View Full Version : Warning: Ford and Kavanaugh Senate Hearing
Chloe
09-27-2018, 02:56 PM
I'm hoping this thread will be balanced and mature unlike some of the other current ones, so please try to follow the rules and be respectful.
So far if I were to compare and contrast the opening statements between Dr. Ford and Brett Kavanaugh my personal opinion is that Ford's opening statement to me came across as believable and sympathetic and I don't doubt that something happened to her, however, Kavanaugh's opening statement to me comes across as truth and defensively sincere. We will see how the Q&A session goes between the senators and Kavanaugh, but his opening statement does not seem like he is hiding something or putting on a conniving act in my opinion. Many of you know that I am not someone that leans to the right, i'm consistent in my beliefs and ideals, I am not a fan of Trump, and obviously Kavanaugh and I probably don't see eye to eye on political issues. But I just flat out don't believe he was the person that abused Dr. Ford. I think he is just as much of a victim as Dr. Ford at this point, and it's sad all around.
What are your thoughts?
Adelaide
09-27-2018, 03:13 PM
I caught the tail end of the inquisition and I found him to be excessively defensive, but that could be caused by a million things, including the level of offense he would (rightly) feel if this turns out to be false.
Hoosier8
09-27-2018, 03:19 PM
I'm hoping this thread will be balanced and mature unlike some of the other current ones, so please try to follow the rules and be respectful.
So far if I were to compare and contrast the opening statements between Dr. Ford and Brett Kavanaugh my personal opinion is that Ford's opening statement to me came across as believable and sympathetic and I don't doubt that something happened to her, however, Kavanaugh's opening statement to me comes across as truth and defensively sincere. We will see how the Q&A session goes between the senators and Kavanaugh, but his opening statement does not seem like he is hiding something or putting on a conniving act in my opinion. Many of you know that I am not someone that leans to the right, i'm consistent in my beliefs and ideals, I am not a fan of Trump, and obviously Kavanaugh and I probably don't see eye to eye on political issues. But I just flat out don't believe he was the person that abused Dr. Ford. I think he is just as much of a victim as Dr. Ford at this point, and it's sad all around.
What are your thoughts?
The real crime is how the democrats have handled this. There was plenty of time to include this in the confirmation hearings no matter their excuse.
This is an unprovable he said she said and no FBI investigation would prove otherwise as Biden previously stated years ago.
This is also a dangerous ploy to both the process and American justice. It has been turned into an embarrassing circus.
The Xl
09-27-2018, 03:42 PM
I think there are too many holes in the story and that it happened too long ago for it to be believable.
Mister D
09-27-2018, 03:45 PM
I think there are too many holes in the story and that it happened too long ago for it to be believable.
It's the timing that troubles me. That raises a huge red flag and the lack of details doesn't help. It has the appearance of a desperate last minute ploy to derail his nomination.
Mister D
09-27-2018, 03:47 PM
I'm hoping this thread will be balanced and mature unlike some of the other current ones, so please try to follow the rules and be respectful.
So far if I were to compare and contrast the opening statements between Dr. Ford and Brett Kavanaugh my personal opinion is that Ford's opening statement to me came across as believable and sympathetic and I don't doubt that something happened to her, however, Kavanaugh's opening statement to me comes across as truth and defensively sincere. We will see how the Q&A session goes between the senators and Kavanaugh, but his opening statement does not seem like he is hiding something or putting on a conniving act in my opinion. Many of you know that I am not someone that leans to the right, i'm consistent in my beliefs and ideals, I am not a fan of Trump, and obviously Kavanaugh and I probably don't see eye to eye on political issues. But I just flat out don't believe he was the person that abused Dr. Ford. I think he is just as much of a victim as Dr. Ford at this point, and it's sad all around.
What are your thoughts?
If something really did happen to Ford in the circles she and Kavanaugh hung out in that would help explain how she can rationalize these allegations.
Chris
09-27-2018, 04:58 PM
Missed his opening statement, listening to his questioning. He was just asked about private questioning before the committee, questioing about his personal life and that the accusation wasn't mentioned even though Ford had already written her letter to Feinstein....
I'll say what I said after her testimony. Nothing has changed. I think she's telling what she believes is the truth, and so is he. Nothing has been accomplished. If he's defensive it's because he's being accused.
Hoosier8
09-27-2018, 05:00 PM
Dems refuses to participate in the Senate investigation. Telling.
Common
09-27-2018, 05:04 PM
Chloe the entire events surrounding these allegations, how old they are, how long the democrats knew and sat on them. The way they are trying to delay, makes it all very suspect and very hard to believe.
If they are true the democrats did this woman a great disservice using her for their gain. If its not true democrats who orchestrated this should be spit on in the street.
Chris
09-27-2018, 05:13 PM
What went wrong here is some people have lost all sense of what is a general principle of civilization. The Death of Reason and the Slaying of Civility (https://cafehayek.com/2018/09/death-reason-slaying-civility.html) says it well:
The noir parade that is the march of at-least-as-yet unsubstantiated accusations that young Brett Kavanaugh serially committed indecent, and even heinous, sexual offenses against women has left me more despondent than I can ever recall being about American liberalism (by which I mean classical liberalism). I simply – and I mean this claim literally – cannot begin to begin to begin to begin to understand why so many of my fellow Americans are oblivious to the dangers of imposing the burden of proof or of persuasion upon the accused.
That Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing is not a criminal trial is, of course, true. But this fact does nothing whatsoever to change the logic of how civilized, decent, truth-respecting people assess claims of wrongdoing, no matter how paltry or grievous. And this logic has two essential component parts. First, any accuser must have something more than the accusation itself. Second, the accused is presumed innocent of the charge until and unless the accuser makes a reasonable argument that the accusation is true.
...I’m tempted to conclude that if we human beings routinely treated accusations alone as sufficient proof of, if not their absolute validity, at least of their presumptive validity, that civilization would be practically impossible. I think that this conclusion is likely correct. But, perhaps, it’s too strong. So I’ll conclude instead by saying that if we human beings routinely treated accusations alone as sufficient proof of, if not their absolute validity, at least of their presumptive validity, civilization as we know it would not exist. Whatever civilization we would then be members of would look and feel radically different from that which we now know.
Hoosier8
09-27-2018, 05:22 PM
Booker is such a tool. Interrupts about every answer.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 05:42 PM
I'm hoping this thread will be balanced and mature unlike some of the other current ones, so please try to follow the rules and be respectful.
So far if I were to compare and contrast the opening statements between Dr. Ford and Brett Kavanaugh my personal opinion is that Ford's opening statement to me came across as believable and sympathetic and I don't doubt that something happened to her, however, Kavanaugh's opening statement to me comes across as truth and defensively sincere. We will see how the Q&A session goes between the senators and Kavanaugh, but his opening statement does not seem like he is hiding something or putting on a conniving act in my opinion. Many of you know that I am not someone that leans to the right, i'm consistent in my beliefs and ideals, I am not a fan of Trump, and obviously Kavanaugh and I probably don't see eye to eye on political issues. But I just flat out don't believe he was the person that abused Dr. Ford. I think he is just as much of a victim as Dr. Ford at this point, and it's sad all around.
What are your thoughts?
It's very difficult to determine where an accused's emotions come from. Sometimes it's the righteous indignation of the innocent and sometimes it's from a narcissistic belief of the guilty that they shouldn't be punished for something that they don't/didn't find all that important or see as wrong or simply the realization that they are not getting away with it. It's a bit like the way 3-year-olds cry when they have to give back something they took away from someone else. It's a skewed sense of fairness or justice, mixed with frustration.
Chris
09-27-2018, 05:48 PM
It's very difficult to determine where an accused's emotions come from. Sometimes it's the righteous indignation of the innocent and sometimes it's from a narcissistic belief of the guilty that they shouldn't be punished for something that they don't/didn't find all that important or see as wrong or simply the realization that they are not getting away with it. It's a bit like the way 3-year-olds cry when they have to give back something they took away from someone else. It's a skewed sense of fairness or justice, mixed with frustration.
Those are imaginative possibilities but do you have any evidence whatsoever for associating them with the accused here?
Standing Wolf
09-27-2018, 05:49 PM
Judge Kavanaugh had his talking points, which he kept repeating in lieu of answering the Committee's questions...taking up their time with his rambling non-answers. I feel absolutely comfortable stating that if an attorney arguing before him ever responded to his questioning in that manner, they would find themselves being held in contempt in a New York minute.
Chris
09-27-2018, 05:59 PM
Judge Kavanaugh had his talking points, which he kept repeating in lieu of answering the Committee's questions...taking up their time with his rambling non-answers. I feel absolutely comfortable stating that if an attorney arguing before him ever responded to his questioning in that manner, they would find themselves being held in contempt in a New York minute.
Well, some senators were trying to insinuate presumptions with their loaded questions, like the last one would he call for an FBI investigation. It's not his, the accused's place to do that. As he answered, directly, it was the Senate committee's and he would go with what they asked for.
Do judges often ask insinuating and presumptuous questions of lawyers?
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 06:00 PM
Those are imaginative possibilities but do you have any evidence whatsoever for associating them with the accused here?
Other than by way of suggesting that the tears of an accused do not necessarily imply innocence? No. I thought that was clear.
Chris
09-27-2018, 06:03 PM
The one thing that bothered me is much ado was made of the effects of these hearing and the public disclosure of the accusations on them and their families, on Ford's part, especially, but also Kavanaugh's. I'm sure it garners sympathy but is mere emotional appeal that strays from the facts. IOW, her suffering public exposre, not his, makes their statement more or less true.
Chris
09-27-2018, 06:04 PM
Other than by way of suggesting that the tears of an accused do not necessarily imply innocence? No. I thought that was clear.
Right, tears imply nothing. Nor Ford's shakey, emotional voice.
Captdon
09-27-2018, 06:11 PM
I thought he was too emotional in his opening statement. I though he was going to be ripped by the Democrats.
His handling of the questions was great. I doubt anyone will change their mind about it.
I do think that the Republicans will get him confirmed.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 06:12 PM
Right, tears imply nothing. Nor Ford's shakey, emotional voice.
Well, if they were fake, she missed her calling as an actress.
Captdon
09-27-2018, 06:16 PM
Judge Kavanaugh had his talking points, which he kept repeating in lieu of answering the Committee's questions...taking up their time with his rambling non-answers. I feel absolutely comfortable stating that if an attorney arguing before him ever responded to his questioning in that manner, they would find themselves being held in contempt in a New York minute.
The very thing you say about him is true of every one Democratic Senators. What's your point?
Captdon
09-27-2018, 06:20 PM
Other than by way of suggesting that the tears of an accused do not necessarily imply innocence? No. I thought that was clear.
You are one of the ones who proclaimed him guilty from minute one. The tears of the accuser do not imply that he is guilty. What's your point?
Hoosier8
09-27-2018, 06:22 PM
Judge Kavanaugh had his talking points, which he kept repeating in lieu of answering the Committee's questions...taking up their time with his rambling non-answers. I feel absolutely comfortable stating that if an attorney arguing before him ever responded to his questioning in that manner, they would find themselves being held in contempt in a New York minute.
Yet he was the ONLY one to present ANY evidence of that time period.
Captdon
09-27-2018, 06:22 PM
Well, if they were fake, she missed her calling as an actress.
Maybe she did. Chloe hoped for a civil and rational discussion this one time. You screwed that.
Chris
09-27-2018, 06:36 PM
Well, if they were fake, she missed her calling as an actress.
I didn't imply they were fake. Are you implying his were? Why? Where I saw him get emotional was talking about his little girl and her wisdom in not judging Ford.
stjames1_53
09-27-2018, 06:40 PM
Missed his opening statement, listening to his questioning. He was just asked about private questioning before the committee, questioing about his personal life and that the accusation wasn't mentioned even though Ford had already written her letter to Feinstein....
I'll say what I said after her testimony. Nothing has changed. I think she's telling what she believes is the truth, and so is he. Nothing has been accomplished. If he's defensive it's because he's being accused.
we watched the whole circus.............This was a political battlefield with these two in the middle. Feinstein sold out Ford to keep Trump's appointment from going forward.
The shining moment came from Graham, (D) without a doubt
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 06:45 PM
Maybe she did. Chloe hoped for a civil and rational discussion this one time. You screwed that.
How is that?
stjames1_53
09-27-2018, 06:57 PM
It's very difficult to determine where an accused's emotions come from. Sometimes it's the righteous indignation of the innocent and sometimes it's from a narcissistic belief of the guilty that they shouldn't be punished for something that they don't/didn't find all that important or see as wrong or simply the realization that they are not getting away with it. It's a bit like the way 3-year-olds cry when they have to give back something they took away from someone else. It's a skewed sense of fairness or justice, mixed with frustration.
I thought you claimed this was NOT an investigation, yet you banter words like "accused" around...so this WAS a trial, not an interview. Even Graham said as much. A democrat, not less
roadmaster
09-27-2018, 07:08 PM
I don't look at feeling, the facts are there is no evidence. I don't care if he cried or she did. Emotions don't make a person guilty or innocent. I listened to them but refused to watch them. Facts are the only thing that matters.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 07:10 PM
I didn't imply they were fake.
I'm sorry, but this came across as suggesting that she was faking: "Right, tears imply nothing. Nor Ford's shakey, emotional voice."
Are you implying his were? Why? Where I saw him get emotional was talking about his little girl and her wisdom in not judging Ford.
I'm not implying anything other than the fact that the tears of accused persons can't be taken automatically as evidence of innocence. If you don't believe me, ask any cop, D.A. or specialist in criminal psychology. The tears are real, the reasons behind them come from very different places. Making accusations up out of whole cloth complete with believable emotion, on the other hand, requires particularly strong acting skills and/or a lot of practice.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 07:12 PM
I thought you claimed this was NOT an investigation, yet you banter words like "accused" around...so this WAS a trial, not an interview. Even Graham said as much. A democrat, not less
He is being accused, is he not? That's why I used that term. Don't read too much into it.
Safety
09-27-2018, 07:13 PM
How is that?
It didn't happen, he is lying.
gamewell45
09-27-2018, 07:14 PM
At this point, I don't know who to believe. Both made compelling statements. This is going to be a tough one.
Crepitus
09-27-2018, 07:17 PM
I'm hoping this thread will be balanced and mature unlike some of the other current ones, so please try to follow the rules and be respectful.
So far if I were to compare and contrast the opening statements between Dr. Ford and Brett Kavanaugh my personal opinion is that Ford's opening statement to me came across as believable and sympathetic and I don't doubt that something happened to her, however, Kavanaugh's opening statement to me comes across as truth and defensively sincere. We will see how the Q&A session goes between the senators and Kavanaugh, but his opening statement does not seem like he is hiding something or putting on a conniving act in my opinion. Many of you know that I am not someone that leans to the right, i'm consistent in my beliefs and ideals, I am not a fan of Trump, and obviously Kavanaugh and I probably don't see eye to eye on political issues. But I just flat out don't believe he was the person that abused Dr. Ford. I think he is just as much of a victim as Dr. Ford at this point, and it's sad all around.
What are your thoughts?
I disagree, Bart O'Kavanaugh came out of the gate angry and defensive. His belligerent opening statement was nothing more than a hearty "how DARE you!" As far as I could tell
roadmaster
09-27-2018, 07:20 PM
Anyone that looks at feeling instead of facts shouldn't be on a jury.
Hoosier8
09-27-2018, 07:23 PM
I disagree, Bart O'Kavanaugh came out of the gate angry and defensive. His belligerent opening statement was nothing more than a hearty "how DARE you!" As far as I could tell
You don’t know much about how innocent men react to false accusations.
Chris
09-27-2018, 07:24 PM
we watched the whole circus.............This was a political battlefield with these two in the middle. Feinstein sold out Ford to keep Trump's appointment from going forward.
The shining moment came from Graham, (D) without a doubt
Yes, it was all politics.
Who leaked the letter?
Crepitus
09-27-2018, 07:25 PM
You don’t know much about how innocent men react to false accusations.
Or maybe you don't.
Chris
09-27-2018, 07:30 PM
Other than by way of suggesting that the tears of an accused do not necessarily imply innocence? No. I thought that was clear.
Right, tears imply nothing. Nor Ford's shakey, emotional voice.
Well, if they were fake, she missed her calling as an actress.
I didn't imply they were fake. Are you implying his were? Why? Where I saw him get emotional was talking about his little girl and her wisdom in not judging Ford.
I'm sorry, but this came across as suggesting that she was faking: "Right, tears imply nothing. Nor Ford's shakey, emotional voice."
I'm not implying anything other than the fact that the tears of accused persons can't be taken automatically as evidence of innocence. If you don't believe me, ask any cop, D.A. or specialist in criminal psychology. The tears are real, the reasons behind them come from very different places. Making accusations up out of whole cloth complete with believable emotion, on the other hand, requires particularly strong acting skills and/or a lot of practice.
Yet, if you examine our exchange, you will see you admitting emotions say nothing and me agreeing with you for Kavanaaugh and for Ford. How you got an impression of faking out of that agreement is beyond me, and, apparently, your ability to explain.
Let's circle the wagons as you have started:
I'm not implying anything other than the fact that the tears of accused persons can't be taken automatically as evidence of innocence....
Right, tears imply nothing. Nor Ford's shakey, emotional voice.
Not interested in amatuer psychoanalyzing, I stop at teats and shakey voice and all the emotional appeal in the world mean nothing to a rational judgement.
Chris
09-27-2018, 07:31 PM
He is being accused, is he not? That's why I used that term. Don't read too much into it.
Yes, let's not "read too much into it."
Chris
09-27-2018, 07:32 PM
It didn't happen, he is lying.
Who is lying, and where? This time, for once, actually demonstrate lying.
stjames1_53
09-27-2018, 07:34 PM
He is being accused, is he not? That's why I used that term. Don't read too much into it.
you don't interview an accused. You interrogate them, just like the fricking dems did......................at the end of this day, nothing has been resolved in your mind. You're still convinced, as you were when first broke, that Kavanaugh was absolutely guilty. She has absolutely nothing to support her claim, he did, however. and You've turned your nose up to that.
This was not an interrogation as it was to be an interview. When was the last time you had to defend against a false claim while interviewing for a job.
Graham was right, you guys are despicable and deplorable................
Chris
09-27-2018, 07:34 PM
At this point, I don't know who to believe. Both made compelling statements. This is going to be a tough one.
Agree. Both were believable. Both could be telling the truth as they recall it. It is tough, if you have to pick one over the other. But you don't. Innocence must be presumed in any civil world and guilt must be demonstrated.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 07:47 PM
Yet, if you examine our exchange, you will see you admitting emotions say nothing and me agreeing with you for Kavanaaugh and for Ford. How you got an impression of faking out of that agreement is beyond me, and, apparently, your ability to explain.
Let's circle the wagons as you have started:
Right, tears imply nothing. Nor Ford's shakey, emotional voice.
Not interested in amatuer psychoanalyzing, I stop at teats and shakey voice and all the emotional appeal in the world mean nothing to a rational judgement.
First of all, I was not psychoanalyzing Kavanaugh. I was commenting in general as to whether or not a display of emotion is a sign of innocence in an accused person. Since viewers of the interview have no other basis for judgment, I'm just saying that tears cannot be taken as proof of innocence.
The tears of an accuser are different. Either they are reflecting genuine emotion whether they are accusing the right person or the wrong person, or they are completely contrived.
Absent a real investigation of all parties and potential witnesses, this questioning was nothing more than reality TV.
Chloe
09-27-2018, 08:00 PM
First of all, I was not psychoanalyzing Kavanaugh. I was commenting in general as to whether or not a display of emotion is a sign of innocence in an accused person. Since viewers of the interview have no other basis for judgment, I'm just saying that tears cannot be taken as proof of innocence.
The tears of an accuser are different. Either they are reflecting genuine emotion whether they are accusing the right person or the wrong person, or they are completely contrived.
Absent a real investigation of all parties and potential witnesses, this questioning was nothing more than reality TV.
To be fair I cry when i'm angry, sad, and happy. Ive cried before getting into arguments on here, as silly as that sounds, and so if I felt like I was wrongly accused of sexual assault and had my family subjected to all kinds of harsh words i'd cry through my anger as well.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 08:03 PM
you don't interview an accused. You interrogate them, just like the fricking dems did......................at the end of this day, nothing has been resolved in your mind. You're still convinced, as you were when first broke, that Kavanaugh was absolutely guilty. She has absolutely nothing to support her claim, he did, however. and You've turned your nose up to that.
This was not an interrogation as it was to be an interview. When was the last time you had to defend against a false claim while interviewing for a job.
Graham was right, you guys are despicable and deplorable................
Emotional response, laden with accusations and political fervor. If Kavanaugh is not permitted to become a SCOTUS judge, there is a list of other conservative candidates, one of whom will take his place. It's a lifetime appointment or at least the next 20-30 years. A judge with that kind of cloud hanging over his head will have some of his judgments unduly scrutinized, criticized and turned into a media circus. Even those inclined to believe him will still always wonder and worry that he could be blackmailed into changing his decisions. Unless he is exonerated by an actual investigation, he will be a liability on the bench.
Captdon
09-27-2018, 08:04 PM
How is that?
Read your post. You aren't stupid.
Chris
09-27-2018, 08:07 PM
First of all, I was not psychoanalyzing Kavanaugh. I was commenting in general as to whether or not a display of emotion is a sign of innocence in an accused person. Since viewers of the interview have no other basis for judgment, I'm just saying that tears cannot be taken as proof of innocence.
The tears of an accuser are different. Either they are reflecting genuine emotion whether they are accusing the right person or the wrong person, or they are completely contrived.
Absent a real investigation of all parties and potential witnesses, this questioning was nothing more than reality TV.
Reality TV brought to us by Democrats.
There is still the principle of innocent till proven guilty. A standard most of us follow.
Captdon
09-27-2018, 08:08 PM
I disagree, Bart O'Kavanaugh came out of the gate angry and defensive. His belligerent opening statement was nothing more than a hearty "how DARE you!" As far as I could tell
which is exactly the way he should have come out. You're name game is childish, Creepitus
Chris
09-27-2018, 08:09 PM
To be fair I cry when i'm angry, sad, and happy. Ive cried before getting into arguments on here, as silly as that sounds, and so if I felt like I was wrongly accused of sexual assault and had my family subjected to all kinds of harsh words i'd cry through my anger as well.
It's something people do, no need to dismiss psychoanalytically. Kavanaugh got emotional talking about how wise his daughter was not to blame Ford.
Captdon
09-27-2018, 08:09 PM
Who is lying, and where? This time, for once, actually demonstrate lying.
Originally Posted by Safety
It didn't happen, he is lying.
He is doing just that.
Hoosier8
09-27-2018, 08:10 PM
Emotional response, laden with accusations and political fervor. If Kavanaugh is not permitted to become a SCOTUS judge, there is a list of other conservative candidates, one of whom will take his place. It's a lifetime appointment or at least the next 20-30 years. A judge with that kind of cloud hanging over his head will have some of his judgments unduly scrutinized, criticized and turned into a media circus. Even those inclined to believe him will still always wonder and worry that he could be blackmailed into changing his decisions. Unless he is exonerated by an actual investigation, he will be a liability on the bench.
In other words, a political hit job is successful if the Senate allows this sort of shenanigans.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 08:10 PM
To be fair I cry when i'm angry, sad, and happy. Ive cried before getting into arguments on here, as silly as that sounds, and so if I felt like I was wrongly accused of sexual assault and had my family subjected to all kinds of harsh words i'd cry through my anger as well.
I understand. The only point I am making is that emotions can't be taken at face value. This questioning proves nothing other than satisfying the public need for a mock trial. As I said, it was a reality TV moment, but none of it proves anything.
Chris
09-27-2018, 08:10 PM
Emotional response, laden with accusations and political fervor. If Kavanaugh is not permitted to become a SCOTUS judge, there is a list of other conservative candidates, one of whom will take his place. It's a lifetime appointment or at least the next 20-30 years. A judge with that kind of cloud hanging over his head will have some of his judgments unduly scrutinized, criticized and turned into a media circus. Even those inclined to believe him will still always wonder and worry that he could be blackmailed into changing his decisions. Unless he is exonerated by an actual investigation, he will be a liability on the bench.
Like Justice Thomas?
ripmeister
09-27-2018, 08:12 PM
Emotional response, laden with accusations and political fervor. If Kavanaugh is not permitted to become a SCOTUS judge, there is a list of other conservative candidates, one of whom will take his place. It's a lifetime appointment or at least the next 20-30 years. A judge with that kind of cloud hanging over his head will have some of his judgments unduly scrutinized, criticized and turned into a media circus. Even those inclined to believe him will still always wonder and worry that he could be blackmailed into changing his decisions. Unless he is exonerated by an actual investigation, he will be a liability on the bench.
A corollary to this was K's accusations of a vast left wing conspiracy which he relayed with quite a bit of anger. How will that affect his judicial decisions when liberal groups come before him on the court.
countryboy
09-27-2018, 08:12 PM
I disagree, Bart O'Kavanaugh came out of the gate angry and defensive. His belligerent opening statement was nothing more than a hearty "how DARE you!" As far as I could tell
All looks yellow to the jaundiced eye.
Soooo, how should an innocent man act when confronted with such heinous allegations? I have a feeling if he had been meek your reaction would've been, "SEE! LOOK HOW MEEK HE IS!!!!! GUILTY!!!!!! AHHHHHHHHRGH!!!!!
countryboy
09-27-2018, 08:17 PM
Emotional response, laden with accusations and political fervor. If Kavanaugh is not permitted to become a SCOTUS judge, there is a list of other conservative candidates, one of whom will take his place. It's a lifetime appointment or at least the next 20-30 years. A judge with that kind of cloud hanging over his head will have some of his judgments unduly scrutinized, criticized and turned into a media circus. Even those inclined to believe him will still always wonder and worry that he could be blackmailed into changing his decisions. Unless he is exonerated by an actual investigation, he will be a liability on the bench.
Lol. Nice regurgitation of the issued talking points. Did you know the domain name "stopamyconeybarrett" has already been purchased? Yeah, leftist loons will never stop.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 08:17 PM
In other words, a political hit job is successful if the Senate allows this sort of shenanigans.
It depends on how patient the Senate is. If they are willing to wait for a real investigation to take place, then Kavanaugh will either be proven innocent or guilty. If appointing a justice to SCOTUS immediately is more important, then it is what it is - political expediency or justice.
Captdon
09-27-2018, 08:19 PM
you don't interview an accused. You interrogate them, just like the fricking dems did......................at the end of this day, nothing has been resolved in your mind. You're still convinced, as you were when first broke, that Kavanaugh was absolutely guilty. She has absolutely nothing to support her claim, he did, however. and You've turned your nose up to that.
This was not an interrogation as it was to be an interview. When was the last time you had to defend against a false claim while interviewing for a job.
Graham was right, you guys are despicable and deplorable................
She said she never talked to anyone about it until she went to therapy. Today she said she talked to others over the years. Lie.
She said she didn't tell her husband until therapy. Today she said she told him right after they married. Lie.
She said she talked to a friend right after it happened. The friend, under penalty of a felony.Witness said she didn't. Lie.
She claims to remember little except the attack. Today she talked about then bouncing off the stairwell walls and the conversations down in the living room. A lie.
Captdon
09-27-2018, 08:24 PM
Emotional response, laden with accusations and political fervor. If Kavanaugh is not permitted to become a SCOTUS judge, there is a list of other conservative candidates, one of whom will take his place. It's a lifetime appointment or at least the next 20-30 years. A judge with that kind of cloud hanging over his head will have some of his judgments unduly scrutinized, criticized and turned into a media circus. Even those inclined to believe him will still always wonder and worry that he could be blackmailed into changing his decisions. Unless he is exonerated by an actual investigation, he will be a liability on the bench.
A load of bunk. Only liberals would do that and they would anyway. He will be one of nine justices. He will be a liability only to liberals.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 08:27 PM
Reality TV brought to us by Democrats.
There is still the principle of innocent till proven guilty. A standard most of us follow.
You cannot prove innocence or guilt without a proper investigation. With now, I believe, 4 accusers, it's no longer just a 'he said', 'she said' situation.
Captdon
09-27-2018, 08:29 PM
A corollary to this was K's accusations of a vast left wing conspiracy which he relayed with quite a bit of anger. How will that affect his judicial decisions when liberal groups come before him on the court.
I'm wondering that myself. He knows the Democrats did a hatchet job on him. He's human. i think he will try not to let his emotions decide anything but...would you?
Chris
09-27-2018, 08:29 PM
You cannot prove innocence or guilt without a proper investigation. With now, I believe, 4 accusers, it's no longer just a 'he said', 'she said' situation.
No, the principle is not to have to prove innocence. In the West we presume innocence until guilt is proven.
Captdon
09-27-2018, 08:31 PM
It depends on how patient the Senate is. If they are willing to wait for a real investigation to take place, then Kavanaugh will either be proven innocent or guilty. If appointing a justice to SCOTUS immediately is more important, then it is what it is - political expediency or justice.
More bunk. He is going to be confirmed. It is over. There is no proving anything and there never was. It's over; it's done' it's crying time for you.
ripmeister
09-27-2018, 08:31 PM
I'm wondering that myself. He knows the Democrats did a hatchet job on him. He's human. i think he will try not to let his emotions decide anything but...would you?
Don't know. Reason I brought it up.
ripmeister
09-27-2018, 08:33 PM
More bunk. He is going to be confirmed. It is over. There is no proving anything and there never was. It's over; it's done' it's crying time for you.
Probably. We know now thing more now than we knew yesterday.
Ransom
09-27-2018, 08:35 PM
It depends on how patient the Senate is. If they are willing to wait for a real investigation to take place, then Kavanaugh will either be proven innocent or guilty. If appointing a justice to SCOTUS immediately is more important, then it is what it is - political expediency or justice.
There is no evidence of a crime. You have someone making allegations from 36 years ago. You want an investigation into Ford's claims. Then you'll want a separate investigation into Ramirez's claim. Then we'll need to investigate the newest claim with by a woman with a porn star lawyer for representation. Then we'll investigate his drinking. We'll investigate his entire college years after all, there must be something there.
That darned Constitution you wanna rewrite, I'm starting to really understand why you feel it's aged and should thus be written off. It's getting in your way.
Ransom
09-27-2018, 08:36 PM
Probably. We know now thing more now than we knew yesterday.
I think you're starting to understand you backed the wrong f'n horse, Rip. Sorta like the morning of Nov 9, 2016.
Ransom
09-27-2018, 08:43 PM
You cannot prove innocence or guilt without a proper investigation.
Not in a court of law you can't, as you know that isn't the case here because Feinstein waited until the Committee had completed it's hearing and Kavanaugh was going to be seated. And there is no 'proper' method of investigation here, these are accusations made 36 years ago while both were teens. She has no corroboration whatsoever. There is no evidence and yet an 11th hour accusation comes to light and you want an investigation, wouldn't that hold true with every single accusation to come after then? Including this Swetnick charge.
With now, I believe, 4 accusers, it's no longer just a 'he said', 'she said' situation.
No, it's no longer merely a he said she said, it's clearly a coordinated hack job and that is so painfully obvious to everyone watching this sham you're promoting, Dr. Who.
Hoosier8
09-27-2018, 08:44 PM
It depends on how patient the Senate is. If they are willing to wait for a real investigation to take place, then Kavanaugh will either be proven innocent or guilty. If appointing a justice to SCOTUS immediately is more important, then it is what it is - political expediency or justice.
You evidently don’t understand there just was one and the democrats refused to participate.
ripmeister
09-27-2018, 08:46 PM
I think you're starting to understand you backed the wrong f'n horse, Rip. Sorta like the morning of Nov 9, 2016.
I backed neither horse. I've only asked for an unbiased full investigation. Hell, I'd settle for an FBI interview of Mark Judge in be of the alleged principles. How on earth can that be ignored? What do the R's fear?
Safety
09-27-2018, 08:50 PM
Chris/Captdon, I'm tired of the stupid bullshit you two always bring into a discussion. I'm going to address this now, and then let the forum see how both of you are a cancer to tPF.
Well, if they were fake, she missed her calling as an actress.
This was Dr. Who's response about Dr. Ford's tears.
Maybe she did. Chloe hoped for a civil and rational discussion this one time. You screwed that.
This is Captdon saying Dr. Who screwed up a civil and rational discussion.
How is that?
This is Dr. Who asking how she screwed up a civil and rational discussion.
It didn't happen, he is lying.
This is me making an accurate statement regarding Captdon's accusation.
Who is lying, and where? This time, for once, actually demonstrate lying.
This is Chris playing dumb when all he had to do is scroll up and see where the lie occurred.
[/I][/COLOR]
He is doing just that.
This is Captdon lying once again. As any rational thinking human can see, Chris and Captdon are not only outright lying in this thread, they are also the sole cause for most of the animosity that occurs at tPF.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 08:50 PM
A corollary to this was K's accusations of a vast left wing conspiracy which he relayed with quite a bit of anger. How will that affect his judicial decisions when liberal groups come before him on the court.
It could be seen as prejudicial.
Captdon
09-27-2018, 08:55 PM
It could be seen as prejudicial.
Won't change anything. There is no appeal from the Supreme Court.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 08:56 PM
There is no evidence of a crime. You have someone making allegations from 36 years ago. You want an investigation into Ford's claims. Then you'll want a separate investigation into Ramirez's claim. Then we'll need to investigate the newest claim with by a woman with a porn star lawyer for representation. Then we'll investigate his drinking. We'll investigate his entire college years after all, there must be something there.
That darned Constitution you wanna rewrite, I'm starting to really understand why you feel it's aged and should thus be written off. It's getting in your way.
I suggested that both the accused and accusers be investigated. Do you have a problem with that?
Safety
09-27-2018, 08:58 PM
I suggested that both the accused and accusers be investigated. Do you have a problem with that?
It appears so, because when Harris asked Kavanaugh whether he would ask the White House to conduct an FBI investigation, he would not answer after three or four attempts. Maybe they are afraid about what would be uncovered?
Chris
09-27-2018, 09:00 PM
Chris/Captdon, I'm tired of the stupid bullshit you two always bring into a discussion. I'm going to address this now, and then let the forum see how both of you are a cancer to tPF.
This was Dr. Who's response about Dr. Ford's tears.
This is Captdon saying Dr. Who screwed up a civil and rational discussion.
This is Dr. Who asking how she screwed up a civil and rational discussion.
This is me making an accurate statement regarding Captdon's accusation.
This is Chris playing dumb when all he had to do is scroll up and see where the lie occurred.
This is Captdon lying once again. As any rational thinking human can see, Chris and Captdon are not only outright lying in this thread, they are also the sole cause for most of the animosity that occurs at tPF.
Where are the lies?
You need to demonstrate 1) the statement false, 2) the poster knew it was false, 3) the poster intended to deceive.
You haven't demonstrated #1. Your personal opinion is in sufficient.
Good luck.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 09:01 PM
More bunk. He is going to be confirmed. It is over. There is no proving anything and there never was. It's over; it's done' it's crying time for you.
If he is appointed despite the cloud over his head, it will just be more grist for the mill.
Captdon
09-27-2018, 09:02 PM
Safety
You might get the support you want or need to feel good. Every post you make is a negative. You never add anything here.
I won't speak for Chris but you are a far bigger menace to this place than I could ever be. I post a lot because I actually have an interest here while you only show up to bitch.
Chris
09-27-2018, 09:02 PM
It appears so, because when Harris asked Kavanaugh whether he would ask the White House to conduct an FBI investigation, he would not answer after three or four attempts. Maybe they are afraid about what would be uncovered?
Another attempt at another psychoanalyzing with not a scintilla of evidence.
Common Sense
09-27-2018, 09:04 PM
Where are the lies?
You need to demonstrate 1) the statement false, 2) the poster knew it was false, 3) the poster intended to deceive.
You haven't demonstrated #1. Your personal opinion is in sufficient.
Good luck.
From what I've just read, the accusation that Who "screwed that" in regards to being civil, is the lie in question.
Captdon
09-27-2018, 09:06 PM
If he is appointed despite the cloud over his head, it will just be more grist for the mill.
That should be a comforting thought for the next 25 years.
Captdon
09-27-2018, 09:09 PM
I backed neither horse. I've only asked for an unbiased full investigation. Hell, I'd settle for an FBI interview of Mark Judge in be of the alleged principles. How on earth can that be ignored? What do the R's fear?
Judge sent a letter saying it was untrue. What more can he say? All of her witness' signed affidavits saying they don't know what she talking about. Now, what else is there.
Captdon
09-27-2018, 09:12 PM
From what I've just read, the accusation that Who "screwed that" in regards to being civil, is the lie in question.
What lie? Chloe asked for a civil and reasonable thread for once. Who is the one who broke it. What lie? read the posts.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 09:12 PM
Not in a court of law you can't, as you know that isn't the case here because Feinstein waited until the Committee had completed it's hearing and Kavanaugh was going to be seated. And there is no 'proper' method of investigation here, these are accusations made 36 years ago while both were teens. She has no corroboration whatsoever. There is no evidence and yet an 11th hour accusation comes to light and you want an investigation, wouldn't that hold true with every single accusation to come after then? Including this Swetnick charge.
No, it's no longer merely a he said she said, it's clearly a coordinated hack job and that is so painfully obvious to everyone watching this sham you're promoting, Dr. Who.
I'm promoting? I have nothing to do with what is coming out of the media on a daily basis. I am suggesting that instead of letting Kavanaugh be tried by the media and the public, that there should be an investigation of all parties concerned. I don't know why the right is so against an investigation unless you really believe that he's guilty, but don't care i.e. that the politics that he brings to the bench are more important than determining whether or not he is a sociopath.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 09:14 PM
What lie? Chloe asked for a civil and reasonable thread for once. Who is the one who broke it. What lie? read the posts.
You refused to describe how I made the thread unreasonable. I offer you that option once again.
Captdon
09-27-2018, 09:16 PM
You refused to describe how I made the thread unreasonable. I offer you that option once again.
Tears from the accused is a sign of guilt. That's reasonable? Wow. Turn this one over to safety.
Mister D
09-27-2018, 09:17 PM
Sociopath lol
Common Sense
09-27-2018, 09:20 PM
What lie? Chloe asked for a civil and reasonable thread for once. Who is the one who broke it. What lie? read the posts.
How was Who's post not civil or unreasonable? It didn't attack anyone here. It was simply a comment on her testimony.
Safety
09-27-2018, 09:25 PM
Where are the lies?
You need to demonstrate 1) the statement false, 2) the poster knew it was false, 3) the poster intended to deceive.
You haven't demonstrated #1. Your personal opinion is in sufficient.
Good luck.
I don't need to demonstrate anything. The forum can see what was said, and also see how you go to great lengths to say absolutely nothing.
Chloe
09-27-2018, 09:26 PM
Chris/Captdon, I'm tired of the stupid bullshit you two always bring into a discussion. I'm going to address this now, and then let the forum see how both of you are a cancer to tPF.
This was Dr. Who's response about Dr. Ford's tears.
This is Captdon saying Dr. Who screwed up a civil and rational discussion.
This is Dr. Who asking how she screwed up a civil and rational discussion.
This is me making an accurate statement regarding Captdon's accusation.
This is Chris playing dumb when all he had to do is scroll up and see where the lie occurred.
This is Captdon lying once again. As any rational thinking human can see, Chris and Captdon are not only outright lying in this thread, they are also the sole cause for most of the animosity that occurs at tPF.
Where are the lies?
You need to demonstrate 1) the statement false, 2) the poster knew it was false, 3) the poster intended to deceive.
You haven't demonstrated #1. Your personal opinion is in sufficient.
Good luck.
@Safety (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=1226)
You might get the support you want or need to feel good. Every post you make is a negative. You never add anything here.
I won't speak for Chris but you are a far bigger menace to this place than I could ever be. I post a lot because I actually have an interest here while you only show up to bitch.
Another attempt at another psychoanalyzing with not a scintilla of evidence.
From what I've just read, the accusation that Who "screwed that" in regards to being civil, is the lie in question.
Tears from the accused is a sign of guilt. That's reasonable? Wow. Turn this one over to safety.
What lie? Chloe asked for a civil and reasonable thread for once. Who is the one who broke it. What lie? read the posts.
You refused to describe how I made the thread unreasonable. I offer you that option once again.
How was Who's post not civil or unreasonable? It didn't attack anyone here. It was simply a comment on her testimony.
Making me pull out the sad face...
24399
Safety
09-27-2018, 09:26 PM
From what I've just read, the accusation that Who "screwed that" in regards to being civil, is the lie in question.
Everyone with an IQ over 58 can see it was a lie.
Safety
09-27-2018, 09:28 PM
Making me pull out the sad face...
24399
I'm sorry Chloe, I just couldn't let an obnoxious hack tell a blatant lie, especially on someone that at least tries to treat everyone with respect.
Chloe
09-27-2018, 09:30 PM
I'm sorry Chloe, I just couldn't let an obnoxious hack tell a blatant lie, especially on someone that at least tries to treat everyone with respect.
It's ok. I mainly created this thread so that people would have an alternative to exotix's ridiculous threads about the topic.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 09:31 PM
From what I've just read, the accusation that Who "screwed that" in regards to being civil, is the lie in question.
Apparently, not assuming that Kavanaugh is automatically innocent, that his accusers are lying for political purposes and suggesting that an investigation is the only way to treat the matter fairly, is a sign of incivility, as opposed to treating other members with disrespect and being intolerant of their right to have an opposing or even neutral opinion. Who knew? Certainly not me - I only helped craft the current forum rules.
Chris
09-27-2018, 09:33 PM
From what I've just read, the accusation that Who "screwed that" in regards to being civil, is the lie in question.
Demonstrate it's a lie. It was known as such. It was intended to deceive.
Good luck.
Chris
09-27-2018, 09:35 PM
How was Who's post not civil or unreasonable? It didn't attack anyone here. It was simply a comment on her testimony.
No, the accusation here by Safety is it was a lie. The burden is on Safety. Presumption of innocence.
Common Sense
09-27-2018, 09:35 PM
Demonstrate it's a lie. It was known as such. It was intended to deceive.
Good luck.
It's not really the topic.
Good of luck to you as well.
Chris
09-27-2018, 09:36 PM
I don't need to demonstrate anything. The forum can see what was said, and also see how you go to great lengths to say absolutely nothing.
You made an accusation of lying. The burden on you is to demonstrate it. Or were you…
Safety
09-27-2018, 09:37 PM
No, the accusation here by Safety is it was a lie. The burden is on Safety. Presumption of innocence.
Demonstrate it's a lie. It was known as such. It was intended to deceive.
Good luck.
You made an accusation of lying. The burden on you is to demonstrate it. Or were you…
Get bent.
Chris
09-27-2018, 09:37 PM
Making me pull out the sad face...
24399
Safety runs around this forum constantly accusing people of being racists and liars. He's the one disrupted yet another thread.
I apologize but it has to stop.
Chris
09-27-2018, 09:39 PM
It's not really the topic.
Good of luck to you as well.
No, it wasn't. Tall Safety to stop disrupting threads making false accusations of racism and lying.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 09:41 PM
Tears from the accused is a sign of guilt. That's reasonable? Wow. Turn this one over to safety.
I didn't say it was a sign of guilt, only that it is not necessarily a sign of innocence. Don't misrepresent my words Captdon. It's very uncivil and constitutes bad faith (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_faith).
Safety
09-27-2018, 09:42 PM
Safety runs around this forum constantly accusing people of being racists and liars. He's the one disrupted yet another thread.
I apologize but it has to stop.
Oh the fucking irony.....
Those are imaginative possibilities but do you have any evidence whatsoever for associating them with the accused here?
Right, tears imply nothing. Nor Ford's shakey, emotional voice.
Yet, if you examine our exchange, you will see you admitting emotions say nothing and me agreeing with you for Kavanaaugh and for Ford. How you got an impression of faking out of that agreement is beyond me, and, apparently, your ability to explain.
Let's circle the wagons as you have started:
Right, tears imply nothing. Nor Ford's shakey, emotional voice.
Not interested in amatuer psychoanalyzing, I stop at teats and shakey voice and all the emotional appeal in the world mean nothing to a rational judgement.
Yes, let's not "read too much into it."
Who is lying, and where? This time, for once, actually demonstrate lying.
Where are the lies?
You need to demonstrate 1) the statement false, 2) the poster knew it was false, 3) the poster intended to deceive.
You haven't demonstrated #1. Your personal opinion is in sufficient.
Good luck.
Another attempt at another psychoanalyzing with not a scintilla of evidence.
Demonstrate it's a lie. It was known as such. It was intended to deceive.
Good luck.
No, the accusation here by Safety is it was a lie. The burden is on Safety. Presumption of innocence.
You made an accusation of lying. The burden on you is to demonstrate it. Or were you…
No, it wasn't. Tall Safety to stop disrupting threads making false accusations of racism and lying.
FFS.
Common Sense
09-27-2018, 09:43 PM
You made an accusation of lying. The burden on you is to demonstrate it. Or were you…
The initial accusation was that Who was not posting in good faith as Chloe had requested. Maybe you should ask Capton to adhere to these standards you're requesting.
Claiming Who was not posting in good faith was innacurate and perhaps a lie. I don't think anyone needs to adhere to your rigamarole just because you demand it.
Anyways, it's clear to me what transpired. I don't think we should continue with this shit...its done and has nothing to do with the topic.
Feel free to have the last word...
Common Sense
09-27-2018, 09:44 PM
I think Kavanaugh will be confirmed. He's bound to remain a controversial figure though.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 09:45 PM
Demonstrate it's a lie. It was known as such. It was intended to deceive.
Good luck.
http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/101371-Ford-and-Kavanaugh-Senate-Hearing?p=2429864&viewfull=1#post2429864
Common Sense
09-27-2018, 09:46 PM
No, it wasn't. Tall Safety to stop disrupting threads making false accusations of racism and lying.
Capton started this, not Safety.
Chris
09-27-2018, 09:47 PM
The initial accusation was that Who was not posting in good faith as Chloe had requested. Maybe you should ask Capton to adhere to these standards you're requesting.
Claiming Who was not posting in good faith was innacurate and perhaps a lie. I don't think anyone needs to adhere to your rigamarole just because you demand it.
Anyways, it's clear to me what transpired. I don't think we should continue with this shit...its done and has nothing to do with the topic.
Feel free to have the last word...
You have still failed to show Captdon's opinion false. Your opinion vs his? Isn't that what's happening in the Senate hearing? It seems to me some people have no respect for the principle of innocent till proven guilty. Accusations are not enough.
Abby08
09-27-2018, 09:47 PM
I think Kavanaugh will be confirmed. He's bound to remain a controversial figure though.
I agree.
Chris
09-27-2018, 09:48 PM
http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/101371-Ford-and-Kavanaugh-Senate-Hearing?p=2429864&viewfull=1#post2429864
See what I just posted to common sense. Your opinion vs his demonstrates nothing in the way of a lie.
Chris
09-27-2018, 09:51 PM
Capton started this, not Safety.
Captdon accused no one of lying. That was safety who has already demonstrated he can't back up his false accusation.
It's the same thing going on in the hearing.
Common Sense
09-27-2018, 09:53 PM
You have still failed to show Captdon's opinion false. Your opinion vs his? Isn't that what's happening in the Senate hearing? It seems to me some people have no respect for the principle of innocent till proven guilty. Accusations are not enough.
I'm sorry, do you think Who was posting in bad faith?
If so, was it demonstrated in the same way you've requested the accusation of lying be proven?
You haven't requested that Capton prove his accusation in any way shape or form. Why is that?
Again, this is sort of pointless...you're complaining about the disruption, yet propagating it relentlessly.
Maybe we should just let it go?
Chris
09-27-2018, 09:57 PM
I'm sorry, do you think Who was posting in bad faith?
If so, was it demonstrated in the same way you've requested the accusation of lying be proven?
You haven't requested that Capton prove his accusation in any way shape or form. Why is that?
Again, this is sort of pointless...you're complaining about the disruption, yet propagating it relentlessly.
Maybe we should just let it go?
Do you think Captdon was? Safety accused him of lying. Stop trying to shift the burden of proof on the accused. Just like in the hearing. Kavanaugh is expected to prove his innocence.
Mister D
09-27-2018, 09:57 PM
I think Kavanaugh will be confirmed. He's bound to remain a controversial figure though.
Sadly, that will bring some comfort to those who orchestrated this farce.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 10:04 PM
You have still failed to show Captdon's opinion false. Your opinion vs his? Isn't that what's happening in the Senate hearing? It seems to me some people have no respect for the principle of innocent till proven guilty. Accusations are not enough.
Captdon's allegation wrt me is false. He is entitled to his opinion re Kavanaugh. I am entitled to suggest that tears in an accused do not necessarily signify innocence. I'm also entitled to suggest that the only fair way to resolve the issue is with a real investigation. If Kavanaugh is guilty and placed on the bench, then SCOTUS would have a justice who is also a sociopath. However political this issue is, ensuring that Supreme Court justices are beyond reproach should be in everyone's best interests. If he is innocent and that can be proven at least to the standard of civil law, which is not beyond a reasonable doubt, then he should take action against his accusers, if this was simply contrived political chicanery.
Common Sense
09-27-2018, 10:04 PM
Do you think Captdon was? Safety accused him of lying. Stop trying to shift the burden of proof on the accused. Just like in the hearing. Kavanaugh is expected to prove his innocence.
The accused was Who. She was accused and essentially some here have called that accusation a lie.
Why do you not ask Capton to prove his accusation?
....and again, do you think Dr. Who was not posting in good faith as Capton accused?
I don't know if Capton was lying, but I think it's clear that his accusation was unfounded.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 10:08 PM
Captdon accused no one of lying. That was safety who has already demonstrated he can't back up his false accusation.
It's the same thing going on in the hearing.
Captdon accused me of incivility and screwing [up] the thread. http://thepoliticalforums.com/threads/101371-Ford-and-Kavanaugh-Senate-Hearing?p=2429698&viewfull=1#post2429698
Mister D
09-27-2018, 10:11 PM
Sociopath lol
Cletus
09-27-2018, 10:19 PM
Judge Kavanaugh had his talking points, which he kept repeating in lieu of answering the Committee's questions...taking up their time with his rambling non-answers. I feel absolutely comfortable stating that if an attorney arguing before him ever responded to his questioning in that manner, they would find themselves being held in contempt in a New York minute.
They weren't questioning. They were badgering and trying to intimidate.
Blumenschein, Booker, and the others, especially Feinstein need to be censured as a minimum and if possible, removed from the Senate. I have scraped better stuff off the bottom of my boot.
Cletus
09-27-2018, 10:25 PM
I thought he was too emotional in his opening statement.
What he said needed to be said. He was pissed off and rightfully so. the only thing he did wrong was not call out the Senators he was talking about by name. Feinstein needs to be removed from the Senate... in chains if necessary.
Cletus
09-27-2018, 10:26 PM
How is that?
You posted.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 10:32 PM
You evidently don’t understand there just was one and the democrats refused to participate.
There is never just one. He was just the favorite.
Hoosier8
09-27-2018, 10:33 PM
There is never just one. He was just the favorite.
Still not aware of the Senate powers? Meh, the education, or lack of it these days.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 10:34 PM
Won't change anything. There is no appeal from the Supreme Court.
There is also no appeal from the Court of public opinion.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 10:38 PM
Still not aware of the Senate powers? Meh, the education, or lack of it these days.
Please explain what you mean. I was under the impression that I was responding to a suggestion that Kavanaugh was the only choice.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 10:40 PM
It appears so, because when Harris asked Kavanaugh whether he would ask the White House to conduct an FBI investigation, he would not answer after three or four attempts. Maybe they are afraid about what would be uncovered?
Those who have nothing to hide should have no problem with an investigation.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 10:41 PM
That should be a comforting thought for the next 25 years.
Only if you enjoy dystopia.
Common Sense
09-27-2018, 10:44 PM
Only if you enjoy dystopia.
I think many would.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 10:49 PM
I think many would.
It does seem like that doesn't it? I'm afraid that 24/7 anger can't help but turn out badly.
Cletus
09-27-2018, 11:20 PM
Those who have nothing to hide should have no problem with an investigation.
That is one of the most untrue statements ever uttered by anyone.
Cletus
09-27-2018, 11:23 PM
I disagree, Bart O'Kavanaugh came out of the gate angry and defensive. His belligerent opening statement was nothing more than a hearty "how DARE you!" As far as I could tell
The fact that you didn't like his conduct means it was good and righteous.
Cletus
09-27-2018, 11:25 PM
A corollary to this was K's accusations of a vast left wing conspiracy which he relayed with quite a bit of anger. How will that affect his judicial decisions when liberal groups come before him on the court.
They brought it on themselves.
Cletus
09-27-2018, 11:29 PM
It appears so, because when Harris asked Kavanaugh whether he would ask the White House to conduct an FBI investigation, he would not answer after three or four attempts. Maybe they are afraid about what would be uncovered?
It is more likely they are just tired of her bullshit. she is another one who has no business being in the Senate. She is a disgrace.
Cletus
09-27-2018, 11:34 PM
If he is appointed despite the cloud over his head, it will just be more grist for the mill.
This is exactly the sort of thing the Democrats were trying to cultivate among the ignorant unwashed.
There is no cloud over Kavanaugh's head. There is ZERO evidence tying him to any of the allegations against him. He MUST be confirmed because if the Republican majority bows to the thugs on the Democrat side, they will be sending a signal to them that this tactic worked and it will be used time and time again.
Don't worry about facts. They don't matter. All that matters is the allegation. That will become the Democrat motto for years to come.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 11:34 PM
That is one of the most untrue statements ever uttered by anyone.
If people are inclined to lie about you, they still need to provide some evidence. Liars make mistakes.
Cletus
09-27-2018, 11:35 PM
Apparently, not assuming that Kavanaugh is automatically innocent, that his accusers are lying for political purposes and suggesting that an investigation is the only way to treat the matter fairly, is a sign of incivility, as opposed to treating other members with disrespect and being intolerant of their right to have an opposing or even neutral opinion. Who knew? Certainly not me - I only helped craft the current forum rules.
This forum has some good rules. It has some really stupid rules.
Should I guess which ones you helped craft?
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 11:48 PM
This is exactly the sort of thing the Democrats were trying to cultivate among the ignorant unwashed.
There is no cloud over Kavanaugh's head. There is ZERO evidence tying him to any of the allegations against him. He MUST be confirmed because if the Republican majority bows to the thugs on the Democrat side, they will be sending a signal to them that this tactic worked and it will be used time and time again.
Don't worry about facts. They don't matter. All that matters is the allegation. That will become the Democrat motto for years to come.
You are assuming that they are lies. What if they are not lies? Regardless if these allegations are beneficial to the Democrats, if the allegations are true, then what? There are all manner of credible people who have been found to have done incredible things. People's public and private personas can be completely disconnected. While I can't say that the Democrats are not taking advantage of these revelations, there were no such accusations against Gorsuch and he didn't please the Democrats in the least. I say investigate all of them, accused and accusers alike. Let the chips fall where they may.
Adelaide
09-27-2018, 11:54 PM
Discuss the topic, not each other. Do not personally attack or insult one another.
Dr. Who
09-27-2018, 11:57 PM
This forum has some good rules. It has some really stupid rules.
Should I guess which ones you helped craft?
Parts (expansions) of one, two and three. The rules have recently become much longer - IIRC there only used to be 9 or 10.
Common Sense
09-28-2018, 12:07 AM
You are assuming that they are lies. What if they are not lies? Regardless if these allegations are beneficial to the Democrats, if the allegations are true, then what? There are all manner of credible people who have been found to have done incredible things. People's public and private personas can be completely disconnected. While I can't say that the Democrats are not taking advantage of these revelations, there were no such accusations against Gorsuch and he didn't please the Democrats in the least. I say investigate all of them, accused and accusers alike. Let the chips fall where they may.
Ironically, investigations and their findings are meaningless to some. Many of the same people accusing her of lying, also think Hillary Clinton is a criminal or responsible for deaths in Benghazi, even though numerous investigations have concluded otherwise. So I don't know if they would accept the findings of an investigation, unless they approved of the verdict.
Certainly this is political to to both sides and it's ugly, but this cry of a devious plot, righteous indignation and dirty politics by Kavanaugh's supporters is hard to take seriously.
exotix
09-28-2018, 12:26 AM
Today
Rachel Maddow explains Brett Kavanaughs' testimony ... from Kavanaughs (bizarre) opening-statement tantrums and hysterics as an attempt to cover-up the truth including a raging threat against America as revenge based on his own conspiracy theory ... and with the kind of angry behavior literally as Dr. Ford witnessed during her sexual-assault ... attacking members of Congress .... and with the kind of adolescent and juvenile remarks that would be laughable if not so serious ... denial of his alcoholism including Kavanaughs demeanor throughout the hearing indicative of the kind of mental-meltdowns of alcoholics .... incoherent reasoning in refusing an FBI investigation ... to literally perjuring himself on numerous occasions ...
... where Kavanaugh not only presented himself as an unsophisticated sophomoric political partisan .... by declaring war on Dems (and the Clintons) and never seen before in a SCOTUS justice confirmation hearing ... an audition of what not to be ...
... culminating in the GOP congressional members of the Judicial committee thwarting their own *female* prosecutor brought-in so to disguise their own misogynistic inept abilities to deal with the accusations ... so to rage themselves in hysterics turning the rest of the hearing into a sick and sad tragic Clown Show ... where she never spoke again ...
... with the inescapable notion and conclusion that this Kavanaugh Hearing produced nothing more than proof of what Trump and the GOP are ... a belligerent mindless soul-less regime without morals nor scruples ... sans any kind of sensible leadership nor moral compass ...
... when America needs a Statesman but is yet again presented with an embarrassing and degenerate Trump sycophant ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5BvL5uLrXU
exotix
09-28-2018, 12:27 AM
Watch Brett Kavanaugh threaten America as revenge for decades to come ...
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/...clintons?amp=1 (https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/408821-kavanaugh-says-hes-victim-of-revenge-on-behalf-of-the-clintons?amp=1)
"This is a circus," Kavanaugh said with urgency.
"The consequences will extend long past my nomination; the consequences will be with us for decades."
He quoted Democratic leaders who have called him "evil" and "your worst nightmare" and warned he would "threaten the lives of millions of Americans for decades to come."
"Given comments like those, is it any surprise that people have been willing to do anything, to make any physical threat against my family, to send any violent email to my wife, to make any kind of allegation against me and against my friends, to blow me up and take me down?" he asked.
"You sowed the wind for decades to come."
"The whole country will reap the whirlwind," he added.
https://res.cloudinary.com/luvckye9s/image/upload/v1538107876/9_vk4pvo.png
Major Lambda
09-28-2018, 02:54 AM
Missed his opening statement, listening to his questioning. He was just asked about private questioning before the committee, questioing about his personal life and that the accusation wasn't mentioned even though Ford had already written her letter to Feinstein....
I'll say what I said after her testimony. Nothing has changed. I think she's telling what she believes is the truth, and so is he. Nothing has been accomplished. If he's defensive it's because he's being accused.
Thursday during the dems questioning, they kept asking the same question over and over. One dem would ask a question, then another would ask the same question.
It was worse than a filibuster argument.
Major Lambda
Cletus
09-28-2018, 03:09 AM
You are assuming that they are lies. What if they are not lies?
I am not assuming they are lies. I suspect something did happen to Dr. Ford. I don't however, believe it was Kavanaugh who did it. There is no evidence to support the contention that he was involved and there are numerous witnesses who say he wasn't even at the even where the alleged incident occurred. Dr. Ford is a dyed in the wool Leftist who is opposed to everything Kavanaugh stands for. I think it is also pretty obvious that she is weak and probably very easily influenced. She may have convinced herself it was Kavanaugh or she may have had an outside influence who planted the idea it was Kavanaugh.
Regardless if these allegations are beneficial to the Democrats, if the allegations are true, then what?
If they were true, someone other than Ford should be able to support her allegations.
While I can't say that the Democrats are not taking advantage of these revelations, there were no such accusations against Gorsuch and he didn't please the Democrats in the least.
Gorsuch by himself was not in a position to cast the vote that would undo everything the Left hopes to achieve. He wasn't as much of a threat to them as Kavanaugh is. Kavanaugh being on the court puts the Lefts push for gun control and bunch of other plans in serious jeopardy. They can't afford to have him or another judge like him on the bench to side with with Gorsuch, Thomas. and Alito and influence the the other justices who may be undecided on issues that the Left consider critical.
They are afraid of him and they are terrified at the combined strength of the Conservative Justices if he joins their ranks.
Major Lambda
09-28-2018, 03:10 AM
I'm hoping this thread will be balanced and mature unlike some of the other current ones, so please try to follow the rules and be respectful.
So far if I were to compare and contrast the opening statements between Dr. Ford and Brett Kavanaugh my personal opinion is that Ford's opening statement to me came across as believable and sympathetic and I don't doubt that something happened to her, however, Kavanaugh's opening statement to me comes across as truth and defensively sincere. We will see how the Q&A session goes between the senators and Kavanaugh, but his opening statement does not seem like he is hiding something or putting on a conniving act in my opinion. Many of you know that I am not someone that leans to the right, i'm consistent in my beliefs and ideals, I am not a fan of Trump, and obviously Kavanaugh and I probably don't see eye to eye on political issues. But I just flat out don't believe he was the person that abused Dr. Ford. I think he is just as much of a victim as Dr. Ford at this point, and it's sad all around.
What are your thoughts?
A thirty five year grudge, to come out into public with sexual allegations against a SCOTUS nominee.
Well, sexual allegations are the norm pretty much now for retaliation.
The great Dr.Ford layed out stipulation for her testimony. Her friends said they don't remember Kavanaugh treating her that way, on the night In question. Brett Kavanaugh has had numerous people stand up for him. The Democrats have turned this whole event into a circus, and their motivations are political and retaliatory. There is no evidence, just she said - he did. There is a great number of inconsistencies and irregularity in Dr.Fords testimony. Dr.Ford as I recall recanted on some testimony. I was not impressed with Dr.Fords demeanor during testimony.
It don't take a member of Mensa to figure this out. Brett Kavanaugh is getting railroaded by a case, absent of evidence or collaboration ; with alot of help from the democratic party. An alledged impropriety from thirty five years ago is being argued by a witness that I consider less than credible, and the Dems are delaying as long as they can .
Major Lambda
Cletus
09-28-2018, 03:12 AM
I have no doubt that Ford is a victim. The problem is that the abusers in her case are Democrat Senators who found in her an easy mark to use as a tool to discredit and extremely qualified jurist.
Lummy
09-28-2018, 04:33 AM
To a person, every analyst believes her story to the effect that "something happened" to her, but it wasn't Kavanaugh but maybe someone else at the party or space aliens or something (they've been known to do this kind of thing, the little buggers).
Nary a one person is so crass as to suggest that perhaps maybe she's crazier than a bag of squirrels, a perfect operative for the Democratic party.
All it would take is another battery of psychological tests for Democrats to disavow her totally and say she hoodwinked them, because at this point, they all look like shit.
Hoosier8
09-28-2018, 05:22 AM
Ironically, investigations and their findings are meaningless to some. Many of the same people accusing her of lying, also think Hillary Clinton is a criminal or responsible for deaths in Benghazi, even though numerous investigations have concluded otherwise. So I don't know if they would accept the findings of an investigation, unless they approved of the verdict.
Certainly this is political to to both sides and it's ugly, but this cry of a devious plot, righteous indignation and dirty politics by Kavanaugh's supporters is hard to take seriously.
Hard to take the democrats that knew about this long before and waited until the last minute to spring it seriously.
stjames1_53
09-28-2018, 05:36 AM
Ironically, investigations and their findings are meaningless to some. Many of the same people accusing her of lying, also think Hillary Clinton is a criminal or responsible for deaths in Benghazi, even though numerous investigations have concluded otherwise. So I don't know if they would accept the findings of an investigation, unless they approved of the verdict.
Certainly this is political to to both sides and it's ugly, but this cry of a devious plot, righteous indignation and dirty politics by Kavanaugh's supporters is hard to take seriously.
Even Graham is calling YOU out................you're disgrace if you approve of what happened yesterday...............
stjames1_53
09-28-2018, 05:40 AM
Hard to take the democrats that knew about this long before and waited until the last minute to spring it seriously.
Only a handful of people knew about the letter. Only one was not on Feinstein's staff: Ford. Feinstein leaked this to the media for a feeding frenzy. It could have only been leaked by her.
She's a f*cking liar when she says it didn't come from her.
IMPress Polly
09-28-2018, 05:42 AM
I had to work all day yesterday and only got caught up in the evening. Probably a good thing I'm responding only this morning, after some rest, as this farce was everything I expected it to be.
This was not a fact-finding inquiry. This was a show trial designed by the Republican Party to convict Dr. Christine Blasey Ford of impeding their confirmation process. No investigation was allowed. No witnesses were called (or allowed) to testify. No evidence was allowed to be presented. Only one of the four women who has come forward was even invited. The hearing was rushed to the earliest possible date, with the conclusion determined in advance, as shown by the fact that the Senate Judiciary Committee scheduled a vote to move the Kavanaugh nomination to the full Senate floor for this morning before the hearing had even begun and plainly told reporters that they had already made up their minds in favor of Kavanaugh. Highly unprofessional outbursts during the hearing from male Senators supporting Kavanaugh were commonplace. Meanwhile, legions of Judge Kavanaugh's supporters spent the last week attempting to stop and/or scare Dr. Ford from testifying at all with death threats so credible that she and her family were forced to move.
Those who have defended this non-process discredit their frequent critiques of the Me Too movement and of others who come forward with allegations of sexual violence and/or harassment. Their main line of critique, after all, has been that the disclosure of such accusations often results in a lack of due process. And yet what precisely have they opposed throughout this entire episode but due process? Why the fear of knowledge if one is confident of Judge Kavanaugh's innocence? It is now abundantly clear that such persons do not care about the truth so much as about the advancement of certain outcomes.
To the end that this was a show trial, we concluded this inquisition with little more information than with which we began and have been asked here to judge on the matter of credibility primarily on the basis simply of how these two specific individuals composed themselves yesterday. My observation about that would be that one of them was visibly terrified and traumatized, but otherwise a normal human being, while the other, the Supreme Court nominee, showed himself to be so short-tempered and aggressive-natured that he can barely control his faculties WHILE SOBER, let alone drunk.
Those are my observations.
Hoosier8
09-28-2018, 05:54 AM
Only a handful of people knew about the letter. Only one was not on Feinstein's staff: Ford. Feinstein leaked this to the media for a feeding frenzy. It could have only been leaked by her.
She's a f*cking liar when she says it didn't come from her.
I don’t believe that for an instance. The dems have a hit list for every nominee.
stjames1_53
09-28-2018, 06:37 AM
I had to work all day yesterday and only got caught up in the evening. Probably a good thing I'm responding only this morning, after some rest, as this farce was everything I expected it to be.
This was not a fact-finding inquiry. This was a show trial designed by the Republican Party to convict Dr. Christine Blasey Ford of impeding their confirmation process. No investigation was allowed. No witnesses were called (or allowed) to testify. No evidence was allowed to be presented. Only one of the four women who has come forward was even invited. The hearing was rushed to the earliest possible date, with the conclusion determined in advance, as shown by the fact that the Senate Judiciary Committee scheduled a vote to move the Kavanaugh nomination to the full Senate floor for this morning before the hearing had even begun and plainly told reporters that they had already made up their minds in favor of Kavanaugh. Highly unprofessional outbursts during the hearing from male Senators supporting Kavanaugh were commonplace. Meanwhile, legions of Judge Kavanaugh's supporters spent the last week attempting to stop and/or scare Dr. Ford from testifying at all with death threats so credible that she and her family were forced to move.
Those who have defended this non-process discredit their frequent critiques of the Me Too movement and of others who come forward with allegations of sexual violence and/or harassment. Their main line of critique, after all, has been that the disclosure of such accusations often results in a lack of due process. And yet what precisely have they opposed throughout this entire episode but due process? Why the fear of knowledge if one is confident of Judge Kavanaugh's innocence? It is now abundantly clear that such persons do not care about the truth so much as about the advancement of certain outcomes.
To the end that this was a show trial, we concluded this inquisition with little more information than with which we began and have been asked here to judge on the matter of credibility primarily on the basis simply of how these two specific individuals composed themselves yesterday. My observation about that would be that one of them was visibly terrified and traumatized, but otherwise a normal human being, while the other, the Supreme Court nominee, showed himself to be so short-tempered and aggressive-natured that he can barely control his faculties WHILE SOBER, let alone drunk.
Those are my observations.
Then let's put a woman in his place and accuse her of molesting children when she was 18 then grill her like a wh*re. If she had a drink when she was 18, then by God she guilty and should be placed in the stocks for 30 days while people run around destroying her family.
That better?
Chris
09-28-2018, 07:15 AM
They weren't questioning. They were badgering and trying to intimidate.
Blumenschein, Booker, and the others, especially Feinstein need to be censured as a minimum and if possible, removed from the Senate. I have scraped better stuff off the bottom of my boot.
But you know they won't be. Their behavior will become the standard now. Politics is losing any sense of decorum or dignity.
IMPress Polly
09-28-2018, 07:16 AM
Then let's put a woman in his place and accuse her of molesting children when she was 18 then grill her like a wh*re. If she had a drink when she was 18, then by God she guilty and should be placed in the stocks for 30 days while people run around destroying her family.
That better?
Frankly, St. James, how many women have you ever heard of who were even accused of attempting to rape someone while they were drunk? Or at all, ever? Like 3% of all people in prison for sex crimes are women. Sex offenses are basically a male thing, even when the victims are male (like they are mostly in the Catholic Church's ongoing child molestation scandal) and we all know it. Hell, VIOLENCE IN GENERAL is basically a male phenomenon: some 80% of people in prison for violent crimes of any kind are male.
Chris
09-28-2018, 07:17 AM
Those who have nothing to hide should have no problem with an investigation.
Kavanaugh repeatedly said he would do whatever the committee decided.
This is no more than the desperation of those who believe him guiding until proven innocent.
Chris
09-28-2018, 07:20 AM
If people are inclined to lie about you, they still need to provide some evidence. Liars make mistakes.
That's what I said last night and you disagreed. Accusers are the ones who need to provide evidence, not the accused.
Chris
09-28-2018, 07:25 AM
Today
Rachel Maddow explains Brett Kavanaughs' testimony ... from Kavanaughs (bizarre) opening-statement tantrums and hysterics as an attempt to cover-up the truth including a raging threat against America as revenge based on his own conspiracy theory ... and with the kind of angry behavior literally as Dr. Ford witnessed during her sexual-assault ... attacking members of Congress .... and with the kind of adolescent and juvenile remarks that would be laughable if not so serious ... denial of his alcoholism including Kavanaughs demeanor throughout the hearing indicative of the kind of mental-meltdowns of alcoholics .... incoherent reasoning in refusing an FBI investigation ... to literally perjuring himself on numerous occasions ...
... where Kavanaugh not only presented himself as an unsophisticated sophomoric political partisan .... by declaring war on Dems (and the Clintons) and never seen before in a SCOTUS justice confirmation hearing ... an audition of what not to be ...
... culminating in the GOP congressional members of the Judicial committee thwarting their own *female* prosecutor brought-in so to disguise their own misogynistic inept abilities to deal with the accusations ... so to rage themselves in hysterics turning the rest of the hearing into a sick and sad tragic Clown Show ... where she never spoke again ...
... with the inescapable notion and conclusion that this Kavanaugh Hearing produced nothing more than proof of what Trump and the GOP are ... a belligerent mindless soul-less regime without morals nor scruples ... sans any kind of sensible leadership nor moral compass ...
... when America needs a Statesman but is yet again presented with an embarrassing and degenerate Trump sycophant ...
...
Madddow sure didn't watch the hearing I watched.
But then she's another who assumes guilt and that he must prove his innocence.
The world turned upsidedown.
Chris
09-28-2018, 07:26 AM
Thursday during the dems questioning, they kept asking the same question over and over. One dem would ask a question, then another would ask the same question.
It was worse than a filibuster argument.
Major Lambda
Sort of says they had nothing but accusations and insinuations.
I still think their show was for midterm elections, tryig to turn women's votes.
Lummy
09-28-2018, 07:29 AM
I am not assuming they are lies. I suspect something did happen to Dr. Ford.
Aliens. Aliens from someplace under Orion's Belt. They are very sneaky.
Chris
09-28-2018, 07:31 AM
I had to work all day yesterday and only got caught up in the evening. Probably a good thing I'm responding only this morning, after some rest, as this farce was everything I expected it to be.
This was not a fact-finding inquiry. This was a show trial designed by the Republican Party to convict Dr. Christine Blasey Ford of impeding their confirmation process. No investigation was allowed. No witnesses were called (or allowed) to testify. No evidence was allowed to be presented. Only one of the four women who has come forward was even invited. The hearing was rushed to the earliest possible date, with the conclusion determined in advance, as shown by the fact that the Senate Judiciary Committee scheduled a vote to move the Kavanaugh nomination to the full Senate floor for this morning before the hearing had even begun and plainly told reporters that they had already made up their minds in favor of Kavanaugh. Highly unprofessional outbursts during the hearing from male Senators supporting Kavanaugh were commonplace. Meanwhile, legions of Judge Kavanaugh's supporters spent the last week attempting to stop and/or scare Dr. Ford from testifying at all with death threats so credible that she and her family were forced to move.
Those who have defended this non-process discredit their frequent critiques of the Me Too movement and of others who come forward with allegations of sexual violence and/or harassment. Their main line of critique, after all, has been that the disclosure of such accusations often results in a lack of due process. And yet what precisely have they opposed throughout this entire episode but due process? Why the fear of knowledge if one is confident of Judge Kavanaugh's innocence? It is now abundantly clear that such persons do not care about the truth so much as about the advancement of certain outcomes.
To the end that this was a show trial, we concluded this inquisition with little more information than with which we began and have been asked here to judge on the matter of credibility primarily on the basis simply of how these two specific individuals composed themselves yesterday. My observation about that would be that one of them was visibly terrified and traumatized, but otherwise a normal human being, while the other, the Supreme Court nominee, showed himself to be so short-tempered and aggressive-natured that he can barely control his faculties WHILE SOBER, let alone drunk.
Those are my observations.
This was a show trial designed by the Republican Party...
Your opening premise is factually incorrect. Republicans wanted nothing to do with it. It was Democrats who pushed it.
Premise wrong, conclusion can't be right.
Lummy
09-28-2018, 07:33 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l5BvL5uLrXU
"Hearing Exposes Brett Kavanaugh Termperment Problem, Credibility Issues / Rachel Maddow.MSNBC"???
How about "Hearing Exposes America's deepening, debilitating political crisis with Democrats".
Lummy
09-28-2018, 07:37 AM
Sort of says they had nothing but accusations and insinuations.
I still think their show was for midterm elections, tryig to turn women's votes.
Yes. This is going to backfire on them big time. Kavanaugh will be confirmed, and Democrats are going to lose across the country in the election.
stjames1_53
09-28-2018, 07:41 AM
Frankly, St. James, how many women have you ever heard of who were even accused of attempting to rape someone while they were drunk? Or at all, ever? Like 3% of all people in prison for sex crimes are women. Sex offenses are basically a male thing, even when the victims are male (like they are mostly in the Catholic Church's ongoing child molestation scandal) and we all know it. Hell, VIOLENCE IN GENERAL is basically a male phenomenon: some 80% of people in prison for violent crimes of any kind are male.
are you really saying women don't rape boys?
Chloe
09-28-2018, 07:49 AM
are you really saying women don't rape boys?
No she just said that it’s heavily skewed towards men.
Not for anything, but what is proper demeanor for someone who is a victim of sexual assault as well as someone accused of such? I think we are trying to over analyze behavior that could be subjective under these circumstances.
jmo
Chris
09-28-2018, 07:50 AM
All that this thread has convinced me of is that there are those who are quick to jump assumptions and accusations based on imagining what could be rather than on any evidence at all.
I'll repost what I posted elsewhere yesterdau, The Death of Reason and the Slaying of Civility (https://cafehayek.com/2018/09/death-reason-slaying-civility.html):
...how civilized, decent, truth-respecting people assess claims of wrongdoing, no matter how paltry or grievous. And this logic has two essential component parts. First, any accuser must have something more than the accusation itself. Second, the accused is presumed innocent of the charge until and unless the accuser makes a reasonable argument that the accusation is true.
...I’m tempted to conclude that if we human beings routinely treated accusations alone as sufficient proof of, if not their absolute validity, at least of their presumptive validity, that civilization would be practically impossible. I think that this conclusion is likely correct. But, perhaps, it’s too strong. So I’ll conclude instead by saying that if we human beings routinely treated accusations alone as sufficient proof of, if not their absolute validity, at least of their presumptive validity, civilization as we know it would not exist. Whatever civilization we would then be members of would look and feel radically different from that which we now know.
My conclusion remains the same: We have two people who are both telling the truth as they recall and interpret it. One story does not trump the other. And we have the principle of innocent till proven guilty, which has not happened here.
Chris
09-28-2018, 07:53 AM
Yes. This is going to backfire on them big time. Kavanaugh will be confirmed, and Democrats are going to lose across the country in the election.
No, I think many women as upset over this and will vote Democrat. Whom do you think Dr Who would vote for? Whom will Polly vote for? The only one I see with an open mind still is Chloe.
stjames1_53
09-28-2018, 07:58 AM
No she just said that it’s heavily skewed towards men.
she never claimed that women rape boys. She actually never mentions that at all. It's a hit piece against all males...we are already aware of her temperament towards all males.
Captdon
09-28-2018, 07:58 AM
I didn't say it was a sign of guilt, only that it is not necessarily a sign of innocence. Don't misrepresent my words @Captdon (http://thepoliticalforums.com/member.php?u=2480). It's very uncivil and constitutes bad faith (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_faith).
My post was spot on. You people have an agenda and I don't care.
Standing Wolf
09-28-2018, 08:05 AM
I disagree, Bart O'Kavanaugh came out of the gate angry and defensive. His belligerent opening statement was nothing more than a hearty "how DARE you!" As far as I could tell
Kavanaugh did everything but actually say the words, "left-wing conspiracy" in his opening rant. I don't recall anything he said, then or later, that is quite as quotable as Clarence Thomas' "high tech lynching" line, but the tone and feeling was certainly the same.
Chris
09-28-2018, 08:06 AM
I didn't say it was a sign of guilt, only that it is not necessarily a sign of innocence. Don't misrepresent my words Captdon. It's very uncivil and constitutes bad faith (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bad_faith).
Another accusation of lying--see link--with no evidence to back it up.
The left seems to be stuck on everyone is lying.
exotix
09-28-2018, 08:09 AM
It's ok. I mainly created this thread so that people would have an alternative to exotix's ridiculous threads about the topic.I notice it turned out about the same.
Chloe
09-28-2018, 08:09 AM
I notice it turned out about the same.
Fair enough
Cannons Front
09-28-2018, 08:10 AM
I had to work all day yesterday and only got caught up in the evening. Probably a good thing I'm responding only this morning, after some rest, as this farce was everything I expected it to be.
This was not a fact-finding inquiry. This was a show trial designed by the Republican Party to convict Dr. Christine Blasey Ford of impeding their confirmation process. No investigation was allowed. No witnesses were called (or allowed) to testify. No evidence was allowed to be presented. Only one of the four women who has come forward was even invited. The hearing was rushed to the earliest possible date, with the conclusion determined in advance, as shown by the fact that the Senate Judiciary Committee scheduled a vote to move the Kavanaugh nomination to the full Senate floor for this morning before the hearing had even begun and plainly told reporters that they had already made up their minds in favor of Kavanaugh. Highly unprofessional outbursts during the hearing from male Senators supporting Kavanaugh were commonplace. Meanwhile, legions of Judge Kavanaugh's supporters spent the last week attempting to stop and/or scare Dr. Ford from testifying at all with death threats so credible that she and her family were forced to move.
Those who have defended this non-process discredit their frequent critiques of the Me Too movement and of others who come forward with allegations of sexual violence and/or harassment. Their main line of critique, after all, has been that the disclosure of such accusations often results in a lack of due process. And yet what precisely have they opposed throughout this entire episode but due process? Why the fear of knowledge if one is confident of Judge Kavanaugh's innocence? It is now abundantly clear that such persons do not care about the truth so much as about the advancement of certain outcomes.
To the end that this was a show trial, we concluded this inquisition with little more information than with which we began and have been asked here to judge on the matter of credibility primarily on the basis simply of how these two specific individuals composed themselves yesterday. My observation about that would be that one of them was visibly terrified and traumatized, but otherwise a normal human being, while the other, the Supreme Court nominee, showed himself to be so short-tempered and aggressive-natured that he can barely control his faculties WHILE SOBER, let alone drunk.
Those are my observations.
The partisan hack that this has turned into turns my stomach, failure to conduct themselves in a respectful manner has forever damaged the Senate of the United States.
Feinstein referred the letter to the FBI, which added it to Kavanaugh’s background investigation file. The FBI has indicated to the committee and in public statements that it considers the matter closed. The FBI does not make credibility determinations. The FBI provides information on a confidential basis in order for decision makers to determine an individual’s suitability. The Senate has the information it needs to follow up with witnesses and gather and assess the relevant evidence.
The Democrats on the Committee know this they have been informed by the FBI this. The Senate investigators, most of which are former FBI agents looked into the claims and sought out witnesses, this is where we got the statements from DR Fords witnesses, that were sworn under oath. These statements all went against DR Ford. The Democrats chose to not participate in the investigation, the only reason to make that decision was so that they could play the victim card and rant about the FBI. The FBI again had the letter and said they considered the issue settled in regards to what their job is.
Chris
09-28-2018, 08:13 AM
Kavanaugh did everything but actually say the words, "left-wing conspiracy" in his opening rant. I don't recall anything he said, then or later, that is quite as quotable as Clarence Thomas' "high tech lynching" line, but the tone and feeling was certainly the same.
It plays well to the right who does see it that way.
Not sure how else Kavanaugh would see it, he believes he's innocent and probably can't make sense of where Democrats took this hearing any other way.
Chris
09-28-2018, 08:16 AM
I notice it turned out about the same.
Other than accusations members lied and the uproar following my challenging those accusations for some evidence, the thread has gone well, lots of discussion.
Standing Wolf
09-28-2018, 08:19 AM
It appears so, because when Harris asked Kavanaugh whether he would ask the White House to conduct an FBI investigation, he would not answer after three or four attempts. Maybe they are afraid about what would be uncovered?
One of Kavanaugh's last questioners - I didn't catch the Senator's name - pointed out that Kavanaugh had failed/refused to answer that question at least eight times to that point, and asked him yet again. When it quickly became apparent that Kavanaugh was going to launch into another speech, repeating the same irrelevant talking points in lieu of answering, the Senator simply said, "I'll take that as a No" and moved on. Kavanaugh had clearly been coached to take up as much of the Democratic questioners' five minutes as possible - the Republican Senators' designated questioner's softball inquiries were no threat - but that particular Senator didn't let him get away with it. Now the usual suspects are crying that Kavanugh was "rudely interrupted" and not allowed to speak. :rollseyes:
exotix
09-28-2018, 08:27 AM
Other than accusations members lied and the uproar following my challenging those accusations for some evidence, the thread has gone well, lots of discussion.I have no qualm at all in allowing this thread by Chloe to now be the main thread ... so allow me to post this breaking news ...
American Bar Association calls for delay of Kavanaugh vote until FBI investigates assault allegations
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&ei=xiquW4C1Ao-VzwL-t7T4CQ&q=american+bar+association&oq=American+Bar&gs_l=psy-ab.1.0.0i131j0i3j0i131l2j0i3l2j0i131j0l3.2126.5572 ..8514...0.0..0.100.779.11j1......0....1..gws-wiz.MbquJWjlZOk
The American Bar Association is calling on the Senate Judiciary Committee to halt the consideration of President Donald Trump's Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh until an FBI investigation is completed into the sexual assault allegations that have roiled his nomination.
https://res.cloudinary.com/luvckye9s/image/upload/v1538141199/11_yoxezt.png
Hoosier8
09-28-2018, 08:29 AM
One of Kavanaugh's last questioners - I didn't catch the Senator's name - pointed out that Kavanaugh had failed/refused to answer that question at least eight times to that point, and asked him yet again. When it quickly became apparent that Kavanaugh was going to launch into another speech, repeating the same irrelevant talking points in lieu of answering, the Senator simply said, "I'll take that as a No" and moved on. Kavanaugh had clearly been coached to take up as much of the Democratic questioners' five minutes as possible - the Republican Senators' designated questioner's softball inquiries were no threat - but that particular Senator didn't let him get away with it. Now the usual suspects are crying that Kavanugh was "rudely interrupted" and not allowed to speak. :rollseyes:
Harris playing to the base. Kavanaugh cannot request an FBI investigation and she knows it. She also knows it was already requested by democrats and turned down by the FBI. Not a federal crime and the accuser never requested or opened the issue with the police that have jurisdiction.
Purely for show.
Chris
09-28-2018, 08:31 AM
One of Kavanaugh's last questioners - I didn't catch the Senator's name - pointed out that Kavanaugh had failed/refused to answer that question at least eight times to that point, and asked him yet again. When it quickly became apparent that Kavanaugh was going to launch into another speech, repeating the same irrelevant talking points in lieu of answering, the Senator simply said, "I'll take that as a No" and moved on. Kavanaugh had clearly been coached to take up as much of the Democratic questioners' five minutes as possible - the Republican Senators' designated questioner's softball inquiries were no threat - but that particular Senator didn't let him get away with it. Now the usual suspects are crying that Kavanugh was "rudely interrupted" and not allowed to speak. :rollseyes:
Elsewhere in the hearing, Kavanaugh did say he would welcome an investigation and that he'd do whatever the committee wants. Grassley reminded Durbin that an investigation is not up to Trump or Kanaugh but the committee to decide.
See https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2018/09/27/durbin-grassley-kavanaugh-fbi-investigation-hearing-lead-vpx.cnn/video/playlists/kavanaugh-ford-senate-hearing/
Standing Wolf
09-28-2018, 08:32 AM
Thursday during the dems questioning, they kept asking the same question over and over. One dem would ask a question, then another would ask the same question.
You may have noticed - or not - that the questions were being repeated because Kavanaugh was consistently refusing to give direct answers to them.
Crepitus
09-28-2018, 08:33 AM
which is exactly the way he should have come out. You're name game is childish, Creepitus
Ever hear the expression "protest too much"? That's what he did. He exposed himself as tremendously partisan as well.
The name thing is not a game. It's the name his buddy Mark Judge used for him in his book. Bart O'Kavanaugh.
stjames1_53
09-28-2018, 08:34 AM
One of Kavanaugh's last questioners - I didn't catch the Senator's name - pointed out that Kavanaugh had failed/refused to answer that question at least eight times to that point, and asked him yet again. When it quickly became apparent that Kavanaugh was going to launch into another speech, repeating the same irrelevant talking points in lieu of answering, the Senator simply said, "I'll take that as a No" and moved on. Kavanaugh had clearly been coached to take up as much of the Democratic questioners' five minutes as possible - the Republican Senators' designated questioner's softball inquiries were no threat - but that particular Senator didn't let him get away with it. Now the usual suspects are crying that Kavanugh was "rudely interrupted" and not allowed to speak. :rollseyes:
the question you keep referring to was, "will you (Kavanaugh) ask for an FBI investigation?" ....really, you're running with that? He's undergone 6 FBI background checks already.
You want Kavanaugh to prove his innocence. How is that possible after 6 background checks? They've already cleared him 6 times. How many more times are you going to demand he request a background check for whenever an accusation comes around?
Guys like you will stop at nothing to destroy a man's life and shatter his family. You should be immensely satisfied with the damage you've already done.
God knows I couldn't take that seat. Can you?
Cannons Front
09-28-2018, 08:35 AM
One of Kavanaugh's last questioners - I didn't catch the Senator's name - pointed out that Kavanaugh had failed/refused to answer that question at least eight times to that point, and asked him yet again. When it quickly became apparent that Kavanaugh was going to launch into another speech, repeating the same irrelevant talking points in lieu of answering, the Senator simply said, "I'll take that as a No" and moved on. Kavanaugh had clearly been coached to take up as much of the Democratic questioners' five minutes as possible - the Republican Senators' designated questioner's softball inquiries were no threat - but that particular Senator didn't let him get away with it. Now the usual suspects are crying that Kavanugh was "rudely interrupted" and not allowed to speak. :rollseyes:
Get away with what, the Question was would he ask the White house to have the FBI investigate? He had answered than a great many times, he said THAT WAS UP TO THE COMMITTEE, he has no authority to have the FBI do anything. It was also a a BS request. The FBI had already been sent the letter, they added it to the file and closed the case, that is their job, it is not to provide recommendations nor is it to draw conclusions. They are to provide back ground information for the Committee to look into as they decide, they did that and received statements from Dr Fords named witnesses that refuted her claim. Would those staements been more important if they were told to the FBI than if they were told to the Senate investigators?
Had the Democrats not wasted 80% of their time with the FBI distraction, they would have had plenty of time to ask as many questions that they wanted to.
Then there were the questions that they should have asked Dr Ford, Either side really since no one asked them.
How about so when was the first time you met the Kavanaugh?
Did you have any mutual friends?
Did you attend any other parties that he was present?
But nobody seemed interested in asking any real questions to her, why is that?
Crepitus
09-28-2018, 08:36 AM
The fact that you didn't like his conduct means it was good and righteous.
Nobody pulled your chain boy.
stjames1_53
09-28-2018, 08:37 AM
You may have noticed - or not - that the questions were being repeated because Kavanaugh was consistently refusing to give direct answers to them.
there was only one they kept demanding....................and they already had the answer.......
Kavanaugh cannot ask for an FBI investigation to prove his innocence. Graham said it best, they held on to that letter and failed to give it to the FBI at the appropriate time. It was a disgrace to demand he get an investigation to prove his innocence when they wouldn't ask for one to prove his guilt.
buggar off
Cannons Front
09-28-2018, 08:38 AM
Ever hear the expression "protest too much"? That's what he did. He exposed himself as tremendously partisan as well.
The name thing is not a game. It's the name his buddy Mark Judge used for him in his book. Bart O'Kavanaugh.
How about we go into a sworn hearing in front of your family and the world and see how your declare yourself not a gang rapist after half of the committee has already declared you guilty...
exotix
09-28-2018, 08:44 AM
Get away with what, the Question was would he ask the White house to have the FBI investigate? He had answered than a great many times, he said THAT WAS UP TO THE COMMITTEE, he has no authority to have the FBI do anything. It was also a a BS request. The FBI had already been sent the letter, they added it to the file and closed the case, that is their job, it is not to provide recommendations nor is it to draw conclusions. They are to provide back ground information for the Committee to look into as they decide, they did that and received statements from Dr Fords named witnesses that refuted her claim. Would those staements been more important if they were told to the FBI than if they were told to the Senate investigators?
Had the Democrats not wasted 80% of their time with the FBI distraction, they would have had plenty of time to ask as many questions that they wanted to.
Then there were the questions that they should have asked Dr Ford, Either side really since no one asked them.
How about so when was the first time you met the Kavanaugh?
Did you have any mutual friends?
Did you attend any other parties that he was present?
But nobody seemed interested in asking any real questions to her, why is that?Are they going to bring in the second, third and fourth victims ... as well as Mark Judge ... as Blumenthall is calling for now ... as the constitutional duty of the Senate ...
https://res.cloudinary.com/luvckye9s/image/upload/v1538142277/100_2676_gdnrx2.jpg
exotix
09-28-2018, 08:49 AM
How about we go into a sworn hearing in front of your family and the world and see how your declare yourself not a gang rapist after half of the committee has already declared you guilty...What it include things like this that would go to your character ?
Brett Kavanaugh Urged Graphic Questions in Clinton Inquiry
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...30.kPwgMNC0xw0 (https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&ei=TyKtW8CtBIKBzwLR-b-gDQ&q=kavanaugh+ken+starr+report&oq=Kavanugh+Ken+Starr&gs_l=psy-ab.1.1.0i13l5j0i22i30j0i13i5i30l2j0i8i13i30.2008.7 764..9608...0.0..0.72.1097.18......0....1..gws-wiz.......0j0i131j0i10j0i8i13i10i30.kPwgMNC0xw0)
https://res.cloudinary.com/luvckye9s/image/upload/v1538073473/2_lztfn0.png
https://www.dailydot.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Screen-Shot-2018-07-11-at-9.50.43-AM.png
Captdon
09-28-2018, 08:55 AM
Get bent.
There's the safety we all know. No argument so "get bent."
Captdon
09-28-2018, 08:58 AM
The initial accusation was that Who was not posting in good faith as Chloe had requested. Maybe you should ask Capton to adhere to these standards you're requesting.
Claiming Who was not posting in good faith was innacurate and perhaps a lie. I don't think anyone needs to adhere to your rigamarole just because you demand it.
Anyways, it's clear to me what transpired. I don't think we should continue with this $#@!...its done and has nothing to do with the topic.
Feel free to have the last word...
My post was spot on.
exotix
09-28-2018, 09:00 AM
Just In
Kavanaugh's most ardent supporters reverse support after Kavanaughs' 'deranged and unhinged' opening statement
https://splinternews.com/kavanaughs-deranged-hearing-freaked-out-some-of-his-mos-1829386915
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&source=hp&ei=qTOuW-HlGpC2zwK1zJrgCQ&q=jesuit+magazine&oq=Jesuit+&gs_l=psy-ab.1.1.0j0i131l8j0.2207.4215..7790...0.0..0.79.432 .7......0....1..gws-wiz.......0i3.JJoRzW9SGH8
American Bar Association & Jesuit Magazine call for immediate suspension of Kavanaugh Confirmation
Captdon
09-28-2018, 09:00 AM
Capton started this, not Safety.
I was spot on. You have nothing.
Captdon
09-28-2018, 09:01 AM
I had to work all day yesterday and only got caught up in the evening. Probably a good thing I'm responding only this morning, after some rest, as this farce was everything I expected it to be.
This was not a fact-finding inquiry. This was a show trial designed by the Republican Party to convict Dr. Christine Blasey Ford of impeding their confirmation process. No investigation was allowed. No witnesses were called (or allowed) to testify. No evidence was allowed to be presented. Only one of the four women who has come forward was even invited. The hearing was rushed to the earliest possible date, with the conclusion determined in advance, as shown by the fact that the Senate Judiciary Committee scheduled a vote to move the Kavanaugh nomination to the full Senate floor for this morning before the hearing had even begun and plainly told reporters that they had already made up their minds in favor of Kavanaugh. Highly unprofessional outbursts during the hearing from male Senators supporting Kavanaugh were commonplace. Meanwhile, legions of Judge Kavanaugh's supporters spent the last week attempting to stop and/or scare Dr. Ford from testifying at all with death threats so credible that she and her family were forced to move.
Those who have defended this non-process discredit their frequent critiques of the Me Too movement and of others who come forward with allegations of sexual violence and/or harassment. Their main line of critique, after all, has been that the disclosure of such accusations often results in a lack of due process. And yet what precisely have they opposed throughout this entire episode but due process? Why the fear of knowledge if one is confident of Judge Kavanaugh's innocence? It is now abundantly clear that such persons do not care about the truth so much as about the advancement of certain outcomes.
To the end that this was a show trial, we concluded this inquisition with little more information than with which we began and have been asked here to judge on the matter of credibility primarily on the basis simply of how these two specific individuals composed themselves yesterday. My observation about that would be that one of them was visibly terrified and traumatized, but otherwise a normal human being, while the other, the Supreme Court nominee, showed himself to be so short-tempered and aggressive-natured that he can barely control his faculties WHILE SOBER, let alone drunk.
Those are my observations.
A total nonsense post. Not one fact.
Captdon
09-28-2018, 09:04 AM
No she just said that it’s heavily skewed towards men.
Which proves what exactly?
Captdon
09-28-2018, 09:09 AM
Another accusation of lying--see link--with no evidence to back it up.
The left seems to be stuck on everyone is lying.
Chris, it's an attempt to discredit you and I. It's mostly me but you are on their hit list. It is now the leftist approach- lie and lie and, then, lie some more.
I've told them all to go to the mods is they have a complaint. That's how it goes.
Chloe
09-28-2018, 09:09 AM
Which proves what exactly?
It doesn’t proven anything it’s just a statistical fact/point.
Chris
09-28-2018, 09:10 AM
Kavanaugh confirmation vote, live stream @ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Sa-JkHhy-U
Some Dem Sens just walked out.
Hey, I have a question on Judiciary Committee rules, which I read last night but still couldn't understand voting. When they vote, is it a simple majority that decides?
Chris
09-28-2018, 09:12 AM
Chris, it's an attempt to discredit you and i. It's mostly me but you are on their hit list. It is now the leftist approach- lie and lie and, then, lie some more.
And if you ask for evidence, it's not evidence that's produced, here or hearing, but (as Who called it recently) dogpile.
Captdon
09-28-2018, 09:12 AM
One of Kavanaugh's last questioners - I didn't catch the Senator's name - pointed out that Kavanaugh had failed/refused to answer that question at least eight times to that point, and asked him yet again. When it quickly became apparent that Kavanaugh was going to launch into another speech, repeating the same irrelevant talking points in lieu of answering, the Senator simply said, "I'll take that as a No" and moved on. Kavanaugh had clearly been coached to take up as much of the Democratic questioners' five minutes as possible - the Republican Senators' designated questioner's softball inquiries were no threat - but that particular Senator didn't let him get away with it. Now the usual suspects are crying that Kavanugh was "rudely interrupted" and not allowed to speak. :rollseyes:
When has the accused ever asked for an investigation? Everyone of those Dems was told there was nothing for the FBI to look into. They were told that by the FBI. You ;lefties put on a clown show and it flopped.
Captdon
09-28-2018, 09:16 AM
You may have noticed - or not - that the questions were being repeated because Kavanaugh was consistently refusing to give direct answers to them.
No, he wasn't the one who decides it. He said he would like whatever the committee decided. that's all he could say.
Let the committee do it's job. They hid the letter when it could have been checked out. Why is that? They knew the witnesses were going to refute Ford's statements, which is exactly what they did. Not one person she named said anything happened.
You side pulled a dirt stunt and it didn't work. Live with it.
Chris
09-28-2018, 09:18 AM
Which proves what exactly?
It doesn’t proven anything it’s just a statistical fact/point.
But it also suffices, somehow, for articles like this: You Must Believe Women, And Other Facts (http://digg.com/2018/believe-christine-blasey-ford): "What I hope doesn't get lost in this sea of analysis is the simple fact that you should believe victims of sexual assault, especially women." Women should report it but this argument assumes its conclusion. Of course we should believe women who are in fact victims, but claims are insufficent.
stjames1_53
09-28-2018, 09:21 AM
Nobody pulled your chain boy.
a racist attack?
Captdon
09-28-2018, 09:23 AM
It doesn’t proven anything it’s just a statistical fact/point.
That's right. It's all it is.
Chris
09-28-2018, 09:29 AM
Here's the C-SPAN live feed, much better than the biased CBS feed.
Edit, removed, that was yesterday's "live" feed.
Common Sense
09-28-2018, 09:42 AM
My post was spot on.
I disagree. You made a baseless personal accusation and indeed were the first person to derail the thread.
I'm fairly certain you won't be able to see that or admit to it, yet it remains a fact.
Anyways...
stjames1_53
09-28-2018, 09:44 AM
I disagree. You made a baseless personal accusation and indeed were the first person to derail the thread.
I'm fairly certain you won't be able to see that or admit to it, yet it remains a fact.
Anyways...
so, since you claimed he derailed this thread, you've decided to derail it further.......................instead of actually continuing to discus the actual topic.........
Common Sense
09-28-2018, 09:47 AM
so, since you claimed he derailed this thread, you've decided to derail it further.......................instead of actually continuing to discus the actual topic.........
I tried. I asked that it be dropped repeatedly. It wasn't.
I tend to just not let hypocrisy go unchecked. But I'm also willing to discuss the topic.
stjames1_53
09-28-2018, 09:52 AM
I tried. I asked that it be dropped repeatedly. It wasn't.
I tend to just not let hypocrisy go unchecked. But I'm also willing to discuss the topic.
Then man up and discuss the OP.....prove you're bigger than he is
Common Sense
09-28-2018, 09:53 AM
Then man up and discuss the OP.....prove you're bigger than he is
You understand that you're also doing the same, right?
Chris
09-28-2018, 09:55 AM
I disagree. You made a baseless personal accusation and indeed were the first person to derail the thread.
I'm fairly certain you won't be able to see that or admit to it, yet it remains a fact.
Anyways...
And the basis for your opinion is...?
Here's the exchange for review:
Other than by way of suggesting that the tears of an accused do not necessarily imply innocence? No. I thought that was clear.
Right, tears imply nothing. Nor Ford's shakey, emotional voice.
Well, if they were fake, she missed her calling as an actress.
Maybe she did. Chloe hoped for a civil and rational discussion this one time. You screwed that.
The first implication was that Kananaugh's emotional testimony was fake. My reply was emotions demonstrate nothing in either case. The response to that demonstrated the implication Kavanaugh was faking it, projecting that into what I said. Captdon said that implication was in his opinion not civil and rational.
Now certainly you can disagree with whether the impication was such. That's disagreement. None of that derailed the thread. What did was direct accusations of lying that were never backed up, just the same as in the hearing. The parallel between here and hearing as important.
Chris
09-28-2018, 09:59 AM
I tried. I asked that it be dropped repeatedly. It wasn't.
I tend to just not let hypocrisy go unchecked. But I'm also willing to discuss the topic.
OK, so now you are making accusations of hypocrisy without any demonstrable evidence.
Again, what's happening here and in the hearing are parallel. We have accusations, we have testimony from different views, we have no evidence, no demonstration, but we have some who take accusations as sufficient for evidence of guilt.
Common Sense
09-28-2018, 10:01 AM
And the basis for your opinion is...?
Here's the exchange for review:
The first implication was that Kananaugh's emotional testimony was fake. My reply was emotions demonstrate nothing in either case. The response to that demonstrated the implication Kavanaugh was faking it, projecting that into what I said. Captdon said that implication was in his opinion not civil and rational.
Now certainly you can disagree with whether the impication was such. That's disagreement. None of that derailed the thread. What did was direct accusations of lying that were never backed up, just the same as in the hearing. The parallel between here and hearing as important.
You seem to ignore the initial accusation by Capton. You haven't asked that he prove his accusation.
Up until Capton's accusation, there were no personal slights or attacks. Capton's was the first. That's where this started. The responses were simply in response to his accusation.
Again, the first personal attack was Capton's.
Anyways, this has become silly...
Chris
09-28-2018, 10:03 AM
You seem to ignore the initial accusation by Capton. You haven't asked that he prove his accusation.
Up until Capton's accusation, there were no personal slights or attacks. Capton's was the first. That's where this started. The responses were simply in response to his accusation.
Again, the first personal attack was Capton's.
Anyways, this has become silly...
It was his opinion based on the exchanges reposted. He was responding to what was said. That has still not happened for the accusation of lying and now of hypocrisy. That is silly. Give it a rest.
Abby08
09-28-2018, 10:05 AM
Ah, I see, Kavanaugh's emotional state was fake, but, Ford's wasn't.
Way to go, some of you, convict based on your own personal thoughts/opinions...party....and not actual evidence.
Speaking of evidence, it doesn't appear as though Ford has any, something most likely did happen to her, 36 years ago, but, she hasn't proven, so far, Kavanaugh is responsible, even her own witnesses are bowing out.
Sure, they're emotional, it's an emotional experience, for both of them, but, the burden of proof, lies with the accuser.
Ethereal
09-28-2018, 10:06 AM
I don't need to demonstrate anything. The forum can see what was said, and also see how you go to great lengths to say absolutely nothing.
C'mon man... this is the same guy who had two totally different reactions to the exact same post. What else needs to be said at this point?
stjames1_53
09-28-2018, 10:06 AM
You seem to ignore the initial accusation by Capton. You haven't asked that he prove his accusation.
Up until Capton's accusation, there were no personal slights or attacks. Capton's was the first. That's where this started. The responses were simply in response to his accusation.
Again, the first personal attack was Capton's.
Anyways, this has become silly...
and you had a chance to make a course correction, but failed to do so............................
So far, you've contributed nothing except to come in here and accuse people for the same thing you do......
Try to stay on topic. Show us how you are the bigger man
Safety
09-28-2018, 10:06 AM
so, since you claimed he derailed this thread, you've decided to derail it further.......................instead of actually continuing to discus the actual topic.........By your logic you are also derailing the thread, so you are admonishing someone for doing exactly what you just did?
Textbook definition of hypocrisy.
exotix
09-28-2018, 10:07 AM
*Breaking*
American Bar Association calls on Senate to delay Kavanaugh vote until FBI can investigate
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/408894-american-bar-association-calls-on-senate-to-hold-off-on-kavanaugh-vote-until
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ei=DEKuW764PM78zgKN14_YCQ&q=aba+kavanaugh+letter&oq=ABA+kavanaugh&gs_l=psy-ab.1.1.0i131j0i3j0i22i30l3.3115.6495..9132...0.0.. 0.59.546.10....2..0....1..gws-wiz.......0j0i71j0i131i67j0i67j0i10.q-9-rIZK05I
The American Bar Association (ABA) on Thursday called on the Senate Judiciary Committee to postpone a vote on Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court until the FBI can investigate accusations of sexual assault against him.
https://res.cloudinary.com/luvckye9s/image/upload/v1538147186/15_lw6qpp.png
https://res.cloudinary.com/luvckye9s/image/upload/v1538147210/16_p52p24.png
Common Sense
09-28-2018, 10:07 AM
While I'm undecided on what actually transpired between Ford and Kavanugh, I don't understand what Ford personally has to gain by going through this.
Ford coming forward is a life altering decision. Her life will never be the same. She has received death threats and her life has been permanently altered for the worse. She doesn't stand to gain anything personally or monetarily. So why would she lie?
Perhaps the truth is somewhere in between, but she has no real incentive to lie and he does.
Chris
09-28-2018, 10:07 AM
C'mon man... this is the same guy who had two totally different reactions to the exact same post. What else needs to be said at this point?
Well, the clique's all here. Thanks for referring to your trolling me again.
Common Sense
09-28-2018, 10:09 AM
and you had a chance to make a course correction, but failed to do so............................
So far, you've contributed nothing except to come in here and accuse people for the same thing you do......
Try to stay on topic. Show us how you are the bigger man
Try re reading the thread.
Again, you do understand that you are also contributing to the derailment? I assume this is the last I'll hear from you on this.
Common Sense
09-28-2018, 10:10 AM
It was his opinion based on the exchanges reposted. He was responding to what was said. That has still not happened for the accusation of lying and now of hypocrisy. That is silly. Give it a rest.
Ok.
Abby08
09-28-2018, 10:10 AM
While I'm undecided on what actually transpired between Ford and Kavanugh, I don't understand what Ford personally has to gain by going through this.
Ford coming forward is a life altering decision. Her life will never be the same. She has received death threats and her life has been permanently altered for the worse. She doesn't stand to gain anything personally or monetarily. So why would she lie?
Perhaps the truth is somewhere in between, but she has no real incentive to lie and he does.
Who says she isn't gaining anything, monetarily?
You raise a very good question, why, after 36 years, is she bringing it up? At this, particular time?
Chris
09-28-2018, 10:10 AM
While I'm undecided on what actually transpired between Ford and Kavanugh, I don't understand what Ford personally has to gain by going through this.
Ford coming forward is a life altering decision. Her life will never be the same. She has received death threats and her life has been permanently altered for the worse. She doesn't stand to gain anything personally or monetarily. So why would she lie?
Perhaps the truth is somewhere in between, but she has no real incentive to lie and he does.
I believe her story. I have no reason to doubt it.
She came forward because I think she was forced to. The letter she sent to Feinstein was leaked. Her reputation was put on the line.
I think she did the right thing. Women should feel free to come forward and report and speak out when sexually assaulted.
I also believe Kavanaugh.
But he's innocent till proven guilty and that's on his accuser.
Ethereal
09-28-2018, 10:11 AM
Chris/Captdon, I'm tired of the stupid bull$#@! you two always bring into a discussion. I'm going to address this now, and then let the forum see how both of you are a cancer to tPF.
This was Dr. Who's response about Dr. Ford's tears.
This is Captdon saying Dr. Who screwed up a civil and rational discussion.
This is Dr. Who asking how she screwed up a civil and rational discussion.
This is me making an accurate statement regarding Captdon's accusation.
This is Chris playing dumb when all he had to do is scroll up and see where the lie occurred.
This is Captdon lying once again. As any rational thinking human can see, Chris and Captdon are not only outright lying in this thread, they are also the sole cause for most of the animosity that occurs at tPF.
We now know for a fact that if someone other than a conservative had made the exact same comment as Captdon, Chris's reaction would have been 100% different. We now know that Chris is the tPF king of double, triple and even quadruple standards. Chris could argue that the sky is purple and that the grass is pink if it meant contradicting a non-conservative member of the forum. Personally, I don't see any point in engaging with these particular members anymore. It only gives them validation and attention.
Common Sense
09-28-2018, 10:11 AM
Who says she isn't gaining anything, monetarily?
You raise a very good question, why, after 36 years, is she bringing it up? At this, particular time?
How is she gaining monetarily? Are you claiming she's being secretly paid?
She's explained why she's come forward.
Chris
09-28-2018, 10:12 AM
*Breaking*
American Bar Association calls on Senate to delay Kavanaugh vote until FBI can investigate
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/408894-american-bar-association-calls-on-senate-to-hold-off-on-kavanaugh-vote-until
https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ei=DEKuW764PM78zgKN14_YCQ&q=aba+kavanaugh+letter&oq=ABA+kavanaugh&gs_l=psy-ab.1.1.0i131j0i3j0i22i30l3.3115.6495..9132...0.0.. 0.59.546.10....2..0....1..gws-wiz.......0j0i71j0i131i67j0i67j0i10.q-9-rIZK05I
The American Bar Association (ABA) on Thursday called on the Senate Judiciary Committee to postpone a vote on Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination to the Supreme Court until the FBI can investigate accusations of sexual assault against him.
https://res.cloudinary.com/luvckye9s/image/upload/v1538147186/15_lw6qpp.png
https://res.cloudinary.com/luvckye9s/image/upload/v1538147210/16_p52p24.png
And there's this:
https://i.snag.gy/qZNxdU.jpg
Ethereal
09-28-2018, 10:13 AM
...he is lying.
This assumes he has the ability to distinguish between fantasy and reality. It's entirely possible that he does not.
Common Sense
09-28-2018, 10:15 AM
I believe her story. I have no reason to doubt it.
She came forward because I think she was forced to. The letter she sent to Feinstein was leaked. Her reputation was put on the line.
I think she did the right thing. Women should feel free to come forward and report and speak out when sexually assaulted.
I also believe Kavanaugh.
But he's innocent till proven guilty and that's on his accuser.
He's innocent in the eyes of the law, but this isn't a legal procedure. It's a glorified job interview.
If someone's testimony creates a doubt with regards to a candidates suitability, then it should be a factor to consider.
Hoosier8
09-28-2018, 10:15 AM
This assumes he has the ability to distinguish between fantasy and reality. It's entirely possible that he does not.
Projection?
Abby08
09-28-2018, 10:15 AM
How is she gaining monetarily? Are you claiming she's being secretly paid?
She's explained why she's come forward.
I have my suspicions, nothing I can prove, of course....much like, I don't think she can prove it was Kavanaugh.
Hoosier8
09-28-2018, 10:15 AM
Funny how the dems are whining about no investigation when they refused to participate in the investigate.
exotix
09-28-2018, 10:16 AM
And there's this:
https://i.snag.gy/qZNxdU.jpgGOP Congress actually tries to make out Mark Judge as so disabled that its a disgrace to call for bringing 'em in ... known as *bleeding-heart conservatives* ... when in fact Mark Judge has been tormented since he and Kavanaugh gang-raped all these teenage girls ...
Common Sense
09-28-2018, 10:17 AM
I have my suspicions, nothing I can prove, of course....much like, I don't think she can prove it was Kavanaugh.
Suspicions based on what?
Hoosier8
09-28-2018, 10:20 AM
GOP Congress actually tries to make out Mark Judge as so disabled that its a disgrace to call for bringing 'em in ... known as *bleeding-heart conservatives* ... when in fact Mark Judge has been tormented since he and Kavanaugh gang-raped all these teenage girls ...
Like a rich spoiled jet setter whining she couldn't fly to DC because she was afraid of flying?
Abby08
09-28-2018, 10:20 AM
If it was a Democrat, set to be confirmed and, the accuser was a Republican, the opinions of all of you who are saying, "he's lying," would be reversed.
Abby08
09-28-2018, 10:21 AM
Suspicions based on what?
Timing.
Hoosier8
09-28-2018, 10:23 AM
Many of the democrats in the Senate have been prosecutors but now play like they wouldn't know how to investigate anything.
Common Sense
09-28-2018, 10:23 AM
Timing.
I don't see how that is evidence of a payoff. She's explained why she came forward now.
Chris
09-28-2018, 10:23 AM
GOP Congress actually tries to make out Mark Judge as so disabled that its a disgrace to call for bringing 'em in ... known as *bleeding-heart conservatives* ... when in fact Mark Judge has been tormented since he and Kavanaugh gang-raped all these teenage girls ...
Actually, Mark is the one who says that's why he doesn't want to testify publicly. Read his letter, end of paragraph 1.
Hoosier8
09-28-2018, 10:23 AM
Dem Whitehouse is making it clear that the main reason he is voting against Kavanaugh is because he is a Republican nominee.
Common Sense
09-28-2018, 10:24 AM
Dem Whitehouse is making it clear that the main reason he is voting against Kavanaugh is because he is a Republican nominee.
Who?
Chris
09-28-2018, 10:25 AM
He's innocent in the eyes of the law, but this isn't a legal procedure. It's a glorified job interview.
If someone's testimony creates a doubt with regards to a candidates suitability, then it should be a factor to consider.
Innocence till proven guilty is a common civil(ized) principle. Be it in a court of law or the court of public opinion, it's a general standard.
"The presumption of innocence is the principle that one is considered innocent unless proven guilty. It was traditionally expressed by the Latin maxim ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (“the burden of proof is on the one who declares, not on one who denies”)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Presumption_of_innocence
It's only natural that that principle is found also in law and declarations of rights.
exotix
09-28-2018, 10:25 AM
Like a rich spoiled jet setter whining she couldn't fly to DC because she was afraid of flying?She came in to testify ... Mark Judge is hiding like a fugitive.
Hoosier8
09-28-2018, 10:26 AM
She came in to testify ... Mark Judge is hiding like a fugitive.
So her lying is AOK for you. Got it.
Abby08
09-28-2018, 10:26 AM
I don't see how that is evidence of a payoff. She's explained why she came forward now.
Because of a letter she wrote, that got ' leaked' at this most opportune time.
I never said it was proof, just that I had my suspicions.
exotix
09-28-2018, 10:27 AM
Actually, Mark is the one who says that's why he doesn't want to testify publicly. Read his letter, end of paragraph 1.
So her lying is AOK for you. Got it.
Mark Judge is a coward while his victims are brave.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.1.8 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.