Read 9134 times

  • Savant
  • Hero of Waygookistan

    • 1917

    • April 07, 2012, 11:35:31 pm
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #200 on: October 08, 2018, 08:52:34 am »
He brought up Liberal Mob Justice as somehow protesting for women's rights is a bad thing. I mentioned Charlottesville as a comparison of what a true "Mob" looks like.

As for the mob, look no further than Trump rallies and regular chants of "Lock her up!". The presumption of innocence it seems is only guaranteed as long as you are a right wing conservative. Hypocrisy abound!
Charlottesville wasn't mob violence. It was a single nut in a car. That's no more a "mob" or representative of the left/right than the guy who shot Steve Scalise and tried to kill a bunch of Republican members of Congress. I don't think that guy represents leftists. Too many people on both sides of the aisle think those people are representative, rather than extreme outliers.

If you think Charlottesville was just a "single nut in a car" then you don't know what the "mob" refers to. Think pitchforks and torches and racist chants.


  • Savant
  • Hero of Waygookistan

    • 1917

    • April 07, 2012, 11:35:31 pm
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #201 on: October 08, 2018, 08:55:30 am »
As far as guilt or innocence and "it's a job interview, not a trial". Most job interviews don't have sworn witness statements and surprise allegations of gang rape.

I for one, would like to see "innocent until proven guilty" broadly applied as a principle, rather than extremely narrowly.

"Innocent until proven guilty" is only a rule of law applied to white people by the governing party of white people. I think if Kavannaugh was black then.....ha ha ha....like Trump would nominate a black Judge to be a Supreme Court Justice.


  • CDW
  • Hero of Waygookistan

    • 1783

    • June 15, 2011, 01:22:09 pm
    • Banned
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #202 on: October 08, 2018, 09:20:52 am »


Fortunately, the angry left-wing mob in this case did not get its way.


Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #203 on: October 08, 2018, 09:22:05 am »



Ha, says the guy whose family just got exposed as criminals.


Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #204 on: October 08, 2018, 09:42:16 am »
First question to those that think Kavanaugh sexually assaulted anyone.  Do you believe in innocent until proven guilty? Not a court case?  What job interview consists of allegations?  Pure evil to ruin someones life based on NO EVIDENCE. 

Sorry I would never sexually assault anyone, would stick up for women that were truly sexually assaulted, but this situation is totally bonkers. 


I want to answer this honestly, as someone who is not registered as a Democrat and pays no fealty to the party. When Kavanagh was nominated I didn't pay much attention - just assumed that in a majority-Republican Senate, he'd sail through. I'd probably oppose a lot of his positions on certain issues, but with a Trump nominee, that's to be expected. So I wasn't part of some "mob" effort (I guess this is the new term applied by the Champions of Free Speech to people who exercise free speech) to derail his nomination at any cost.

For me it boiled down to the relative plausibility of two scenarios:

1) A man who left a long trail of evidence suggesting that he was a boorish drunk in his younger days once did an exceptionally boorish thing, which he may or may not remember

2) A woman with nothing to gain and everything to lose decided, for reasons that are still mysterious, to upend her life and commit perjury before the Senate

If, in his Senate testimony, Brett Kavanagh had said something akin to, "Look, my friends and I made a bunch of dumb jokes and exaggerations related to sex and drinking when we were in high school, and I'm very embarrassed about it now. It was stupid youthful machismo, and hopefully we didn't actually hurt anybody. I'm genuinely concerned to find out what happened to Dr. Ford, and my legal team is willing to work with hers to find out the details of this situation so that we can determine what exactly happened, and when. I need my name cleared but she also needs closure on this issue, and I hope we can help bring that to her..." then I would've thought, Okay, I don't think this guy really did it.

Instead, he chose - without any help from the Democrats, "outside leftwing money" or the Clintons - to deflect, mislead, obfuscate, insult and to portray himself as a victim of a conspiracy. And that hurt his credibility, to the point where I didn't think he should go to jail, but I did think that Trump could probably choose a more suitable nominee. In the end, that's what this is about.

Reasonable people can disagree about specific details here, but if you want to explain how anything that I've said reflects intentions of "pure evil", the floor is yours.


Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #205 on: October 08, 2018, 10:18:07 am »
One final thing... If you support Trump, you cannot claim the moral high ground here. We don't know whether Blasey-Ford's accusations are true or false, but we do know that Donald Trump has falsely accused or insinuated several people of crimes for which they were never found guilty. A contingent of his supporters (the QAnon crowd) are routinely turning up at his rallies under the pretext that Trump's political enemies are involved in sex abuse crimes, and are gleefully spreading this idea. A great number of you have argued that private media companies should be compelled to publish false accusations against public figures made by the likes of Alex Jones. Trump himself has encouraged his supporters to chant for the imprisonment of Hillary Clinton for unspecified crimes, or for incidents in which she has been found to bear no criminal responsibility. And let's not even get started on the Central Park Five, or Ted Cruz's father, or the deep state conspiracies that Trump peddles on Twitter... 

So spare me the moral posturing, and the BS claim that you're motivated by this lofty principle of due process. If you really believed in that, you'd join the rest of the world in disgust at Trump and his supporters. You don't care about "innocent until proven guilty." If you did, you'd be speaking up on behalf of the many people that Trump and his supporters have defamed, not shrugging it off as a price worth paying for a tax cut and poke in the eye of SJWs.

And as for this somehow representing a "new low" for the Supreme Court nomination process, I refer you to none other than Mitch McConnell.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/mitch-mcconnell-refuses-to-say-he-wouldnt-confirm-a-supreme-court-nominee-in-2020/ar-BBO3UHT?ocid=ientp_edu

« Last Edit: October 08, 2018, 10:22:11 am by Andyman »


Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #206 on: October 08, 2018, 10:30:03 am »
Donald Trump on the Central Park Jogger case in 2014:

Quote
My opinion on the settlement of the Central Park Jogger case is that it's a disgrace...

Settling doesn't mean innocence...

These young men do not exactly have the pasts of angels.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc-crime/donald-trump-central-park-settlement-disgrace-article-1.1838467




Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #207 on: October 08, 2018, 10:48:57 am »
Quote
"Look, my friends and I made a bunch of dumb jokes and exaggerations related to sex and drinking when we were in high school, and I'm very embarrassed about it now. It was stupid youthful machismo, and hopefully we didn't actually hurt anybody. I'm genuinely concerned to find out what happened to Dr. Ford, and my legal team is willing to work with hers to find out the details of this situation so that we can determine what exactly happened, and when. I need my name cleared but she also needs closure on this issue, and I hope we can help bring that to her..." then I would've thought, Okay, I don't think this guy really did it.

If someone accused me of something I didn't do, I think I'd probably deny the specific charge it and ask them to prove it. Wouldn't you? I don't think I'd admit to a lot of other embarrassing stuff that wasn't actually against the law and worry about whether the person accusing me got closure or not.

Not saying I think he did it or not, just saying that how he behaved is fairly typical of someone who is falsely accused.


Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #208 on: October 08, 2018, 10:52:52 am »
If you think Charlottesville was just a "single nut in a car" then you don't know what the "mob" refers to. Think pitchforks and torches and racist chants.
I remember the tiki-torches, but I don't recall any pitchforks.

The tiki-torch people were 200 people who affected nothing. The mob that went after Kavanaugh was the Democratic Party, the mainstream media, and many Democratic voters.

2) A woman with nothing to gain and everything to lose decided, for reasons that are still mysterious, to upend her life and commit perjury before the Senate
Yet we have multiple examples of false claims being made up in other cases. Usually there's one of three main reasons- 1) Revenge 2) Mental Illness 3) Fame and Attention. There's plenty of reason to make something up. And she has plenty to gain- fame, book deals, TV roles, a magazine cover, etc.

Speaking of revenge, I think much of the opposition to Kavanaugh is 'revenge by proxy'. Kavanaugh is a stand in for either lefties angry at Trump OR past victims of sexual violence who are angry. The problem with 'revenge by proxy' is that you can't assume that because something happened to you, that therefore Kavanaugh is guilty. That's not rational and no system of justice or arbitration would follow such a concept. It is inherently illogical.

Quote
"Look, my friends and I made a bunch of dumb jokes and exaggerations related to sex and drinking when we were in high school, and I'm very embarrassed about it now. It was stupid youthful machismo, and hopefully we didn't actually hurt anybody. I'm genuinely concerned to find out what happened to Dr. Ford, and my legal team is willing to work with hers to find out the details of this situation so that we can determine what exactly happened, and when. I need my name cleared but she also needs closure on this issue, and I hope we can help bring that to her..." then I would've thought, Okay, I don't think this guy really did it.

Funny, I base my idea off of whether or not he did it on the fact that the accuser changed the time, place, and who was at the party, and she changed her story about those things each time in response to information that became public that called her claim into question. I also go with the lack of confirmation by other parties alleged to have been there, as well as other inconsistencies such as her not knowing how she got too or from the party, her best friend not noticing her disappearing from the party, the fact that the family she grew up with is not standing by her, the fact that she apparently lied about her fear of flying (though in her defense, this may have been some scheme by her lawyers), the fact that she lied about the 2nd door and her fear of confined spaces, and the fact that she apparently lied about assisting someone with a polygraph, and that same person apparently engaged in attempted witness tampering AND was likely with her when she wrote her letter to Feinstein.

Speaking reasonably doesn't work these days in politics. Left or right, the other side will just see it as weakness and rip you to shreds.

Quote
without any help from the Democrats, "outside leftwing money" or the Clintons - to deflect, mislead, obfuscate, insult and to portray himself as a victim of a conspiracy

Which in all likelihood he was. The Democrats had this letter for over a month before it was leaked. The Democrats also embraced an incredibly dubious claimant in Swetnick, and labeled Kavanaugh a potential gang rapist and evil.

At that point, the gloves are off. Seriously dude, they accused him of being a possible gang rapist based on the accusation of someone who is not credible.

Don't you have any criticism for the utter circus and smearing that the Democratic Senators engaged in?


Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #209 on: October 08, 2018, 10:55:56 am »
Quote
If someone accused me of something I didn't do, I think I'd probably deny the specific charge it and ask them to prove it. Wouldn't you? I don't think I'd admit to a lot of other embarrassing stuff that wasn't actually against the law and worry about whether the person accusing me got closure or not.

Not saying I think he did it or not, just saying that how he behaved is fairly typical of someone who is falsely accused.

I'm not suggesting that he should have offered this kind of apology apropos of nothing. He was specifically asked about certain incidents and published comments in his past, about which he deflected or misled the Senate. I know that it's embarrassing to sit before a government committee and say, "That's a reference to three-way sex," but lying about it is worse, in my opinion. 
« Last Edit: October 08, 2018, 10:58:35 am by Andyman »


Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #210 on: October 08, 2018, 11:01:15 am »
A great number of you have argued that private media companies should be compelled to publish false accusations against public figures made by the likes of Alex Jones
I think most of us are arguing for an even-handed application of this. Either let Alex Jones say what he will OR apply the same standard to some of the crazy left-leaning things that celebrities and others post on their facebook/twitter/youtube.

Quote
Trump himself has encouraged his supporters to chant for the imprisonment of Hillary Clinton for unspecified crimes, or for incidents in which she has been found to bear no criminal responsibility.
I've always been against the EMAILS!!!!!!! and BENGHAZI!!!!!!! hysteria from the right. However it should be noted that Hillary's private email server is an established fact, one she admitted was against regulations. Now, I personally think that's at the level of 'reprimand' or perhaps firing if there was something really bad, it's not the same as Kavanaugh, where he has denied it in totality.

Quote
or Ted Cruz's father
You know that was a joke, right?

Quote
or the deep state conspiracies that Trump peddles on Twitter... 
Ehhhh, things are starting to look like there was at least a cabal of intel/FBI people who may have put their fingers on the scales of justice in order to look into Trump and possibly trash him.

Now, whether that is the 'Deep State' or just a group of people terrified at Trump becoming President is a whole nother kettle of fish.


Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #211 on: October 08, 2018, 11:05:47 am »
Quote
If someone accused me of something I didn't do, I think I'd probably deny the specific charge it and ask them to prove it. Wouldn't you? I don't think I'd admit to a lot of other embarrassing stuff that wasn't actually against the law and worry about whether the person accusing me got closure or not.

Not saying I think he did it or not, just saying that how he behaved is fairly typical of someone who is falsely accused.

I'm not suggesting that he should have offered this kind of apology apropos of nothing. He was specifically asked about certain incidents and published comments in his past, about which he deflected or misled the Senate. I know that it's embarrassing to sit before a government committee and say, "That's a reference to three-way sex," but lying about it is worse, in my opinion.

Letters to the FBI/SJC revealed that actually, those were the terms they really used. As I mentioned- slang is often specific to different groups of people and can vary in meaning.

It was the MSM that pushed this baloney idea that there is only one possible slang meaning across the entire U.S. for a certain phrase or word.

Also, in Kavanaugh's Op-Ed to the WSJ, he mentioned that some of his answers were given in the context of him being a father with his family watching him. What that means is that yes, he probably did try to sanitize things. But that's what all justices and nominees do. They sanitize statements and rulings they made.


Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #212 on: October 08, 2018, 11:15:40 am »
And I said I thought that it hurt his credibility, in terms of his suitability for one of the most important jobs in the country. That's my opinion. You've offered opinions on the credibility of Dr. Ford, and how it affects Kavanagh's suitability. There is scope for reasonable disagreement. I offered my opinion only response to the idea that anyone was motivated by an "evil" desire to bring a good man down with false accusations.
 


Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #213 on: October 08, 2018, 12:20:41 pm »
And I said I thought that it hurt his credibility, in terms of his suitability for one of the most important jobs in the country. That's my opinion. You've offered opinions on the credibility of Dr. Ford, and how it affects Kavanagh's suitability. There is scope for reasonable disagreement. I offered my opinion only response to the idea that anyone was motivated by an "evil" desire to bring a good man down with false accusations.

Yeah, I don't think anyone wanted to bring him down with false accusations (well, outside perhaps of Avenatti and Swetnick), I think there was a mix of people justifiably concerned about the accusations and also people who were grandstanding and those that were biased by the agenda they promote, which is also applicable to the other side. I do think some Senators swallowed their convictions and went ahead with their party's position (on both sides) when in times past they might not have done so.


  • Adel
  • Expert Waygook

    • 605

    • January 30, 2015, 12:50:26 am
    • The Abyss
    more
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #214 on: October 08, 2018, 08:45:54 pm »


  • CDW
  • Hero of Waygookistan

    • 1783

    • June 15, 2011, 01:22:09 pm
    • Banned
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #215 on: October 10, 2018, 06:22:48 am »


Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #216 on: October 10, 2018, 07:32:56 am »


  • Savant
  • Hero of Waygookistan

    • 1917

    • April 07, 2012, 11:35:31 pm
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #217 on: October 10, 2018, 08:10:40 am »


Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #218 on: October 10, 2018, 08:47:24 am »
Erm, what about Hillary?  Lock her up? Why?
Again, while I think EMAILS!!!!!!!! has been way overblown (grounds for reprimand/firing in my book, a fine/probation-level misdemeanor AT MOST, not prison), she did admit to violating procedure. Also, people on the right (somewhat justifiably) point to examples of people who committed similar offenses and were charged with crimes. The only difference is that they weren't a powerful politician.

This is different from Kavanaugh who has completely denied the offense ever took place.

Quote
Hmmm, that's not what your testimony sounded like Kavanaugh or your judicial history.
Yes, Kavanaugh like all justices on  the Supreme Court going back to the days of Whigs has had a partisan slant.


  • Savant
  • Hero of Waygookistan

    • 1917

    • April 07, 2012, 11:35:31 pm
Re: Ford-Kavanaugh Hearing
« Reply #219 on: October 10, 2018, 08:51:20 am »
Erm, what about Hillary?  Lock her up? Why?
Again, while I think EMAILS!!!!!!!! has been way overblown (grounds for reprimand/firing in my book, a fine/probation-level misdemeanor AT MOST, not prison), she did admit to violating procedure. Also, people on the right (somewhat justifiably) point to examples of people who committed similar offenses and were charged with crimes. The only difference is that they weren't a powerful politician.

This is different from Kavanaugh who has completely denied the offense ever took place.

Quote
Hmmm, that's not what your testimony sounded like Kavanaugh or your judicial history.
Yes, Kavanaugh like all justices on  the Supreme Court going back to the days of Whigs has had a partisan slant.

Can you name another Supreme Court Justice who went full-partisan like Kavanaugh did? Even Clarence Thomas didn't go full-Kavanaugh.