Not being a judge or jury and being a private citizen, I am within my rights to believe that he may be guilty of the actions he is accused of.
Absolutely....in fact, as this is a nation that values individual freedoms, you're well within your rights to believe just about anything. You could believe that Hitler had some valid foreign policies...you could believe the earth is flat...you could believe that your dreams predict the future when correctly interpreted. The freedom to believe as you will and the freedom to express those beliefs is a right guaranteed by a bunch of old wealthy white men who helped create this nation long ago.
It's worth mentioning though....that I have the right to disagree, and just as if you held any of the beliefs I listed above, I think it's important for people like me to explain why your beliefs are wrong.
My post was a direct response to your incredulous question about whether or not the investigation might change anyone's mind. I can say that the results of the investigation may very well change my opinion of the matter. Based on what I've seen, there's nothing that absolutely convinces me of his guilt. Evidence suggests it, but there's room for error or misinterpretation there.
Fair enough.
Ford's testimony is evidence. Kavenaugh's calendar is evidence. Ford having discussed the incident with her therapist in 2012 is evidence. As I said, it's circumstantial, but it is evidence nonetheless.
Ford's testimony is the accusation. It can contain evidence (things like the time this occurred, the location, other people who were present, etc)....but that's the part that stands out to me the most, it doesn't actually contain any evidence. She's named people who she remembers being there....but from what I've read, not a single one is willing to say under oath that they were in fact there.
I'll state that I do think it's likely that someone had an incident with her...but I don't think she accurately remembers who it was or what really happened. That, or she's leaving out details about the incident which might put her in a less flattering light. For example, there's aspects of her testimony that don't make much sense. She claimed to have gone to this house with her friend after swimming...yet she doesn't recall why. I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that it was because they wanted to do some drinking. If you're a parent, or if you were ever a teenager who drank at parties, then you know how this would sound coming from a 14yo.....
Parent- "So these older boys were drinking and there weren't any parents home?"
14yo Girl- "Yeah"
Parent- "So what were you and your friend doing there? You know you aren't supposed to be hanging out with older boys who are drinking...I don't care if it was the middle of the afternoon."
14yo Girl- "We were just hanging out."
Parent- "Why not hang out at the club? You already had your swimsuit...why go there?
14yo Girl- "Well...I don't really remember why we went."
You wouldn't believe this story from your daughter, and the only reason to believe it now is because it's 36 years later. It's a couple of teenage girls who were hanging out with a group of older guys who were drinking...you think they were there just to socialize or kill time? I don't, I think it's likely that one or both girls had a crush on one or more of the guys...and chances are they were drinking too.
Then there's the matter of the swimsuit. Unless I'm mistaken, she claiming to have had it on for hours underneath her clothes. Is there anyone who wouldn't have used the bathroom for five minutes and removed it? A completely dry swimsuit is uncomfortable under regular clothes after just 10 minutes...why keep it on for hours? I don't think she did...I think she wants to avoid the appearance of deception. She doesn't want anyone to think that perhaps she wore the swimsuit out because she didn't want her parents to know she was going with a friend to hang out with some boys. Older boys with alcohol no less.
Then there's the "I went upstairs to use the bathroom part"...why? Why not not use the one downstairs? Moreover, why would two guys...even drunk guys...follow her as she went to use the bathroom with the intent of raping her? There aren't many guys who are turned on by the specific fetish involved there....and I would imagine that number drops further amongst 16yo guys.
Does it seem a little more plausible that maybe, just maybe, she went up there with the boy she liked after having some drinks with the intention of just making out....then as things began to go further than she intended....she tried to get him to stop, which he was reluctant to do, but he eventually did or was interrupted by another person there?
If that was the story she told, I'd be more inclined to believe it. I'd also like to say that if some kind of sexual assault took place...obviously none of those things I mentioned would excuse it or in any way make it her fault. The idea that two giys, whoever they are, just decided atcthe drop of a hat to rape a 14yo girl they had just met seems unlikely. There's usually more to these stories than the victim mentions.
His handling of judicial appointments during the bush administration, his handling of stolen documents from Democratic congressmen, his claims about the Maryland drinking age, his explanations of the statements in his yearbook. They've been detailed multiple times in this and other threads.
I've never heard of the judicial appointments, stolen documents, or the "drinking age"....though I did hear his explanation for the yearbook, and it does sound like a lie....but I certainly can't prove it.
If you'd like to explain or provide links for the rest, I'll read it.
As someone on the left, I don't see this apart from a few fringe elements on the extreme left. These views are not anything that "The Left" as a group is pushing.
Really? Have you been living overseas or something?
What would you say are the top 3 issues the left is pushing these days?
Any fallout from his demonstrated actions is on him. I doubt the attempted rape allegations will have any significant effect on his future career though, assuming that no further evidence is uncovered. Sure, he'll have to deal with a few weeks of discomfort, but that's part of being a public figure.
That's incredible to me that you believe that. I've seen people lose jobs simply because social media claimed they did something that was "racist". The idea that these rape accusations won't affect the rest of his life seems unlikely.
