If the Kavanaugh accusations are true...

[redleghunter]

And you forget, once again, that this is not (at this point) a legal issue...

Lol yes it is. Kavanaugh will be under oath and his statements can be used in federal court.

 

[Ringo84]

IanShapira on Twitter
Christine Blasey Ford to speak with FBI about death threats - CNNPolitics

Yes....she made it up all so she could have the pleasure of death threats and smears. Makes perfect sense.
/sarcasm
Ringo

 

[redleghunter]

So....she shouldn't receive compensation for being harassed?
Ringo

Lol Ringo her claims were never proven to be true.

 

[redleghunter]

IanShapira on Twitter
Christine Blasey Ford to speak with FBI about death threats - CNNPolitics

Yes....she made it up all so she could have the pleasure of death threats and smears. Makes perfect sense.
/sarcasm
Ringo

Feinstein had the letter for almost 3 months. It is all on her now.

 

[Kentonio]

So many people here who are so quick to assume a woman must be lying. So the guy should be automatically assumed innocent while the woman should have her life ripped apart until she can provide cast iron proof, otherwise she deserves what she gets right? Some of the responses here are truly sickening. It's no surprise that such a huge percentage of women have had to deal with rape or serious sexual assult in their lifetimes.

 

[redleghunter]

What evidence do you have of that?

Before the movie deals? $2.5 mil

Anita Hill Net Worth

 

[eleos1954]

I've head some pretty disturbing defenses, both on the news and around here re: Kavanaugh. Not so much "She's lying"; I expected that. It's the "It doesn't matter" defenses that concern me. "Boys will be boys," "just a kid," "Nothing actually happened," "just a little groping..."

I'm curious about which way the wind is blowing on this one.

Thoughts?

Well the "It doesn't matter" is wrong thinking .... no it does matter. However, in this country one is supposed to be considered innocent until proven guilty. Not sure, if statue of limitations may be in effect, I forget what state this allegedly took place in... but laws should be adhered to. If it's still in effect then she should file a criminal law suit ... and if so, then he should step down .... if not ... then he should go ahead and be appointed. It is my understanding the Democrats received info on this a few months ago. They and her should have pursued it then, they have had time. So, have the vote .... if confirmed and it still goes to trial afterwards then so be it ... just because he would then be a SCJ .... he's not beyond the law.

 

[NotreDame]

What motive would Dr Ford have in contriving such a story...

Politics and ideology, both can be very powerful motivation to lie.

 

[super animator]

So many people here who are so quick to assume a woman must be lying.

Or simply being wrong.

 

[NotreDame]

And people asserting, suggesting, or implying Ms.Ford is lying should take a moment to scrutinize the notion Ms. Ford is lying. There isn’t any evidence to show Ms. Ford is more likely than not to be lying.

To express skepticism of Ms. Ford’s account, and to have a rational basis for the skepticism, does justify one saying they cannot, with firm conviction, believe in her account, although it could still be true. This view is a reasonable position to take at the moment.

At the moment, it’s also unclear whether Kavanaugh did what she alleged. Kavanaugh’s denial has not been properly refuted or shown to be more likely than not a false denial.

Right now, the situation is a stalemate, it may remain a stalemate, and a stalemate is not enough to keep Kavanaugh off the bench.

 

[Handmaid for Jesus]

People need to understand why women wait. Please watch this video or some perspective. It is short.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

But she hasn't turned it down. She has been preparing and asking for the ridiculously short deadline set by Senate Republicans to be extended. That's not a denial.

She has asked for more than that, and you know it. She has been offered a chance to accuse Kavanaugh in front of the Senate, and if she wishes the press present, the whole country. Yet instead of jumping at the chance, she insists on extraordinary preconditions. That's as a good as a refusal.

You know the Senate Judiciary Committee doesn't have to let her speak. It would be completely within their authority to tell her that with all due respect, if she believes she has been wronged, the law has a provision for her to file a complaint, and she can make use of that. In the meantime, they have a judicial confirmation to process, and they would like to get on with that. They are under no obligation to abdicate their constitutional authority to CNN.

 

[Kentonio]

She has asked for more than that, and you know it. She has been offered a chance to accuse Kavanaugh in front of the Senate, and if she wishes the press present, the whole country. Yet instead of jumping at the chance, she insists on extraordinary preconditions. That's as a good as a refusal.

Ah yes, ‘extraordinary preconditions’ like not having to stare at the man she believes tried to rape her as she gives her account. Yeah, really ‘extraordinary’.

 

[Aldebaran]

Ah yes, ‘extraordinary preconditions’ like not having to stare at the man she believes tried to rape her as she gives her account. Yeah, really ‘extraordinary’.

That's called the right to face your accuser. Should Kavanaugh be denied that right when he's being accused of something like this?

 

[Kentonio]

That's called the right to face your accuser. Should Kavanaugh be denied that right when he's being accused of something like this?

Yep, this isn’t a court of law, and even if it was it’s a ridiculous so called right anyway. People should have a right to hear what they’re accused of and to provide a defense to those accusations. Facing your accuser just means an opportunity to intimidate an alleged victim. Unless you know of some vitally important thing that’s gained by one person staring at another across a courtroom?

 

[ToddNotTodd]

Anyone considered what the culture was like when he did that? Do you realize that it happened a lot (depending on the details) and girls were more likely to punch him in the face than call a lawyer? You can't judge someone who did something in a context you do not understand. Oh, there's some verses about that passing judgment on someone you might want to look up. It would be beneficial to you—even if you had first-hand evidence.

I was a teenager in the 80s. Guys who did what Kavanaugh is accused of were called “monsters”. And rightfully so.

Any attempt to say that behavior wasn’t as bad in the 80’s is disgusting...

 

[Aldebaran]

Yep, this isn’t a court of law, and even if it was it’s a ridiculous so called right anyway.

I was going to respond to this, but checked your country in your profile and decided it wouldn't be worth the trouble. Just wait until you're accused and come back here and tell me how it feels to be accused and not even be able to face the person who's accusing you.

People should have a right to hear what they’re accused of and to provide a defense to those accusations. Facing your accuser just means an opportunity to intimidate an alleged victim. Unless you know of some vitally important thing that’s gained by one person staring at another across a courtroom?

If someone's accusations are true, why would it be intimidating to face the person you're testifying against.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Well the "It doesn't matter" is wrong thinking .... no it does matter. However, in this country one is supposed to be considered innocent until proven guilty.

...in a court of law, to determine whether or not one should be thrown in a cell...

Personally, I think the standards for sitting on the highest court in the country should be a little stricter.

Not sure, if statue of limitations may be in effect, I forget what state this allegedly took place in... but laws should be adhered to. If it's still in effect then she should file a criminal law suit ... and if so, then he should step down .... if not ... then he should go ahead and be appointed.

Maryland, which has no statute of limitations on felony sexual abuse.

Now, it may very well be that she has no evidence that can stand up in a court, but still wanted this known.

It is my understanding the Democrats received info on this a few months ago. They and her should have pursued it then, they have had time.

But not the desire. It could be that with Kavanaugh's naked partisanship, his gambling problem, the mysterious payments that have allowed him to live well beyond his means as a federal judge, and his less-than-forthcoming answers to the Senate non-explaining these things, that the Dems didn't reasonably think he'd make it this far, and that they wouldn't have to bring Ford into the spotlight, what with the character assassinations and death threats that have subsequently come of it.

Alas, the GOP has proven to be quite intractable in fulfilling the Will of Donald.

 

[redleghunter]

So many people here who are so quick to assume a woman must be lying. So the guy should be automatically assumed innocent while the woman should have her life ripped apart until she can provide cast iron proof, otherwise she deserves what she gets right? Some of the responses here are truly sickening. It's no surprise that such a huge percentage of women have had to deal with rape or serious sexual assult in their lifetimes.

No the accuser and accused need to be fairly heard. The Senate Judiciary Committee set Monday to hear both.

Seems the system is working.

 

[Aldebaran]

...in a court of law, to determine whether or not one should be thrown in a cell...

Personally, I think the standards for sitting on the highest court in the country should be a little stricter.

So should the standards used in the process of destroying the reputation of someone aspiring to that position. Being tried in the Media isn't a very strict standard.