One and only Kavenaugh Hearings Thread (part 1)

[Jezcoe]

@DougBH

@calirepub

Yeah. It was only attempted rape.

There is absolutely no way to determine that there was any thought of such a thing. All we know from her own statement is that she went up to a bedroom with two drunk boys, was pushed on the bed, one of them whom she identified as Kavanaugh after 36 years started to remove some of her clothes and they stopped. The presumption should be they stopped when she wanted them to stop, shouldn’t it? Could she herself have stopped two football players, if the story is true?

That is not how the story went.

[BillBrown]

@DougBH

Kavanaugh wants to be on the Supreme Court, not to get in an ugly civil case over something that happened (or didn’t happen) 36 years ago.

I hope he goes after her. If Clarence Thomas had sued Anita Hill until her nose bled, this wouldn’t be happening.

[DougBH]

Yeah. The story goes she broke away from two football players. If that is true, she didn’t do it because they wanted to stop her from breaking away.

[MidwestIndy]

@BillBrown

@MidwestIndy

Yet another person who doensn’t understand how criminal and civil law works

You’re talking about yourself.

Quite the opposite.

[MidwestIndy]

@DougBH

Kavanaugh wants to be on the Supreme Court, not to get in an ugly civil case over something that happened (or didn’t happen) 36 years ago.

What the ■■■■ does what Kavanaugh “want” factor into the decision of whether he is or is not confirmed?

[BillBrown]

@Snow96

How do they prove it in court. All three testify under oath that they don’t recall any party like she describes they they all attended.

She has no one to back her story.

Do you see now how it’s proved she defamed him?

There is absolutely no way she could win the case unless she comes up with a witness that the jury believes.

[BillBrown]

@MidwestIndy

@DougBH

Kavanaugh wants to be on the Supreme Court, not to get in an ugly civil case over something that happened (or didn’t happen) 36 years ago.

What the ■■■■ does what Kavanaugh “want” factor into the decision of whether he is or is not confirmed?

He’s saying that Kavanaugh won’t sue her. I disagree. I think he might.

[DMK]

@reflechissez

@Joanne

@lulubee

@GWH

It may be after he’s confirmed.

May be what? Investigated?

I can’t speak for everyone, but I certainly don’t like the idea of having anyone on the bench who is guilty of sexually assaulting anyone.

I think those who are protesting so vehemently know the allegations are very likely true and that’s why they love the idea of a deadline and definitely don’t want it investigated.

And that will be my final word on this subject. You know where I stand on this issue and I know where everyone else stands.

This is garbage? How about the fact the only “evidence” that we know about is she said/he said? Hhow about the fact DiFi sat on this for two months?

There are only two reasons why she did that. Either she didn’t take it seriously, or she did but held it until the 11th hour for maximum impact. She didn’t tell Grassley and still has not turned over the unredacted letter.

Everything Feinstein is doing is politcally calculated. If she really cared about the victim, she would have respected her right to remain anonymous instead of letting it leak.

Plus, Grassley has gone out of his way to allow her to testify with multiple options as to the setting,. Ford’s attorneys are all operatives for Democrats and have been for years.

I don’t know for certain if Ford is lying or not. But I do know the actions of her attorneys and the Dem party do not appear to be those of people who want justice. It’s all about revenge for Garland and denying a conservative from being seated on the SC.

You keep saying this. You haven’t shown the source.

What courtesy, what empathy what can you possibly show that the democrats have extended to Ford. They seem to be distancing themselves from her like a hot potato.

[DMK]

Yet, you are willing to vilify Kavenahs’s for his. Why the different standards?

[madasheck]

Update: She’ll testify on Thursday, according to Politico.

The Senate Judiciary Committee has tentatively agreed to a hearing on Thursday with Christine Blasey Ford regarding her allegation that Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her while in high school, according to a person briefed on a call on Saturday night. Representatives of the committee will speak to Ford’s lawyers on Sunday to continue hammering out details, the person said.

Senate Judiciary Committee tentatively agrees to Thursday hearing with...

[MidwestIndy]

@BillBrown

@MidwestIndy

@DougBH

Kavanaugh wants to be on the Supreme Court, not to get in an ugly civil case over something that happened (or didn’t happen) 36 years ago.

What the ■■■■ does what Kavanaugh “want” factor into the decision of whether he is or is not confirmed?

He’s saying that Kavanaugh won’t sue her. I disagree. I think he might.

No he won’t. He’s a litigator he knows what is at stake. He does that he opens himself up to all sorts of testimony he doesn’t want of his former life even if he has changed his ways and isn’t the same man now as most adult tend to do.

[Ecamelio]

I do not understand how anyone cannot see this for the political trick it is. I do feel there are two issues, sexual assault and the horrible politics being made of it.

I am having a hard time being empathetic to a crime not reported to this day, by a person who may have an ax to grind with Judge Kavenaugh from a repo of her family home, that has a political activist as a lawyer that presented the opposite argument for democratic males, that occurred about 36 years ago in places unknown, was not reported, has different view than documented by a psychiatrist, that just so happen to be received by a democrat trying to stop the nomination almost 4 months ago, that has only redacted copies of her letter. I think the only crime here is what the democrats asked her to do and are using her for.

I hope someone gains the courage to just say no to new terms, let the accuser go first, set the date, and if she is not there go forward with the vote.

[GWH]

Key word tentatively.

[madasheck]

@Ecamelio

I do not understand how anyone cannot see this for the political trick it is. I do feel there are two issues, sexual assault and the horrible politics being made of it.

I am having a hard time being empathetic to a crime not reported to this day, by a person who may have an ax to grind with Judge Kavenaugh from a repo of her family home, that has a political activist as a lawyer that presented the opposite argument for democratic males, that occurred about 36 years ago in places unknown, was not reported, has different view than documented by a psychiatrist, that just so happen to be received by a democrat trying to stop the nomination almost 4 months ago, that has only redacted copies of her letter. I think the only crime here is what the democrats asked her to do and are using her for.

I hope someone gains the courage to just say no to new terms, let the accuser go first, set the date, and if she is not there go forward with the vote.

Sexual assault is not an easy thing to discuss even after all those years, and blaming and shaming her just doesn’t work. If you don’t think this isn’t difficult for her, you just don’t get it at all. It’s astounding how senstive some 'Pubs are to his feelings and not to hers.

[BillBrown]

@MidwestIndy

No he won’t. He’s a litigator he knows what is at stake. He does that he opens himself up to all sorts of testimony he doesn’t want of his former life even if he has changed his ways and isn’t the same man now as most adult tend to do.

We don’t know what he wants or doesn’t want. Maybe he doesn’t have anything to hide.
I hope he goes after her.
I’d like to see a lot of libel suits against these unproven and unprovable #metoo accusations. If there were the movement wouldn’t last much longer.

[Samm]

@reflechissez

@Samm

She was a victim of sexual assault, not attempted rape.

How do you know that. Is this part of THE truth?

Because given the circumstances that she described, if the two boys intended to rape her, she would not have been able to flee, she would have been raped.

[Samm]

@Vigilante

@Samm

@Vigilante

@Samm

@Vigilante

@Snow96

She doesn’t say she only had one beer. It says they started with a beer but the other two had been drinking more before she arrived.

We don’t know how much she consumed between the first beer and the alleged incient.

At 15 Im sure she hadnt built up much tolerance. You can assume she was loaded. You can aslo assume the culture of her peers this was encouraged. Doesn’t change the fact she was 15.

That is another factor that affects the credibility of her story. She not only did not have the tolerance to alcohol, which is well known to impair both perception and memory, but also she did not have the life experience to be able to distinguish between a groping and an attempted rape. I have no doubt that she was groped by someone, but there is serious doubt that her recollection of the incident is accurate. Her truth is not necessarily THE truth.

You know the last time I was pinned with a hand over my mouth was in Wrestling class. I didnt know I was being sexually assaulted. Im sure you are right.

If the two boys in the room with her had intended to rape her, she would not have been able to get away, she would have been raped. Yeah, no doubt that they probably wanted to have sex with her, but when she had the opportunity to leave, they let her go. She was a victim of sexual assault, not attempted rape.

You seem very sure she would have been raped. You state it as fact. I wonder how you know this.

Because I’m smart enough to know that in a two on one situation … two strong 17 yr-old boys on one 15 yr-old girl … that the boys would prevail if their intention was to rape her.

[Samm]

@Vigilante

@Samm

@lulubee

@Snow96

Why didn’t Fienstein bring for the accusation earlier so they committee could do more of an investigation. FBI probably looked at the letter and said, not much we can do on a 40 year old case.

Because the women asked her to keep the information confidential until further notice. It wasn’t until her name got out that Feinstein felt she could then make what she knew public.

Did you read the letter and Feinstein’s statement? If you did you would know the answer to your question.

And, for the umpteenth time, the optics of all male Republican judiciary committee majority doing this deadline crap and not agreeing to ask for an investigation before they vote is just bad. Don’t believe me and keep sticking your head in the sand. That’s fine by me.

Feinstein publically dropped the accusations of the letter at the eleventh hour without the name or specifics. Now Feinstein’s camp is suggesting that someone on her staff leaked the information to the media which forced her hand.

Do you want to buy a bridge in Brooklyn?

Youve been watching FOX againn

NBC evening news, actually.

I love it how when liberals run out of rational arguments, they play the FOX News card as though they are the only News organizations that is covering this fiasco.

[MidwestIndy]

@BillBrown

@MidwestIndy

No he won’t. He’s a litigator he knows what is at stake. He does that he opens himself up to all sorts of testimony he doesn’t want of his former life even if he has changed his ways and isn’t the same man now as most adult tend to do.

We don’t know what he wants or doesn’t want. Maybe he doesn’t have anything to hide.
I hope he goes after her.
I’d like to see a lot of libel suits against these unproven and unprovable #metoo accusations. If there were the movement wouldn’t last much longer.

Of course you would. You are the example of the reason why victims of sexual abuse rarely come forward and subsequently the reason why such conversations persists. Persumption of innocense is paramount but you have no problem victim shaming and planting seed of doubt to support someone that you think represents your laid out ideals.

Its very transparent. And you are a joke.

[TheDoctorIsIn]

@BillBrown

If there were the movement wouldn’t last much longer.

Yes, of course.

We need to stamp out this movement. How dare women stand up to their abusers!