroughly checked for corruption.

Unless I miss my guess that wouldn't be required of all candidates.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Just stop with the inflammatory and baseless allegation. That’s the fix.

It's hardly inflammatory to say that a man with a certain bad reputation has a bad reputation.

Not my fault Kavanaugh needs better spin doctors.

 

[NotreDame]

It's hardly inflammatory to say that a man with a certain bad reputation has a bad reputation.

Not my fault Kavanaugh needs better spin doctors.

Yes, this is your fault, it is your fault to repeatedly make an inflammatory, serious, and derogatory claim about Kavanaugh but you cannot provide one shred of evidence in support. My point, cease making baseless, inflammatory remarks about Kavanaugh until you can at least substantiate them. You cannot even substantiate what you are claiming about him.

So, for the second time now in this thread, what is your evidence Kavanaugh has a reputation of being a rapist. That is a very serious allegation, should not be made jokingly, or in a cavalier manner. Whoever is making that allegation, about anyone, not just Kavanaugh, needs to have and better have some evidence.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Yes, this is your fault, it is your fault to repeatedly make an inflammatory, serious, and derogatory claim about Kavanaugh but you cannot provide one shred of evidence in support. My point, cease making baseless, inflammatory remarks about Kavanaugh until you can at least substantiate them. You cannot even substantiate what you are claiming about him.

So, for the second time now in this thread, what is your evidence Kavanaugh has a reputation of being a rapist. That is a very serious allegation, should not be made jokingly, or in a cavalier manner. Whoever is making that allegation, about anyone, not just Kavanaugh, needs to have and better have some evidence.

How baseless is it to say a man with three sexual abuse accusers (and counting; anyone checked the news lately?) has gotten a bad reputation?

Really, ND, give it up; feigning outrage this long is only hurting your own reputation...

 

[Aldebaran]

How baseless is it to say a man with three sexual abuse accusers (and counting; anyone checked the news lately?) has gotten a bad reputation?

Really, ND, give it up; feigning outrage this long is only hurting your own reputation...

The key word here being "accusers", which has taken the place of "criminal convictions" (not that it matters to people who are too filled with hate for the man to care).

 

[redleghunter]

How baseless is it to say a man with three sexual abuse accusers (and counting; anyone checked the news lately?) has gotten a bad reputation?

Really, ND, give it up; feigning outrage this long is only hurting your own reputation...

Ok, I agree many can be convinced with sheer volume as such can show a trend. I can even in the court of opinion say three separate events geographically and separated by time can be a metric.

Where all three separate accusations stand or fall is on the account given by the women. All three give accounts of the events happening with eyewitnesses in attendance. These were parties. All three admit to some memory gaps or being under the influence of alcohol and or drugs (willingly or unwillingly).

Ford's account a very small group but she identified all who were there and none either remember or say they were not there. The tallywhacker account had a huge frat party attendance, but once again no other witnesses come forward to corroborate the accuser. Now we have Julie Swetnick sign a sworn statement Kavanaugh and Judge participated in felony crimes, yet to date no other eyewitnesses. And none to my knowledge were reported to the proper authorities even after the fact years later.

I ask, what would a court or even DA do with such charges? They would be thrown out.

 

[redleghunter]

The key word here being "accusers", which has taken the place of "criminal convictions" (not that it matters to people who are too filled with hate for the man to care).

Frankly let's put politics aside for a moment and focus on the women. I am aghast that three women were sexually assaulted with a cloud of witnesses in attendance and not one eyewitness comes forward to say "Yes, I was there (independent eyewitness) and she was there (the accuser) and he was there (the accused)."

None of these cases has anyone standing up to support the women who were obviously in case 2 and 3 in large parties.

 

[TLK Valentine]

The key word here being "accusers", which has taken the place of "criminal convictions" (not that it matters to people who are too filled with hate for the man to care).

Well, there's as good a reason as any to put Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court --he's not a criminal!

Given Donald's luck in appointing people, I suppose that is an accomplishment.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Ok, I agree many can be convinced with sheer volume as such can show a trend. I can even in the court of opinion say three separate events geographically and separated by time can be a metric.

Where all three separate accusations stand or fall is on the account given by the women. All three give accounts of the events happening with eyewitnesses in attendance. These were parties. All three admit to some memory gaps or being under the influence of alcohol and or drugs (willingly or unwillingly).

Ford's account a very small group but she identified all who were there and none either remember or say they were not there. The tallywhacker account had a huge frat party attendance, but once again no other witnesses come forward to corroborate the accuser. Now we have Julie Swetnick sign a sworn statement Kavanaugh and Judge participated in felony crimes, yet to date no other eyewitnesses. And none to my knowledge were reported to the proper authorities even after the fact years later.

I ask, what would a court or even DA do with such charges? They would be thrown out.

Which is why we don't convict people based on reputation... oh, wait...

LOCK HER UP! LOCK HER UP! LOCK HER UP!

Sorry, a little random noise... what were we saying?

 

[TLK Valentine]

Frankly let's put politics aside for a moment and focus on the women. I am aghast that three women were sexually assaulted with a cloud of witnesses in attendance and not one eyewitness comes forward to say "Yes, I was there (independent eyewitness) and she was there (the accuser) and he was there (the accused)."

None of these cases has anyone standing up to support the women who were obviously in case 2 and 3 in large parties.

True, and that doesn't bode well. OTOH, we've seen what happens to the accusers.

 

[redleghunter]

Ok, I agree many can be convinced with sheer volume as such can show a trend. I can even in the court of opinion say three separate events geographically and separated by time can be a metric.

Where all three separate accusations stand or fall is on the account given by the women. All three give accounts of the events happening with eyewitnesses in attendance. These were parties. All three admit to some memory gaps or being under the influence of alcohol and or drugs (willingly or unwillingly).

Ford's account a very small group but she identified all who were there and none either remember or say they were not there. The tallywhacker account had a huge frat party attendance, but once again no other witnesses come forward to corroborate the accuser. Now we have Julie Swetnick sign a sworn statement Kavanaugh and Judge participated in felony crimes, yet to date no other eyewitnesses. And none to my knowledge were reported to the proper authorities even after the fact years later.

I ask, what would a court or even DA do with such charges? They would be thrown out.

Which is why we don't convict people based on reputation... oh, wait...

LOCK HER UP! LOCK HER UP! LOCK HER UP!

Sorry, a little random noise... what were we saying?

Maybe you have a point. The same FBI which investigated Hillary Clinton investigated Brett Kavanaugh.

 

[redleghunter]

True, and that doesn't bode well. OTOH, we've seen what happens to the accusers.

The issue here is all three women have been used for political pawns. After said testimony or no testimony and whatever the political objectives met, they are all collateral damage neither party will care about.

If they were assaulted and it was mistaken identity then that just extends the collateral damage Madame Feinstein started.

 

[Aldebaran]

Frankly let's put politics aside for a moment and focus on the women. I am aghast that three women were sexually assaulted with a cloud of witnesses in attendance and not one eyewitness comes forward to say "Yes, I was there (independent eyewitness) and she was there (the accuser) and he was there (the accused)."

None of these cases has anyone standing up to support the women who were obviously in case 2 and 3 in large parties.

Probably because they don't need witness since they believe "survivors": Ted Cruz Leaves Washington Restaurant After Protesters Shout 'We Believe Survivors'

 

[TLK Valentine]

The issue here is all three women have been used for political pawns. After said testimony or no testimony and whatever the political objectives met, they are all collateral damage neither party will care about.

How do we know they're pawns?

 

[redleghunter]

How do we know they're pawns?

Three months with a letter in a hip pocket of Feinstein. Truly?

 

[Aldebaran]

Three months with a letter in a hip pocket of Feinstein. Truly?

Just waiting to draw it out and pull the trigger if she felt that the SCOTUS was in danger of being overrun with those evil conservatives!