Brett Kavanaugh Confirmation Thread

[Mojo Hand 4580]

15 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

It’s possible her testimony would be enough for me, but unlikely. I think that if anyone corroborated her story I would be more inclined to believe her. 

Do you believe that Trump sexually assaulted more than a dozen women? 

[Chrispy 132]

1 minute ago, sachick said:

And this is why more women don't say anything when it happens. Who will believe us anyways? It's our words against his and we could be ruining his precious reputation. We should have proof. You let me know what kind of proof would be sufficient for you to believe her or other woman. Anything short of DNA won't be considered good enough and even then, if there was any sort of DNA, he would just say it was consensual.

I agree with some of what you’re saying, but it’s a serious charge and requires serious evidence. You’re supposed to prove guilt, not the other way around. 

[realgreggym 837]

17 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

But you do support a political party that routinely dismisses those with whom they disagree.

 

You mean like when former dem vice pres nominee Joe Lieberman had to run as an independent for his senate reelection because he said something that dems didn't like. 

[Hank Scorpio 17731]

There are too many important questions that haven't been answered yet for anyone to really have a good opinion on Kavanaugh's guilt or innocence. Such as: 

What was she wearing? 

Did she have a "reputation"?

Had she kissed a boy before this? 

How much money does her family have? 

etc. 

[bad_teammate 13299]

1 minute ago, Chrispy said:

I agree with some of what you’re saying, but it’s a serious charge and requires serious evidence. You’re supposed to prove guilt, not the other way around. 

There is, quite literally, no charge.

("Charge" is a word with a meaning.)

[jimmyjazz 46470]

2 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

You’re supposed to prove guilt, not the other way around. 

Nope.

[wildcat09 29453]

Just now, realgreggym said:

You mean like when former dem vice pres nominee Joe Lieberman had to run as an independent for his senate reelection because he said something that dems didn't like. 

He didn't "have" to do anything. He was primaried because he didn't keep his constituents happy. That's how the system is intended to work.

[David Dennison 19117]

Democrats are being uncharacteristically smart here.

Every day this lingers, the odds of Brett Kavanaugh being confirmed get worse.

The earliest that the Judiciary Committee can vote is a week from Thursday because of the Senate's three day rule. That is an eternity in politics. If the hearing gets moved, the vote moves with it.

 

[Chrispy 132]

2 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Do you believe that Trump sexually assaulted more than a dozen women? 

Oh man, this is a can of worms. But no, I don’t. 

[JimmyJames 12271]

2 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

I agree with some of what you’re saying, but it’s a serious charge and requires serious evidence. You’re supposed to prove guilt, not the other way around. 

So fucking dumb. 

Be better. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

6 minutes ago, Iconoclast Texan said:

 

Others on this thread and in the media think he should have his nomination pulled. That’s not giving him due process 

For the millionth time, it is not anyone's due process right to be appointed to the Supreme Court.   Trump could pull the nomination because it merely looks bad.   W pulled Harriet Miers's nomination without anything but ridicule driving it. 

[Anastasis 23498]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

Yes, Anastasis, a woman is telling you what a woman's experience is. Make sure you tell her how wrong she is about it as quickly as possible and how it's actually STILL their fault, just for a different reason.

 lol

Meh, I am not telling her that her experience is wrong. I am telling her same thing i have told my daughter.  Report anything inappropriate immediately.  The primary angle that people are taking to create doubt around the Dr.'s report is that fact that she waiting ~3 decades to report it to anyone, and nearly 4 to come out publicly with it, in the middle of a SCOTUS cofirmation.   

[Captainant 27970]

1 minute ago, Chrispy said:

I agree with some of what you’re saying, but it’s a serious charge and requires serious evidence. You’re supposed to prove guilt, not the other way around. 

This. is. not. a. criminal. proceeding. You are applying a standard that is completely irrelevant to a confirmation hearing. He isn't being threatened with a loss of liberty or freedoms. 

[sachick 1189]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

I think that this case is just the opposite, a good reason why women need to speak up, and report abuse immediately.  The primary issue in this specific case is that she waited nearly 40 years to speak up, and did not publicly only when it became mired in politics. 

Even if she had spoken up, would she have been believed? She would have been blamed for drinking and putting herself in a situation where this could happen. Good girls shouldn't be at parties with boys and shouldn't be drink at these parties with the boys and if you flirted with the boy, then you just asked for it. At 16 she was scared and I don't blame her. Even now when she did say something it's a bunch of excuses of what she should have done and then she's being harassed and doxxed online.  We didn't talk about these things back then. Hopefully with the me too movement more women will speak up when this happens and not be intimidated into silence.

[David Dennison 19117]

Just now, Chrispy said:

Oh man, this is a can of worms. But no, I don’t. 

Do you believe Bill Clinton sexually assaulted women?

[troph 24923]

Ok so how should the American public and our duly elected Senators supposed to evaluate the credibility of this accusation? What is the standard that should be applied to take this data point into consideration or not to do so. Trying to divorce the bedrock American concepts of innocenct until proven guilty and ability to confront your accuser from the confirmation process which in many ways resembles a trial is ridiculous. Even in a job interview, one can correct your interviewer if they have wrong information.

There’s nothing bedrock about it here, you’re applying the wrong standard. Folks on the right will grandstand about criminal standards but he’s not even entitled to due process - if he was Garland would be on the bench. The only clause he can hang his hat on is “advise and consent” in the constitution. That’s it.

Not a right, a privilege. He’s casual at best with his adherence to the truth and he’s facing allegations of a very credible witness.

That’s DOA for all but the most biased.

[bad_teammate 13299]

Just now, Anastasis said:

Meh, I am not telling her that her experience is wrong. I am telling her same thing i have told my daughter.  Report anything inappropriate immediately.  The primary angle that people are taking to create doubt around the Dr.'s report is that fact that she waiting ~3 decades to report it to anyone, and nearly 4 to come out publicly with it, in the middle of a SCOTUS cofirmation.   

But you do realize that's just an "angle", right? It's not legit, it's an angle. She could've reported it right away and those same people would still be attacking her.

[sachick 1189]

5 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

I agree with some of what you’re saying, but it’s a serious charge and requires serious evidence. You’re supposed to prove guilt, not the other way around. 

What kind of evidence? Tell what evidence would prove to you that she was assaulted?

ETA: And we're not talking about a trial here. It's a job interview. Guilt doesn't have to be proven.

 

Edited September 18, 2018 by sachick

[Mojo Hand 4580]

Just now, Chrispy said:

Oh man, this is a can of worms. But no, I don’t. 

So you don't believe one woman because there is no corroboration.  But you also don't believe like 17 women accusing the same man, who admitted on tape doing exactly what they accused him of doing.   Sounds like corroboration isn't really the issue here. 

[Hank Scorpio 17731]

Just now, Anastasis said:

Meh, I am not telling her that her experience is wrong. I am telling her same thing i have told my daughter.  Report anything inappropriate immediately.  The primary angle that people are taking to create doubt around the Dr.'s report is that fact that she waiting ~3 decades to report it to anyone, and nearly 4 to come out publicly with it, in the middle of a SCOTUS cofirmation.   

Sorry honey, you might have been sexually assaulted and hidden it from anyone out of fear, shame, embarrassment, or a myriad of other reasons, but I don't believe you because remember when I told you that one time to report it as soon as possible? Well you should have listened to daddy, skank. 

[Chrispy 132]

1 minute ago, Captainant said:

This. is. not. a. criminal. proceeding. You are applying a standard that is completely irrelevant to a confirmation hearing. He isn't being threatened with a loss of liberty or freedoms. 

No, I’m not. I’m asking for proof of sexual assault, that’s it. But I’m being told that the accusation is all the matters, which is total nonsense. 

[bad_teammate 13299]

1 minute ago, Mojo Hand said:

So you don't believe one woman because there is no corroboration.  But you also don't believe like 17 women accusing the same man, who admitted on tape doing exactly what they accused him of doing.   Sounds like corroboration isn't really the issue here. 

[Chrispy 132]

2 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Do you believe Bill Clinton sexually assaulted women?

Oh man, that was before my time. 

[Nivek 17035]

4 minutes ago, Hank Scorpio said:

There are too many important questions that haven't been answered yet for anyone to really have a good opinion on Kavanaugh's guilt or innocence. Such as: 

What was she wearing? 

Did she have a "reputation"?

Had she kissed a boy before this? 

How much money does her family have? 

etc. 

has her dad ever jerked off in a trashcan?  

 

[Hank Kingsley 21083]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

Meh, I am not telling her that her experience is wrong. I am telling her same thing i have told my daughter.  Report anything inappropriate immediately.  The primary angle that people are taking to create doubt around the Dr.'s report is that fact that she waiting ~3 decades to report it to anyone, and nearly 4 to come out publicly with it, in the middle of a SCOTUS cofirmation.   

A lot has changed in 3 decades.  Right now, yes, a person reporting inappropriate sexual behavior immediately makes sense. 30-40 years ago (hell, even 10 years ago) it was completely understandable that woman felt discouraged to report sexual assault. 

 

[Chrispy 132]

2 minutes ago, sachick said:

What kind of evidence? Tell what evidence would prove to you that she was assaulted?

Something along the lines of eyewitness I suppose, since we’re not getting any DNA. 

[bad_teammate 13299]

Just now, Chrispy said:

Oh man, that was before my time. 

Do you believe Bill Clinton sexually assaulted women in his past?

[David Dennison 19117]

1 minute ago, Chrispy said:

No, I’m not. I’m asking for proof of sexual assault, that’s it. But I’m being told that the accusation is all the matters, which is total nonsense. 

There is no proof other than her recollection and what she told other people.

[DDD Dad 14369]

3 minutes ago, sachick said:

What kind of evidence? Tell what evidence would prove to you that she was assaulted?

And....we're right back to page 44.  I know Chrispy doesn't always seem like a troll, but he's definitely trolling everyone here today.

[bad_teammate 13299]

Just now, Hank Kingsley said:

A lot has changed in 3 decades.  Right now, yes, a person reporting inappropriate sexual behavior immediately makes sense. 30-40 years ago (hell, even 10 years ago) it was completely understandable that woman felt discouraged to report sexual assault.

The reality is that almost nothing has changed. Look at what is happening to this woman right now. Open your eyes, my man.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

I took a lot of shit on the scat board for defending Al Franken at the time.

 Bless your hearts for the criticism. 

Edited September 18, 2018 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Chrispy 132]

2 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

So you don't believe one woman because there is no corroboration.  But you also don't believe like 17 women accusing the same man, who admitted on tape doing exactly what they accused him of doing.   Sounds like corroboration isn't really the issue here. 

Well, some have recanted, so I’m unclear on how many still remain. I would have to do some research on the topic for sure, it hasn’t been on my radar. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

3 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

I agree with some of what you’re saying, but it’s a serious charge and requires serious evidence. You’re supposed to prove guilt, not the other way around. 

Not in this case. A SCOTUS has to be above any impropriety.  If she proves credible, and he can't defend himself enough to convince others he didn't do it, that's not good. He's gonna need to be passed on, and another candidate, better vetted would be required.

Because she's record years before this and he was known to her, they have to take it seriously.  I don't want to think she's lying about something this serious, something that affects not only she and he, but the country as a whole.

[David Dennison 19117]

1 minute ago, Chrispy said:

Something along the lines of eyewitness I suppose, since we’re not getting any DNA. 

Something tells me you wouldn't require so much in the case of your daughter.

[wildcat09 29453]

Just now, Hank Kingsley said:

A lot has changed in 3 decades.  Right now, yes, a person reporting inappropriate sexual behavior immediately makes sense. 30-40 years ago (hell, even 10 years ago) it was completely understandable that woman felt discouraged to report sexual assault. 

 

I'd say it's still understandable that they feel discouraged, particularly if their assailant was in some position of power. One of Roy Moore's accusers had her house burned down. The backlash any time a woman speaking up with something like this is immense.

[Hank Kingsley 21083]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

The reality is that almost nothing has changed. Look at what is happening to this woman right now. Open your eyes, my man.

I'm talking about if a woman was sexually assaulted today. 

 

[troph 24923]

I took a lot of shit on the scat board for defending Al Franken at the time.
 Bless your hearts for the criticism. 

He had to go. You shouldn’t have defended him.

[bad_teammate 13299]

Just now, Chrispy said:

Well, some have recanted, so I’m unclear on how many still remain. I would have to do some research on the topic for sure, it hasn’t been on my radar. 

Are you Paul Ryan? Because this is how he constantly responds.

"Why I'm just a good 'ole country Internet poster I don't know 'bout y'all's big city ways."

[David Dennison 19117]

Just now, Onboard 2.0 said:

Not in this case. A SCOTUS has to be above any impropriety.  If she proves credible, and he can't defend himself enough to convince others he didn't do it, that's not good. He's gonna need to be passed on, and another candidate, better vetted would be required.

Because she's record years before this and he was known to her, they have to take it seriously.  I don't want to think she's lying about something this serious, something that affects not only she and he, but the country as a whole.

The biggest problem for Republicans and Kavanaugh is this: why would she lie to her therapist in 2012?

[Mojo Hand 4580]

1 minute ago, Chrispy said:

Well, some have recanted, so I’m unclear on how many still remain. I would have to do some research on the topic for sure, it hasn’t been on my radar. 

Which ones have recanted? 

[wildcat09 29453]

Just now, Chrispy said:

Well, some have recanted, so I’m unclear on how many still remain. I would have to do some research on the topic for sure, it hasn’t been on my radar. 

Who recanted?

[bad_teammate 13299]

Just now, Hank Kingsley said:

I'm talking about if a woman was sexually assaulted today. 

 

Me, too. A woman accusing a powerful man of sexual assault today is STILL subject to shame and harassment. It's lessened, perhaps, but millions of furious men will still go after them.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23367]

Just now, troph said:

He had to go. You shouldn’t have defended him.

He should have got a hearing with a proper investigation like he agreed to. 

[Chrispy 132]

2 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Do you believe Bill Clinton sexually assaulted women in his past?

I only know the Monica Lewinsky (is that how you spell it?) saga, I really have no clue. 

[jimmyjazz 46470]

1 minute ago, sachick said:

Even if she had spoken up, would she have been believed? She would have been blamed for drinking and putting herself in a situation where this could happen. Good girls shouldn't be at parties with boys and shouldn't be drink at these parties with the boys and if you flirted with the boy, then you just asked for it. At 16 she was scared and I don't blame her. Even now when she did say something it's a bunch of excuses of what she should have done and then she's being harassed and doxxed online.  We didn't talk about these things back then. Hopefully with the me too movement more women will speak up when this happens and not be intimidated into silence.

I understand the reluctance to report.  Without solid evidence, be it DNA or audio/video or witness testimony, who could be expected to believe one side in a "he said she said" story?  That burden of proof looks like an insurmountable mountain to the victim absent damning confirmation.

But again, that's in a court of law.  Who could be expected to think "well, I probably won't get him now but on the off chance he'll later be nominated for SCOTUS I'll go ahead and file a report"?  It's ludicrous.  And, as many of us have been saying for days, that standard of evidence is not required here.  The Senate is not a jury.

[sachick 1189]

 

2 minutes ago, Chrispy said:

Something along the lines of eyewitness I suppose, since we’re not getting any DNA. 

And if a man chooses assault a woman solo she's just shit out luck right? It's just the two of them so they're can't be any evidence to satisfy you.

 

I'm gonna have to have my daughter wear a body camera to every where she goes so she has proof  that someone tried to rape her.

[GHOSTUSER 361]

15 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

He's not owed due process. 

I was responding to tantric who mentioned due process. You are the Johnny Sack of the left dropping 3-4 word replies that add nothing 

[Captainant 27970]

Just now, Chrispy said:

I really have no clue. 

You can fucking say that again

[Hank Kingsley 21083]

Just now, bad_teammate said:

Me, too. A woman accusing a powerful man of sexual assault today is STILL subject to shame and harassment. It's lessened, perhaps, but millions of furious men will still go after them.

Sure. But the amount of people that will believe her has grown exponentially as well. 

[Chad Fuck 17839]

1 minute ago, bad_teammate said:

Me, too. A woman accusing a powerful man of sexual assault today is STILL subject to shame and harassment. It's lessened, perhaps, but millions of furious men will still go after them.

If you don't believe it, just wait until she takes the stand.