Kavanaugh vote postponed. Judiciary Committee hearing on Sexual Assault complain Monday.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys. The hyperbole on this thread is absurd. He isn't being "convicted," "indicted," or "stoned to death." At most, he's just not getting a particularly prestigious job. Spare your tears.

Wrong. He is now an "attempted rapist" in the eyes of many - those of you who refuse to understand that this is a "he said / she said" situation. He is "guilty" in the court of public opinion, with absolutely no evidence and no trial.

I agree with this. Being honest, the pictures that have been posted of him with his high school friends, show a generic group of preppy white guys. So all these similar looking guys all go to a party, everyone is drinking including the girls, and I do think it’s possible that 30 years later either he doesn’t actually remember and neither does she. Clearly something happened but to say with certainty that it was him is too far fetched unless there was some other compelling reason - they were involved in a relationship at some point for example.

Another issue for me - I don’t want people’s actions when they were kids in high school used as a sole measure of their adult self . I think many, many people did things that were dumb , wrong or just plain bad when they were in high school. Things they might not want admit to now. I hate to think that we are now going to be judging people by their actions in high school and basically saying that a person can not and does not change from age 17 onward. If this situation is used now, it will be a standard that can be applied to other nominees for any office.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:She didn't even tell his name to the therapist.

This story just does not ring true.

Would you believe it if there were pics? No, I didn't think so. Because you think women are dirt.

Also why you're so eager to confirm a man hell-bent on repealing women's reproductive rights.

You saw the Franken photos and still don't believe it.

Last time I checked, Franken was sent home for being a naughty boy. Why isn't Brett being held to the same standar? Jim Jordon? Donald Trump?

Because, GOP.

After a huge HUGE liberal pushback and denial of actual physical evidence. Show me the photos of the incident and I'll hold Brett to the same standard.

yeah right. you all excuse all sorts of shitty behavior when they are a party appartchik. just "locker room talk" right bro?

DP. And let me guess - you were a huge defender of Bill Clinton's $hitty behavior, right? Or are you not old enough to remember that?

Dp, but I was a Clinton voter. I thought he should have resigned when the Lewinsky allegations came out, and not dragged the country through the impeachment mess. And I told people that at the time. If he had, we might have never wound up with the disaster that was the Bush administration.

Sure, but there was plenty of evidence in that case, wasn't there? He was guilty. What, exactly, is the evidence in this case?

We’ve been through it repeatedly sweetie. Just became you don’t want to accept it doesn’t make it disappear.

That is very misogynistic of you.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading through some of these posts and reminded that A) misogyny is alive and well in this country and B) victims of sexual assault are incredibly brave to speak out against their attackers. The way some of the PPs have attacked this woman and attempted to discredit her is really gross.

OR

Reading through some of these posts and reminded that A) feelings of jealousy and hatred of men are alive and well by many on this thread and B) victims of sexual assault accusations (not convictions) are incredibly brave to try to defend themselves against their attackers. The way some of the PPs have attacked this man (Kavanaugh) and attempted to discredit and convict him via one woman's accusations of attempted rape and suffocation after 30+ years is really gross.

MRA! MRA! MAGA!

How many victims will it take for you to believe, pp?

PP here. I"m female and not a Trump supporter; but I think it's wrong to accuse, condemn, and "convict" anyone of crimes as serious as attempted rape and suffocation (i.e., murder) based on one person's uncorroborated accusation after 30+ years.

Her accusation is corroborated. There are notes from her therapist on 2012, not to mention the polygraph. She also has a successful and very credible professional and personal track record. But it takes 50 women to corroborate accusations against one man, right?

No, it's not. All you say above is stuff her lawyer claimed. You have no idea if she took a polygraph, let alone passed it. You have no idea if there are notes. You are being TOLD those things, but you have not SEEN PROOF of those things.

Pretty sure that the WP reporter was given proof of all of this. It’s called fact-checking, something you may be unfamiliar with because it isn’t practiced by Fox or Breitbart.

Like NYT fact-checked the story about Nikki Hayley and the drapes? That kind of fact-checking?

+1
And let's not forget Rolling Stone's stellar job fact-checking the UVA non-story.

And didn't the NYT writer get a Pulitzer only to be exposed as a fake? Yep, great fact-checking there too.

Why speculate? Email the Post and ask what they saw.

Same poster, I assume you support the democrats request for an FBI investigation of the allegation because of your strong held belief in gathering all the evidence, right?

Bumping for response.

It was already answered, dummy. I stated that the dems had the right to ask and did and were shut down.

Thanks, proved my point that you don’t give two shits about evidence. Good night.

Checkmate. LOL. The Dems asked and were refused because the FBI felt there wasn't enough evidence for investigation. Sleep well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading through some of these posts and reminded that A) misogyny is alive and well in this country and B) victims of sexual assault are incredibly brave to speak out against their attackers. The way some of the PPs have attacked this woman and attempted to discredit her is really gross.

OR

Reading through some of these posts and reminded that A) feelings of jealousy and hatred of men are alive and well by many on this thread and B) victims of sexual assault accusations (not convictions) are incredibly brave to try to defend themselves against their attackers. The way some of the PPs have attacked this man (Kavanaugh) and attempted to discredit and convict him via one woman's accusations of attempted rape and suffocation after 30+ years is really gross.

MRA! MRA! MAGA!

How many victims will it take for you to believe, pp?

PP here. I"m female and not a Trump supporter; but I think it's wrong to accuse, condemn, and "convict" anyone of crimes as serious as attempted rape and suffocation (i.e., murder) based on one person's uncorroborated accusation after 30+ years.

Precisely how I feel too. For me, this really doesn't have much to do with Brett Kavanaugh, as I'm neutral when it comes to the subject of his confirmation. It has so much more to do with this one-sided accusation from decades ago. There is nothing fair about this.

Please explain how an accusation Ican be two-sided.

I think you know exactly what I meant, but here ya go - we're only hearing Ford's side. Kavanaugh flatly denies being involved at all. So all we have is her word against his.

That’s pretty much every sexual assault case ever. And if you know Kavanaugh is denying completely, you know his side. Most Americans are just reaching a different conclusion than you as to credibility.

"Most Americans"? Sure, whatever you say. Links to that poll, please? I can assure you that no one I know thinks he's being treated fairly. And I have friends and family of every political persuasion.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kavanaugh was the republican hack for years, now he wants to be a boy scout, playing the "I don't know that woman" game?

Why god is laughing at Brett Kavanaugh

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/09/17/kavanaugh-supreme-court-ford-sexual-assault-219983

Democratic motive on full display in that article.

Exactly what I was going to say.

So? The republicans blocked Obama's nominee for a year.

I see. The point of your statement is that it's ok to completely lie and destroy a man's reputation and potentially his family because....revenge.

I don't believe Ford is lying. Even the White House dares not call her a liar. Who the F are you to call her a liar?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys. The hyperbole on this thread is absurd. He isn't being "convicted," "indicted," or "stoned to death." At most, he's just not getting a particularly prestigious job. Spare your tears.

Wrong. He is now an "attempted rapist" in the eyes of many - those of you who refuse to understand that this is a "he said / she said" situation. He is "guilty" in the court of public opinion, with absolutely no evidence and no trial.

Are you assuming most Americans believe Dr. Ford, since he is “guilty?” And do you also believe most people are wrong, but you are uniquely right?

Pardon? I'm not assuming anything about "most" Americans - I leave those assumptions to liberals, who seem to do such a bang-up job of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys. The hyperbole on this thread is absurd. He isn't being "convicted," "indicted," or "stoned to death." At most, he's just not getting a particularly prestigious job. Spare your tears.

Wrong. He is now an "attempted rapist" in the eyes of many - those of you who refuse to understand that this is a "he said / she said" situation. He is "guilty" in the court of public opinion, with absolutely no evidence and no trial.

I agree with this. Being honest, the pictures that have been posted of him with his high school friends, show a generic group of preppy white guys. So all these similar looking guys all go to a party, everyone is drinking including the girls, and I do think it’s possible that 30 years later either he doesn’t actually remember and neither does she. Clearly something happened but to say with certainty that it was him is too far fetched unless there was some other compelling reason - they were involved in a relationship at some point for example.

Another issue for me - I don’t want people’s actions when they were kids in high school used as a sole measure of their adult self . I think many, many people did things that were dumb , wrong or just plain bad when they were in high school. Things they might not want admit to now. I hate to think that we are now going to be judging people by their actions in high school and basically saying that a person can not and does not change from age 17 onward. If this situation is used now, it will be a standard that can be applied to other nominees for any office.

+1 my thoughts as well

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys. The hyperbole on this thread is absurd. He isn't being "convicted," "indicted," or "stoned to death." At most, he's just not getting a particularly prestigious job. Spare your tears.

Wrong. He is now an "attempted rapist" in the eyes of many - those of you who refuse to understand that this is a "he said / she said" situation. He is "guilty" in the court of public opinion, with absolutely no evidence and no trial.

There is evidence, you just refuse to acknowledge it.

Really? Do tell!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys. The hyperbole on this thread is absurd. He isn't being "convicted," "indicted," or "stoned to death." At most, he's just not getting a particularly prestigious job. Spare your tears.

Wrong. He is now an "attempted rapist" in the eyes of many - those of you who refuse to understand that this is a "he said / she said" situation. He is "guilty" in the court of public opinion, with absolutely no evidence and no trial.

I agree with this. Being honest, the pictures that have been posted of him with his high school friends, show a generic group of preppy white guys. So all these similar looking guys all go to a party, everyone is drinking including the girls, and I do think it’s possible that 30 years later either he doesn’t actually remember and neither does she. Clearly something happened but to say with certainty that it was him is too far fetched unless there was some other compelling reason - they were involved in a relationship at some point for example.

Another issue for me - I don’t want people’s actions when they were kids in high school used as a sole measure of their adult self . I think many, many people did things that were dumb , wrong or just plain bad when they were in high school. Things they might not want admit to now. I hate to think that we are now going to be judging people by their actions in high school and basically saying that a person can not and does not change from age 17 onward. If this situation is used now, it will be a standard that can be applied to other nominees for any office.

Dr. Ford provided certainty because the scenario was so unusual- Kavanaugh allegedly assaults her while Judge serves as lookout, hype man, and voyeur. What is not credible to me is your vision of Dr. Ford remembering the wrong drunk boy in the wrong preppy clothing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys. The hyperbole on this thread is absurd. He isn't being "convicted," "indicted," or "stoned to death." At most, he's just not getting a particularly prestigious job. Spare your tears.

Wrong. He is now an "attempted rapist" in the eyes of many - those of you who refuse to understand that this is a "he said / she said" situation. He is "guilty" in the court of public opinion, with absolutely no evidence and no trial.

I agree with this. Being honest, the pictures that have been posted of him with his high school friends, show a generic group of preppy white guys. So all these similar looking guys all go to a party, everyone is drinking including the girls, and I do think it’s possible that 30 years later either he doesn’t actually remember and neither does she. Clearly something happened but to say with certainty that it was him is too far fetched unless there was some other compelling reason - they were involved in a relationship at some point for example.

Another issue for me - I don’t want people’s actions when they were kids in high school used as a sole measure of their adult self . I think many, many people did things that were dumb , wrong or just plain bad when they were in high school. Things they might not want admit to now. I hate to think that we are now going to be judging people by their actions in high school and basically saying that a person can not and does not change from age 17 onward. If this situation is used now, it will be a standard that can be applied to other nominees for any office.

Plenty of 17 year old drunks don't do sexual assault. You are insulting the teens.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guys. The hyperbole on this thread is absurd. He isn't being "convicted," "indicted," or "stoned to death." At most, he's just not getting a particularly prestigious job. Spare your tears.

Wrong. He is now an "attempted rapist" in the eyes of many - those of you who refuse to understand that this is a "he said / she said" situation. He is "guilty" in the court of public opinion, with absolutely no evidence and no trial.

I agree with this. Being honest, the pictures that have been posted of him with his high school friends, show a generic group of preppy white guys. So all these similar looking guys all go to a party, everyone is drinking including the girls, and I do think it’s possible that 30 years later either he doesn’t actually remember and neither does she. Clearly something happened but to say with certainty that it was him is too far fetched unless there was some other compelling reason - they were involved in a relationship at some point for example.

Another issue for me - I don’t want people’s actions when they were kids in high school used as a sole measure of their adult self . I think many, many people did things that were dumb , wrong or just plain bad when they were in high school. Things they might not want admit to now. I hate to think that we are now going to be judging people by their actions in high school and basically saying that a person can not and does not change from age 17 onward. If this situation is used now, it will be a standard that can be applied to other nominees for any office.

Dr. Ford provided certainty because the scenario was so unusual- Kavanaugh allegedly assaults her while Judge serves as lookout, hype man, and voyeur. What is not credible to me is your vision of Dr. Ford remembering the wrong drunk boy in the wrong preppy clothing.

Amazing recollection of detail. But conveniently can't remember the year, the party, etc. Which means her story can't be traced back and proven.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Reading through some of these posts and reminded that A) misogyny is alive and well in this country and B) victims of sexual assault are incredibly brave to speak out against their attackers. The way some of the PPs have attacked this woman and attempted to discredit her is really gross.

OR

Reading through some of these posts and reminded that A) feelings of jealousy and hatred of men are alive and well by many on this thread and B) victims of sexual assault accusations (not convictions) are incredibly brave to try to defend themselves against their attackers. The way some of the PPs have attacked this man (Kavanaugh) and attempted to discredit and convict him via one woman's accusations of attempted rape and suffocation after 30+ years is really gross.

So in your mind, women (and men) who defend the accuser’s right to be heard and not summarily dismissed and/or savaged and discredited equates to people who are jealous and hate men?

Okie dokie.

NOPE. Not what I said. I'm saying that I don't think the accused should be "savaged and discredited" either. And, yes, there have been a lot of DCUM posts on Kavanaugh threads that describe men--and Kavanaugh, in particular-- in an incredibly vile and negative way.

This may be news to you, but putting aside the sexual assault allegations, Kavanaugh has consistently treated women as second class citizens in his opinions. Most women don’t appreciate that. Shocking, I know.

PP here. A person's reputation, which can vary depending on the political, religious, cultural, etc. perspective of others, shouldn't be the determining factor re turning an accusation into a conviction by public opinion.

He is not getting convicted of anything. His suitability for a lifetime appointment to one of the most important jobs in the country is being determined. Character and perception counts. But even if he is found unworthy, he still has his current prestigious lifetime appointment and his girls' basketball team. Not a bad consolation prize for what could have been a life-changing mistake for him.

If he didn't do anything, why should he have to settle for a consolation prize at all? And also - you really think the parents of his basketball players are going to let him coach anymore? Pretty sure that ship has sailed, thanks to all of this.

If he did do it, why should he still be on the DC Court of Appeals? You’d be fine with him being impeached if the evidence was there, right?

If there was actual evidence? Absolutely.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kavanaugh was the republican hack for years, now he wants to be a boy scout, playing the "I don't know that woman" game?

Why god is laughing at Brett Kavanaugh

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/09/17/kavanaugh-supreme-court-ford-sexual-assault-219983

Democratic motive on full display in that article.

Exactly what I was going to say.

So? The republicans blocked Obama's nominee for a year.

I see. The point of your statement is that it's ok to completely lie and destroy a man's reputation and potentially his family because....revenge.

I don't believe Ford is lying. Even the White House dares not call her a liar. Who the F are you to call her a liar?

Who the f are you to call Kavanaugh a liar? Because he has a penis, you can?

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Kavanaugh was the republican hack for years, now he wants to be a boy scout, playing the "I don't know that woman" game?

Why god is laughing at Brett Kavanaugh

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/09/17/kavanaugh-supreme-court-ford-sexual-assault-219983

Democratic motive on full display in that article.

Exactly what I was going to say.

So? The republicans blocked Obama's nominee for a year.

I see. The point of your statement is that it's ok to completely lie and destroy a man's reputation and potentially his family because....revenge.

I don't believe Ford is lying. Even the White House dares not call her a liar. Who the F are you to call her a liar?

Who the f are you to call Kavanaugh a liar? Because he has a penis, you can?

Gosh, you are irrational.