The Kavanaugh Smear War Broke My Decades-Long Support For Feminism

[iluvatar5150]

Link this blog. I'll read it.

Did this blog post exist before she came out, or did it magically appear after her story came out, and you are shocked it is consistent?

You don't seem to know just how many background checks the FBI does before he was ever nominated. Knowing people who actually work in the FBI, and reading the stories of numerous people who were nominated for positions in government, the FBI is extremely through. Just because the FBI didn't state in detail every single thing they investigated, does not mean they didn't.

Believe it or not, the FBI is not in the business of telling potential spies, every single method of investigation they do in the process of vetting.

And lastly, having a memoir of a party, does not indicate anything.

I went to a part decades ago. It checks off all the boxes too. I guess I'm a rapist, because I have a memoir of a party?

Again, there is zero evidence. You must provide actual evidence. Having a teenager that went to a party is not evidence of anything.

If you want the original source, I’ll have to dig for it later, but this site gives the gist of it.

Democrats seize on circumstantial July 1 theory for Kavanaugh and Ford

 

[Andrew77]

If you want the original source, I’ll have to dig for it later, but this site gives the gist of it.

Democrats seize on circumstantial July 1 theory for Kavanaugh and Ford

Huh? So your link basically re-verifies everything we already knew. No one can verify the claim, and several claim there was no party.

All we know is that on his calendar on July 1st, it has the names of the people in question, and that he went to Timmy's. That was nowhere near Ford, or anything Ford claimed. Doesn't say there was a Party. No one can collaborate the party. No one says there was a party. Doesn't say they went somewhere else. Doesn't say anyone else was there.

Evidence. I need evidence. I don't condemn people, and destroy their lives, because someone who can't remember where, or who, or what day, or what house, or where in the house, or who else was there.... said something.

That calendar is nothing of value. When they have people who say "yeah he was at this party, at this time, on this day".... and the calendar verifies that.... then you got something.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Huh? So you link basically re-verifies everything we already knew. No one can verify the claim, and several claim there was no party.

All we know is that on his calendar on July 1st, it has the names of the people in question, and that he went to Timmy's. That was nowhere near Ford, or anything Ford claimed. Doesn't say there was a Party. No one can collaborate the party. No one says there was a party. Doesn't say they went somewhere else. Doesn't say anyone else was there.

Evidence. I need evidence. I don't condemn people, and destroy their lives, because someone who can't remember where, or who, or what day, or what house, or where in the house, or who else was there.... said something.

That calendar is nothing of value. When they have people who say "yeah he was at this party, at this time, on this day".... and the calendar verifies that.... then you got something.

You asked what the FBI could've investigated. I gave you a couple possibilities and included this as an example of some investigative work that was done on the issue by some nobodies on the internet with far fewer resources than the FBI. Whether or not you find the conclusion to be sufficient for conviction is a separate matter.

 

[S.O.J.I.A.]

time for everyone to get on code..

 

[Gigimo]

 

[Ana the Ist]

I would prefer to think that ideas stand or fall on their intellectual merits rather than on the online personalities associated with them on this or that website.

That said, I couldnt even tell you what "third wave feminism" is off the top of my head.

1st wave = equal rights for women
2nd wave= equal rights for gay women
3rd wave= we hate men

 

[Sword of the Lord]

This reminds me of the 2014 or 2015 Packers/Cowboys NFC Championship Game where Dez was ruled to not have caught the ball. Cowboys fans were irate. To this day they still claim he caught it. The stat line is what it is though - an incompletion. And that will never change. And the Packers won. Crying will never change it.

 

[Ana the Ist]

The irony of posters on this thread doubting the writer's dedication to feminism because he doubted the legitimacy of the tactics used against Kavanaugh=hilarious.

 

[KCfromNC]

Trump limited what? And provide evidence.

Limits to Kavanaugh investigation have not changed, despite Trump's comments

 

[Gigimo]

Limits to Kavanaugh investigation have not changed, despite Trump's comments

Isn't that horse dead?

 

[KCfromNC]

The irony of posters on this thread doubting the writer's dedication to feminism because he doubted the legitimacy of the tactics used against Kavanaugh=hilarious.

Yeah, seriously. Everyone knows that The Federalist has really been on the forefront of feminist critique these past few years. Who could possibly doubt their position?

 

[KCfromNC]

Isn't that horse dead?

Ignore the facts for any reason you'd like.

 

[rjs330]

You asked what the FBI could've investigated. I gave you a couple possibilities and included this as an example of some investigative work that was done on the issue by some nobodies on the internet with far fewer resources than the FBI. Whether or not you find the conclusion to be sufficient for conviction is a separate matter.

Apparently you do find the conclusion sufficient. Despite there is no evidence to the claims of assault. In fact there is enough evidence from Ford's own witnesses that say they can't support her claims.

I sure don't want you on a jury if that flimsy enough stuff is enough for you.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Apparently you do find the conclusion sufficient.

Apparently you don't read the thread before commenting.

Despite there is no evidence to the claims of assault. In fact there is enough evidence from Ford's own witnesses that say they can't support her claims.

I sure don't want you on a jury if that flimsy enough stuff is enough for you.

Let's recap, shall we? This was my first comment in this thread on the substance of the allegations against Kavanaugh:

@NightHawkeye said:
Perhaps because there was not a single substantiated allegation. Not one.

Nor was there any serious attempt to investigate them.

Were some on the left too quick to condemn Kavanaugh? Perhaps. But IME, most people at least wanted the allegations investigated. And either way, the right was WAY too quick to exonerate him.

Later, I said:

[The July 1 theory is] certainly not definitive proof of anything, but it is circumstantial evidence that’s consistent with her story.

That's it. I never said Kavanaugh was guilty. I never said that there was proof that he was guilty. I was talking about possible avenues of investigations and how Republicans just glossed over them.

But hey, if you want to keep misconstruing what I said, I can continue pointing out how you're wrong.

 

[Gigimo]

Ignore the facts for any reason you'd like.

There are other articles that refute that you know, a better search engine might help.

 

[Kentonio]

The irony of posters on this thread doubting the writer's dedication to feminism because he doubted the legitimacy of the tactics used against Kavanaugh=hilarious.

Aren’t we mostly just asking who the writer actually is, given that none of us had ever heard of them, and they don’t seem to actually be anyone in any way noteworthy?

 

[iluvatar5150]

The irony of posters on this thread doubting the writer's dedication to feminism because he doubted the legitimacy of the tactics used against Kavanaugh=hilarious.

We're doubting his dedication to feminism because this seems like an odd thing to make one just give up on the whole movement.

 

[KCfromNC]

There are other articles that refute that you know, a better search engine might help.

Says the guy who can't post even a single link to back up their claims.

 

[whatbogsends]

I've been following this issue since the start of it. Everything I'm about to say, is to the absolute best of my knowledge.

If you have more information to provide and consider, I'd love to ready it.

You claim there was no serious attempt to investigate the claims. By everything I've read, that is false. The FBI did as through an investigation as they could.

The problem isn't that they didn't put in the effort to investigate, but rather that there simply wasn't anything to investigate.

Where was the party? She doesn't remember.
Who was there? She doesn't remember.
What specific day? What time? Day? Night? How many people?

Nothing. She provided zero details, for investigators to investigate. The first step in this investigation would be to find where the party was, so that they could establish where to start interviewing people, to find out who was there, and then start trying to get statements supporting that she and the guy was even at the party.

They can't even do that, because we have no idea where, who, or even if there was a party.

Seriously, how would you investigate this? There is no location to visit, no witnesses to interview, no neighbors to talk to, to verify there was even a party.

So my answer to you is, no. You are wrong. We were not 'too quick' to exonerate him. There was zero evidence against him. And your own post proves that.



I take allegations seriously when there is evidence supporting the allegations. I'm sorry, but merely saying "iluvatar5150 raped my daughter" is not enough to take seriously. You have to have actually been near my daughter at some point that can be supported, and my daughter has to actually report such a thing, or talk to someone who is willing to support the allegation.

In short, it has to be more than a claim. Something, anything, has to support the claim.

Saying his yearbook has dumb statements, is not evidence supporting rape. Saying he drinks, is not evidence support rape either. By the way, congress is the largest group of drunks in the country. The emails do not show evidence of rape.

If you want to make your case, then make your case that he could have been involved in rape. You can't accuse someone of rape, and then point to a yearbook, beer, and emails, and then complain we are not taking the accusation seriously.

Your own post proves why no one should take your claims seriously. Honestly, I was far more open to the possibility of Kavanaugh having committed rape, before you tried to support the claim with nonsensical crap evidence.

If someone accused you of rape, and said "and here's your yearbook which proves you can't credibly deny you raped someone".... you would freak out at the injustice of that argument. You would never accept that argument if someone was accusing you.

You either fail to comprehend or are deliberately ignoring what is being said. No one is claiming "his yearbook statements are evidence that he raped Ford", what they are saying is that he clearly and deliberately lied, under oath, about the meanings of things written in his yearbook. Boofing, Renate Alumnus, and Devil's Triangle among the most 3 notable. Lying under oath is perjury. It has little bearing on whether or not he sexually assaulted Ford, but it has plenty of bearing as to whether he's fit to sit as a Supreme Court Justice.

 

[rambot]

The irony of posters on this thread doubting the writer's dedication to feminism because he doubted the legitimacy of the tactics used against Kavanaugh=hilarious.

When's the last time your professional dedications were undermined by one single event? If the whole purpose of your job aligns with one philosophy and one single event occurs that undermines it, I would question how dedicated you really were to begin with.

I don't understand why that would be funny. I mean, if Rand Paul suddenly became a socialist, that would be shocking and worthy of some serious consideration, But that didn't happen to Paul.

And I'm incredulous that it happenned to that guy.