March 27, 2019, 08:13:16 AM


Author Topic: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing  (Read 8340 times)

Offline Mr.DeMartino

  • Waygook Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 6354
  • Gender: Male
Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« on: September 28, 2018, 09:00:40 AM »
The Ford-Kavanaugh hearings just finished and here I am at work on about 3 hours of sleep. I watched all of Fords and watched some of Kavanaugh's on the way to work this morning. What a spectacle in the sense that this is probably the most drama we've had since election night.

My impression is that I found Ford very credible. She came across as genuine and "real" without any attempts to deliberately deceive. Any of the inconsistencies are likely the result of time and/or trauma. I don't care who paid for her polygraph or her lawyers or any of that stuff. As far as the flying stuff, I chalk that up to a delay stunt by her lawyers that she went along with. I do think her lawyers might have skirted the edge with keeping her in the loop, but that's nothing to do with her.

I also found Kavanaugh credible. He really came across as someone genuinely upset over a false accusation and attempts to smear his character. He was a bit more "polished" in certain ways in his responses, which didn't come across well, but then again he is a public figure and lawyer. I do agree with the Republicans that it's disingenuous for the Democrats to demand an investigation now, when they sat on this, then leaked it at the last second.

I dunno. It's a tough call. If this came out before Kavanaugh was nominated, I'd say pass. But I do think that given the lack of concrete evidence against him, and with both parties offering credible testimony, that we have to fall back to our system, and our system is one in which we have the presumption of innocence. However, I do think things should be delayed as the other claims are vetted, though at least two of those (the gangbang one and the anonymous letter) seem less than credible and there are also serious questions about the second accuser.

Offline Andyman

  • Expert Waygook
  • ****
  • Posts: 509
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #1 on: September 28, 2018, 09:23:58 AM »
Quote
But I do think that given the lack of concrete evidence against him, and with both parties offering credible testimony, that we have to fall back to our system, and our system is one in which we have the presumption of innocence.

In principle, you're not wrong, but this is about suitability for public office rather than a criminal prosecution. Before the MRA snowflakes jump on me for that, let me clarify that that doesn't mean that we should operate under a presumption of guilt. Our system is one in which the Senate weighs up the candidate's various qualifications and shortcomings for a federal job, and this kind of thing, however tawdry and however inconclusive the evidence, can be part of that process. I hate that I have to paraphrase Dianne Feinstein, but I think she's right to ask - Is there really nobody better that we can nominate for the job? Taking all of this into account, should we convince ourselves that we couldn't have found anyone else that could perform equally well or better in this position? Leaving questions of guilt and innocence aside, regardless of party affiliation, if I were a Senator I'd probably be thinking that we can do better.


Offline Mr.DeMartino

  • Waygook Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 6354
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #2 on: September 28, 2018, 09:55:41 AM »
Someone will always have a different opinion about someone being better. In this case, someone being better amongst Republicans is going to be people each pointing at someone different and some ending up back at Kavanaugh as the best choice.

And if someone better means "Meets the approval of Diane Feinstein", then 'better' really means
'liberal', which is being ridiculous.

Could someone be better than Kavanaugh? Sure, but that would just be our opinion. For my part, I wasn't the biggest fan of him, but whatever. It's not like I'm a professional constitutional lawyer or anything, so all I can go off of is a little research and a few times watching him on video. 

Offline MayorHaggar

  • The Legend
  • *****
  • Posts: 3616
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #3 on: September 28, 2018, 10:04:47 AM »
Things Republicans now support:

- putting a gang rapist on the Supreme Court

- making a pedophile a state governor

- endorsing constant school shootings in order to sell more guns

- rushing to the defense of violent, murderous Nazis

- championing an insane 9/11 truther conspiracy theorist who denies the existence of school shootings and who encourages other people to harass and make death threats against Sandy Hook parents

Did I leave anything out?
Quote
Quote from: Mr.DeMartino on Yesterday at 01:40:32 PM

    Trump is a liar and a con man.

Offline Mr.DeMartino

  • Waygook Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 6354
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #4 on: September 28, 2018, 10:35:40 AM »
Things Republicans now support:

- putting a gang rapist on the Supreme Court
There's proof Kavanaugh was a gang rapist? As far as I know that claim has not been substantiated.

Same with Roy Moore. By all accounts the women he wanted to date were over the age of 16, which I won't go so far as to label out and out pedophilia, considering that back in 1945, marrying at 16 would still be the norm in a lot of places. I do think Roy Moore was real dodgy though.

No one's endorsing school shootings. That's like saying BLM endorses cop killings to stop police violence.

No one defended Nazis. The fact that you selectively edited and misinterpreted things does not make something so.

They don't endorse Alex Jones, they worry about the implications for free speech. Alex Jones may be spout insane theories, but he has every right to spout those provided he remains within the confines of the law.

Online Savant

  • Hero of Waygookistan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1877
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #5 on: September 28, 2018, 11:35:02 AM »
Kavanaugh's time in the Committee's spotlight may as well have been called "A lot of angry white men".


Offline Mr.DeMartino

  • Waygook Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 6354
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #6 on: September 28, 2018, 12:11:27 PM »
Kavanaugh's time in the Committee's spotlight may as well have been called "A lot of angry white men".
If you (believed you) were falsely accused of rape, I imagine you'd be angry too.

The sad part of all of this is we didn't get anymore clarity when it comes to whether or not this actually took place. We got to hear both parties and assess their credibility, and I think both came off as credible, but I can't say one way or the other whether or not this happened.

However, given that the other people named by Ford have all denied in some form or another the even taking place, then I think you have to give the slight edge to Kavanaugh. It's really a shame that his confirmation will be viewed as a reflection on the credibility of Dr. Ford, when it shouldn't be.

Online Savant

  • Hero of Waygookistan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1877
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #7 on: September 28, 2018, 12:17:28 PM »
Kavanaugh's time in the Committee's spotlight may as well have been called "A lot of angry white men".
If you (believed you) were falsely accused of rape, I imagine you'd be angry too.

The sad part of all of this is we didn't get anymore clarity when it comes to whether or not this actually took place. We got to hear both parties and assess their credibility, and I think both came off as credible, but I can't say one way or the other whether or not this happened.

However, given that the other people named by Ford have all denied in some form or another the even taking place, then I think you have to give the slight edge to Kavanaugh. It's really a shame that his confirmation will be viewed as a reflection on the credibility of Dr. Ford, when it shouldn't be.

1) Kavanaugh wasn't the only "angry white man" on show.
2) They have not denied that the event took place. They have confirmed not to have been aware of the event.
3) Mark Judge needs to be subpoenaed.
4) There needs to be an FBI Investigation.

Offline Mr.DeMartino

  • Waygook Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 6354
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #8 on: September 28, 2018, 12:27:51 PM »
1) Kavanaugh wasn't the only "angry white man" on show.
2) They have not denied that the event took place. They have confirmed not to have been aware of the event.
3) Mark Judge needs to be subpoenaed.
4) There needs to be an FBI Investigation.

1)The Democrats were angry too. Everyone was angry. I don't care if they're white or black, male or female.
2) I believe there is some variance and that's what I meant some form or another. I think one has no memory (not the same as outright denial), and I think another has flatly denied it. Still, no one who was alleged to have been there has corroborated the story.
3) I'd be fine with Judge being deposed.
4) I do agree that a 1-2 week delay for at least a cursory investigation is fine. Either that or a longer investigation with the promise by Dems that if nothing comes up, then the Republicans can confirm Kavanaugh during the lame duck session, even if they lose the Senate.

Offline MoneyMike

  • Super Waygook
  • ***
  • Posts: 260
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #9 on: September 28, 2018, 12:32:08 PM »
Ford seemed credible, so did Kavanaugh.

There is a reeeeeeal big problem with denying K's confirmation over this though. If all it takes is one accusation which has no evidence or witnesses (other than the accuser) it's hard to see how America will ever appoint someone to SCOTUS ever again. There is too much incentive for the other party to drum up some nonsense accusation at the last moment. (Not saying Ford's accusation was nonsense, but unless some people come forward to substantiate her claims it's 100% un-provable) And the way the Dem's held this until the very last minute (despite Feinstein having the accusation much earlier) is shady as hell.

As far as the gang rape accusation, that is almost impossible to believe. I mean think about it. This woman went to TEN parties where she witnessed the drugging and gang raping of a girl / girls in plain view of everyone. And she kept going to the parties. And didn't call the police. Or try to stop it. I'm sorry, any reasonable person is going to call bullshit on that one.

Offline Angeh93

  • Explorer
  • *
  • Posts: 9
  • Gender: Female
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #10 on: September 28, 2018, 12:35:24 PM »
And here we have it- men commenting on the "credibility" of a woman who was sexually assaulted. The problem with the world and why women who are assaulted are so often cast aside is clear right here- because when someone comes forward the choice is not first to believe her, but rather unpack her 'credibility' and measure it up against her attacker's credibility. Shameful.

Offline MoneyMike

  • Super Waygook
  • ***
  • Posts: 260
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #11 on: September 28, 2018, 12:51:01 PM »
And here we have it- men commenting on the "credibility" of a woman who was sexually assaulted. The problem with the world and why women who are assaulted are so often cast aside is clear right here- because when someone comes forward the choice is not first to believe her, but rather unpack her 'credibility' and measure it up against her attacker's credibility. Shameful.

Errrr what? What else is there to go on? There is no evidence, and the person she says witnessed it says he didn't. The mere fact that anyone is even entertaining these accusations is proof of how seriously our countries treat sexual assault. Do you think they would have had a hearing if someone had accused Kavanaugh of literally any other crime with no evidence or witnesses?

What else can someone do? Just assume he's guilty and ruin his life? Because if so, Bernie Sanders once touched me in my naughty place. It was in a house somewhere. Sometime in the 90's probably. Bill Clinton witnessed it, but he's going to deny that. Guess Bernie can't run for president in 2020 now, right? Is this how things work?

Online eggieguffer

  • Waygook Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 5233
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #12 on: September 28, 2018, 01:03:01 PM »
And here we have it- men commenting on the "credibility" of a woman who was sexually assaulted. The problem with the world and why women who are assaulted are so often cast aside is clear right here- because when someone comes forward the choice is not first to believe her, but rather unpack her 'credibility' and measure it up against her attacker's credibility. Shameful.

Errrr what? What else is there to go on? There is no evidence, and the person she says witnessed it says he didn't. The mere fact that anyone is even entertaining these accusations is proof of how seriously our countries treat sexual assault. Do you think they would have had a hearing if someone had accused Kavanaugh of literally any other crime with no evidence or witnesses?

What else can someone do? Just assume he's guilty and ruin his life? Because if so, Bernie Sanders once touched me in my naughty place. It was in a house somewhere. Sometime in the 90's probably. Bill Clinton witnessed it, but he's going to deny that. Guess Bernie can't run for president in 2020 now, right? Is this how things work?

Yep, even when parents have their only child murdered the police still check all the details of their story on the off chance one of them killed the kid. Don't know why women feel they should be a special case in law.

Offline Danield

  • Adventurer
  • *
  • Posts: 48
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #13 on: September 28, 2018, 01:16:35 PM »
I never got the all (insert group) should be believed concerning a crime.

Nobody should be believed because they are apart of (whatever group). All crimes should be taken seriously.  When something is reported, it should be investigated by the appropriate body. If evidence is found (not feeling... EVIDENCE), then the appropriate actions should be taken.

This is appropriate for all crimes for all individuals.

Right now Ford's testimony is all based on feelings. Need some real evidence to keep Kavanaugh from being confirmed. Kavanaugh has at least some evidence in the form of his calendar.

Don't think either side is swinging the hard liners with their moral posturing. Think the moderates are more likely to lead to K as this is a bit of a circus. Also, the gang rape claims seem so far fetched it probably hurt Ford's chances with moderates. Almost in Alex Jones  conspiracy territory at that point.

Online Savant

  • Hero of Waygookistan
  • *****
  • Posts: 1877
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #14 on: September 28, 2018, 01:20:24 PM »
I never got the all (insert group) should be believed concerning a crime.

Nobody should be believed because they are apart of (whatever group). All crimes should be taken seriously.  When something is reported, it should be investigated by the appropriate body. If evidence is found (not feeling... EVIDENCE), then the appropriate actions should be taken.

This is appropriate for all crimes for all individuals.

Right now Ford's testimony is all based on feelings. Need some real evidence to keep Kavanaugh from being confirmed. Kavanaugh has at least some evidence in the form of his calendar.

Don't think either side is swinging the hard liners with their moral posturing. Think the moderates are more likely to lead to K as this is a bit of a circus. Also, the gang rape claims seem so far fetched it probably hurt Ford's chances with moderates. Almost in Alex Jones  conspiracy territory at that point.

The calendar isn't going to list "rape party".

It also confirms in consultation with Mark Judge's book and Dr. Ford's testimony that he could have been present at the gathering instead of denying that he couldn't have been there.

Offline MoneyMike

  • Super Waygook
  • ***
  • Posts: 260
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #15 on: September 28, 2018, 01:23:35 PM »
And here we have it- men commenting on the "credibility" of a woman who was sexually assaulted. The problem with the world and why women who are assaulted are so often cast aside is clear right here- because when someone comes forward the choice is not first to believe her, but rather unpack her 'credibility' and measure it up against her attacker's credibility. Shameful.

Errrr what? What else is there to go on? There is no evidence, and the person she says witnessed it says he didn't. The mere fact that anyone is even entertaining these accusations is proof of how seriously our countries treat sexual assault. Do you think they would have had a hearing if someone had accused Kavanaugh of literally any other crime with no evidence or witnesses?

What you got was a 'sham' hearing, which was set up by the all-male Senate Republicans, hell-bent on 'plowing' this nomination through.  No amount of bleating and complaining about the hearing is rational from the Republicans because it was their idea, on their terms.  Why have a hearing when some of those senate Republicans had already gone public before the testimony about their feelings on the coming hearing?  That is what it boils down to.  There is a way to prove this one way or another, and that is an FBI investigation, that wouldn't take that long, a week or two at the most.  Then the result would something that the majority of right-thinking people would agree with.  But they can't do that.  Why?  Because they don't think there is time before they get absolutely panned in the elections in November.  Allow this to go any closer to those elections and they'll get annihilated.  This whole thing stinks of a party in disarray from the top down.  Is it any wonder that a party that continues to support a president who has had similar or worse accusations from women, should think this is just a 'boys will be boys' scenario?  Trump was heard to muse that Kavanaugh should have been more forceful in his nicey nicey Fox interview, because in Trump's eyes the louder and more blustery your rebuttal, the more believable you are.  Hence Kavanaugh's opening gambit.   

Why do you quote people if you're not going to respond to what they said? Just make a post and do your weird barely literate rant on your own.

Offline Mr.DeMartino

  • Waygook Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 6354
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #16 on: September 28, 2018, 01:35:59 PM »
And here we have it- men commenting on the "credibility" of a woman who was sexually assaulted. The problem with the world and why women who are assaulted are so often cast aside is clear right here- because when someone comes forward the choice is not first to believe her, but rather unpack her 'credibility' and measure it up against her attacker's credibility. Shameful.

Google 'Emmett Till'. Then 'Duke LaCrosse' and 'Rolling Stone Rape'.

There's taking someone's claims of assault seriously and there's taking someone's claims without question. The first is what we should all strive for. The second is dangerous and has been deadly in the past.

Humans, people, are allowed to assess the credibility of others, regardless of race or sex. If Ford had been a man, I would not begrudge the right of any woman to assess the claims of a man regarding being a victim of sexual assault.

Offline Mr.DeMartino

  • Waygook Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 6354
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #17 on: September 28, 2018, 01:43:05 PM »
What you got was a 'sham' hearing, which was set up by the all-male Senate Republicans, hell-bent on 'plowing' this nomination through.  No amount of bleating and complaining about the hearing is rational from the Republicans because it was their idea, on their terms. 
The Senate Democrats would have made ridiculous demands as well. In the end, the Republicans are the majority and control the committee. I do think they were a bit fast, but the Democrats would have stretched this out forever.

Quote
Why have a hearing when some of those senate Republicans had already gone public before the testimony about their feelings on the coming hearing?
I think a number of Democrats have prejudged Kavanaugh as well.

Quote
There is a way to prove this one way or another, and that is an FBI investigation, that wouldn't take that long, a week or two at the most.

An FBI investigation can (and likely would be) inconclusive. I do agree that a week or two delay is reasonable.

Quote
Then the result would something that the majority of right-thinking people would agree with.

Doubtful. I think people's minds on both sides are largely formed and it would take A LOT to get them to change.

Quote
Because they don't think there is time before they get absolutely panned in the elections in November. 

That's true that there is that fear. Conversely the Democrats are trying to drag this out in the hopes they do capture the Senate. Both sides playing politics.

Quote
This whole thing stinks of a party in disarray from the top down.

Now that's probably true. The Republican Party has not been a well-oiled machine as of late.

Quote
Hence Kavanaugh's opening gambit. 

I think if you were falsely accused of rape, or believed you were, as part of a political smear, you'd be rather forceful in your defense as well.

Offline MoneyMike

  • Super Waygook
  • ***
  • Posts: 260
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #18 on: September 28, 2018, 01:50:21 PM »
And here we have it- men commenting on the "credibility" of a woman who was sexually assaulted. The problem with the world and why women who are assaulted are so often cast aside is clear right here- because when someone comes forward the choice is not first to believe her, but rather unpack her 'credibility' and measure it up against her attacker's credibility. Shameful.

Errrr what? What else is there to go on? There is no evidence, and the person she says witnessed it says he didn't. The mere fact that anyone is even entertaining these accusations is proof of how seriously our countries treat sexual assault. Do you think they would have had a hearing if someone had accused Kavanaugh of literally any other crime with no evidence or witnesses?

What you got was a 'sham' hearing, which was set up by the all-male Senate Republicans, hell-bent on 'plowing' this nomination through.  No amount of bleating and complaining about the hearing is rational from the Republicans because it was their idea, on their terms.  Why have a hearing when some of those senate Republicans had already gone public before the testimony about their feelings on the coming hearing?  That is what it boils down to.  There is a way to prove this one way or another, and that is an FBI investigation, that wouldn't take that long, a week or two at the most.  Then the result would something that the majority of right-thinking people would agree with.  But they can't do that.  Why?  Because they don't think there is time before they get absolutely panned in the elections in November.  Allow this to go any closer to those elections and they'll get annihilated.  This whole thing stinks of a party in disarray from the top down.  Is it any wonder that a party that continues to support a president who has had similar or worse accusations from women, should think this is just a 'boys will be boys' scenario?  Trump was heard to muse that Kavanaugh should have been more forceful in his nicey nicey Fox interview, because in Trump's eyes the louder and more blustery your rebuttal, the more believable you are.  Hence Kavanaugh's opening gambit.   

Why do you quote people if you're not going to respond to what they said? Just make a post and do your weird barely literate rant on your own.

But I did.  I apologise that I confused you by using long words with three or more syllables, like Republican or Kavanaugh.  I'll try and make it easier for you next time.

 :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Yes. Your strange idea salad where you tossed 20 different ideas into a single paragraph confused me with its long words.

The timing of all of this is being controlled by the Dems. Feinstein held the accusation until the very end of the confirmation process rather than when it was getting started. It's pretty blatant political gamesmanship. But yes, when the Republicans agree to hold a hearing over it you call it a sham. Okay then.

Also, I'm not sure you're aware of this, but the FBI doesn't investigate sexual assault claims. That's a state matter, rather than a federal one. I think they should do an investigation to be honest, because the outright lunacy being thrown around about this confirmation is getting a little silly. (not the accusation itself, which may well be true, but the media circus surrounding it)

Offline Mr.DeMartino

  • Waygook Lord
  • *****
  • Posts: 6354
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #19 on: September 28, 2018, 01:53:10 PM »
The calendar isn't going to list "rape party".

It also confirms in consultation with Mark Judge's book and Dr. Ford's testimony that he could have been present at the gathering instead of denying that he couldn't have been there.
Yeah, I don't think the calender really adds much one way or the other since Ford can't say the exact date.

And for those that are doubting her because she can't remember the date (which exculpatory towards Kavanaugh, does not cast doubt on her testimony), I got in a couple fistfights in high school and I couldn't tell you the time of year. Heck, I might have one of them confused between freshman and sophomore year. On the other hand, I do know locations pretty well. Others might remember details like what was said or what people were wearing or stuff. Everyone is different.

The only usefulness is if Ford has an exact date and the calender indicates Kavanaugh was out of town or something. That hasn't happened and I doubt it will. Proves nothing either way.