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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Keyser says she believes Ford.

Interesting that the WaPo article did not give a direct quote from Keyser to back that up. Left hanging--did she say she believes Ford that something traumatic happened to her [at sometime]?

[Anonymous]

"Personally, I'd oppose Kavanaugh because of his unhealthy and intemperate fixation on Lewinsky's genitals, Clinton's ejaculate, and Vince Foster conspiracy theories; because he lied about receiving hacked Democratic emails; and because of his sketchy and poorly explained financial situation. But, I'm not a Senator -- they all make their own decisions. A professional accounting of this assault allegation should be in the mix."

The OP of this statement has distilled the real issues here. These issues alone make Kavanaugh's appointment repugnant, the alleged attempted rape notwithstanding.

[Anonymous]

wouldn't the payment of $200K to a sitting judge violate Canon 2 of the Judicial Code of Conduct: http://www.uscourts.gov/judges-judgeships/code-conduct-united-states-judges :

Canon 2: A Judge Should Avoid Impropriety and the Appearance of Impropriety in all Activities

(A) Respect for Law. A judge should respect and comply with the law and should act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.

(B) Outside Influence. A judge should not allow family, social, political, financial, or other relationships to influence judicial conduct or judgment. A judge should neither lend the prestige of the judicial office to advance the private interests of the judge or others nor convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge. A judge should not testify voluntarily as a character witness.

(C) Nondiscriminatory Membership. A judge should not hold membership in any organization that practices invidious discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, or national origin.

[Anonymous]

Did you read Patti Davis' (Ronals Reagan and Nancy Reagan's daughter) opinion article in Washington Post on Friday? I don't subscribe to the Post. I read only an excerpt of the article elsewhere and so I don't want to cite from it.

It was powerful and sad. Too bad the GOP members who worship Reagan won’t consider the words of his daughter who experienced the same victimization as Christina Blasey Ford.

How would we know that? Seriously, why should we believe Ford? Why believe Kavanaugh? Apart from your political team, why?

This has been stated many times but here it is again since you obviously haven't been paying attention:

1) there is no reason to think Ford is clairevoyant and was able in 2012 to predict Kavanaugh was going to be nominated and thus started making up stories about him to her therapist and then her husband. If her accusation is simply a political calculation, please explain to me why she would make up a story of being attacked back when no one else had even heard of Kavanaugh. Why did she pick him out in particular. What Democratic operatives back in 2012 said, okay let's find a classmate or acquaintance of BK and have her start telling stories to her therapist and husband, just in case he gets nominated for something big? This is what you who don't believe her are suggesting happened. Sorry, but Occam's razor applies here. The simplest reason she told those stories back starting back in 2012 is that they're true.

2) Kavanaugh by all accounts (his own yearbook, the circles, fraternity, and organizations he associated with) was part of a circle of males who partied hard. Many of us know exactly the type of male that is and how they relate to women. He may have been an altarboy but he sure didn't act like one outside of church.

3) Kavanaugh spent the 90s as a political, partisan hack working for Ken Starr. There have been many articles about this. Read the one from his colleague David Brock. https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/i-knew-brett-kavanaugh-during-his-years-republican-operative-don-ncna907391

4) Kavanaugh outright lied during his hearings, so he has proven himself capable of lying when the stakes are big.

5) Who has the most to gain / the most to lose? Kavanaugh. He has more incentive to lie that Ford does.

6) Perhaps he isn't "lying" in the sense that he drank so much he doesn't remember what he did. I grant that is a possibility especially given his past. Again, "100 kegs club." Not a great track record there. Drunk boys do stupid, horrible things. And many of us women have been the recipients of their stupid behavior and know exactly what Ford is talking about because we experienced similar situations.

7) The incidents of men assaulting/harassing/terrorizing women and getting away with it vastly outnumber the incidents of women falsely accusing men of assaulting/harassing/terrorizing them. That is truth and women know it. Thus just by the law of chance, if you were to present 2 scenarios with no other corroborating evidence -- a man assaulted a woman and says he didn't do it, or a woman falsely accuses a man of assault -- it is far more likely (again based on actual cases) that the 1st one is the true scenario. You cannot say anything that will change that law of chance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We’ve done such a good job saving Kavanaugh, Inwonder if something cannot be done to rehabilitate gentleman judge Moore?

So wrong. But I literally laughed out loud, as you’ve hit on the mentality.

[Anonymous]

I know I would insist my family stay entirely removed if I ever had to pursue something like this. What a circus. I would probably be unwilling to speak up unless they agreed to stay away and protect themselves as best as possible.

[Anonymous]

To all of the people dismissing the witness statements saying they do not recall and/or it never happened, please remember these are HER witnesses, not his. These are the people she chose to back her up, and they can’t.

If he pulled out 4 people that said he was not there, I’d understand the “who remembers a single party 30 years ago” argument. He didn’t, she did.

If your own alibi says you were not there, who do you believe?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know I would insist my family stay entirely removed if I ever had to pursue something like this. What a circus. I would probably be unwilling to speak up unless they agreed to stay away and protect themselves as best as possible.

They are being attacked here for not commenting. If they entered the frey it would of course be even more vicious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Personally, I'd oppose Kavanaugh because of his unhealthy and intemperate fixation on Lewinsky's genitals, Clinton's ejaculate, and Vince Foster conspiracy theories; because he lied about receiving hacked Democratic emails; and because of his sketchy and poorly explained financial situation. But, I'm not a Senator -- they all make their own decisions. A professional accounting of this assault allegation should be in the mix."

The OP of this statement has distilled the real issues here. These issues alone make Kavanaugh's appointment repugnant, the alleged attempted rape notwithstanding.

That’s for a different thread. Don’t change the argument because your sides story is falling apart.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Have you noticed all her family here is keeping their distance? None of the Blaseys are speaking up for her. Just Holton alumni from other graduation years who don't know her.

This has been curious to me as well. There were some quotes from Ford's DH, Russell Ford, indicating that family relations were tense because her family was politically conservative.

“She didn’t always get along with her parents because of differing political views,” Russell said. “It was a very male-dominated environment,” Russell Ford told The Post.

Honestly, it would be completely inappropriate for her parents to be speaking at all to the press in this situation. Anything they could say would sound shrill and biased. They're not going to join in this public spectacle/circus that is surrounding their daughter. If anything Ford has requested that they be protected from this garbage just as her children are being protected. I would do the same in her position and implore my family to stay safe and silent here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To all of the people dismissing the witness statements saying they do not recall and/or it never happened, please remember these are HER witnesses, not his. These are the people she chose to back her up, and they can’t.

If he pulled out 4 people that said he was not there, I’d understand the “who remembers a single party 30 years ago” argument. He didn’t, she did.

If your own alibi says you were not there, who do you believe?

They aren’t alibis in the way you’re suggesting. You and the other Kav stans are deliberately conflating a job interview that Brett is messing up with criminal prosecution.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Personally, I'd oppose Kavanaugh because of his unhealthy and intemperate fixation on Lewinsky's genitals, Clinton's ejaculate, and Vince Foster conspiracy theories; because he lied about receiving hacked Democratic emails; and because of his sketchy and poorly explained financial situation. But, I'm not a Senator -- they all make their own decisions. A professional accounting of this assault allegation should be in the mix."

The OP of this statement has distilled the real issues here. These issues alone make Kavanaugh's appointment repugnant, the alleged attempted rape notwithstanding.

That’s for a different thread. Don’t change the argument because your sides story is falling apart.

Who elected you in charge of the thread? Besides lying, are you now a moderator?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I know I would insist my family stay entirely removed if I ever had to pursue something like this. What a circus. I would probably be unwilling to speak up unless they agreed to stay away and protect themselves as best as possible.

Hmmm. Would you be equally protective of your husband's family?

Russell Ford's family has publicly come out in support of Christine Ford:

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/20/politics/blasey-ford-family-statement/index.html

So why not her family?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Did you read Patti Davis' (Ronals Reagan and Nancy Reagan's daughter) opinion article in Washington Post on Friday? I don't subscribe to the Post. I read only an excerpt of the article elsewhere and so I don't want to cite from it.

It was powerful and sad. Too bad the GOP members who worship Reagan won’t consider the words of his daughter who experienced the same victimization as Christina Blasey Ford.

How would we know that? Seriously, why should we believe Ford? Why believe Kavanaugh? Apart from your political team, why?

This has been stated many times but here it is again since you obviously haven't been paying attention:

1) there is no reason to think Ford is clairevoyant and was able in 2012 to predict Kavanaugh was going to be nominated and thus started making up stories about him to her therapist and then her husband. If her accusation is simply a political calculation, please explain to me why she would make up a story of being attacked back when no one else had even heard of Kavanaugh. Why did she pick him out in particular. What Democratic operatives back in 2012 said, okay let's find a classmate or acquaintance of BK and have her start telling stories to her therapist and husband, just in case he gets nominated for something big? This is what you who don't believe her are suggesting happened. Sorry, but Occam's razor applies here. The simplest reason she told those stories back starting back in 2012 is that they're true.

2) Kavanaugh by all accounts (his own yearbook, the circles, fraternity, and organizations he associated with) was part of a circle of males who partied hard. Many of us know exactly the type of male that is and how they relate to women. He may have been an altarboy but he sure didn't act like one outside of church.

3) Kavanaugh spent the 90s as a political, partisan hack working for Ken Starr. There have been many articles about this. Read the one from his colleague David Brock. https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/i-knew-brett-kavanaugh-during-his-years-republican-operative-don-ncna907391

4) Kavanaugh outright lied during his hearings, so he has proven himself capable of lying when the stakes are big.

5) Who has the most to gain / the most to lose? Kavanaugh. He has more incentive to lie that Ford does.

6) Perhaps he isn't "lying" in the sense that he drank so much he doesn't remember what he did. I grant that is a possibility especially given his past. Again, "100 kegs club." Not a great track record there. Drunk boys do stupid, horrible things. And many of us women have been the recipients of their stupid behavior and know exactly what Ford is talking about because we experienced similar situations.

7) The incidents of men assaulting/harassing/terrorizing women and getting away with it vastly outnumber the incidents of women falsely accusing men of assaulting/harassing/terrorizing them. That is truth and women know it. Thus just by the law of chance, if you were to present 2 scenarios with no other corroborating evidence -- a man assaulted a woman and says he didn't do it, or a woman falsely accuses a man of assault -- it is far more likely (again based on actual cases) that the 1st one is the true scenario. You cannot say anything that will change that law of chance.

1) "If her accusation is simply a political calculation, please explain to me why she would make up a story of being attacked back when no one else had even heard of Kavanaugh. Why did she pick him out in particular. What Democratic operatives back in 2012 said, okay let's find a classmate or acquaintance of BK and have her start telling stories to her therapist and husband, just in case he gets nominated for something big? “
Back in 2012, Romney had a decent chance of winning the presidency. At the time, Kavanaugh’s name was been floated in the event of a Romney win. See CNN article linked. Kavanaugh was not an unknown.
https://www.cnn.com/2012/09/30/politics/court-romney-list/index.html

2) You are convicting him based on accounts of others. If you are going to do that, you have to consider the accounts of many people who have said they have never seen him out-of-control drunk.

3) David Brock? Seriously? And, what does this statement have to do with the charges leveled against him by Dr. Ford?

4) No, he didn’t. Many legal experts have disputed your version.

5) Dr. Ford is not necessarily lying. Many of us have posited that something traumatic did happen to her - she just is recalling the details (that she remembers) incorrectly, particularly when it comes to the WHO of her version.

6) Maybe she was inebriated and is not remembering events. Just because he was a “member” of some fictitious club does not mean he, himself was a heavy drinker.

7) You are basing his guilty/innocence on mere statistics. Not on facts. The fact of THIS case are what need to be considered - not statistics on other assaults. And, the FACTS of this case are murky - some FACTS are unknown by the accuser and other FACTS, as she states them, are proving to be inconsistent with other evidence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all of the people dismissing the witness statements saying they do not recall and/or it never happened, please remember these are HER witnesses, not his. These are the people she chose to back her up, and they can’t.

If he pulled out 4 people that said he was not there, I’d understand the “who remembers a single party 30 years ago” argument. He didn’t, she did.

If your own alibi says you were not there, who do you believe?

They aren’t alibis in the way you’re suggesting. You and the other Kav stans are deliberately conflating a job interview that Brett is messing up with criminal prosecution.

Heck yes. 99 percent of rapists never see justice. I am sure for these drunck boy assaults it is even less. This has nothing to do with a criminal proceeding. That is practically hopeless pursuit for a victim. This is an attmpt to make clear that this job is inappropriate for this person.