icemann on 28/9/2018 at 13:22
The problem is that it's impossible to prove one way or the other considering how long ago it happened. The other side to it, is that say he didn't do what she's claiming he did. His life is completely ruined whether he's innocent or not. I don't see the justice in that.
If he did do it, then sure he deserves whatever comes to him. But how does one provide evidence to something that happened 36 years ago? In the end you can't. So it all comes down to people making judgments based on word alone with no evidence for or against.
I'm also of the opinion that people can change. An action one regrets, they make changes over time to ensure they don't repeat. Actions one doesn't regret, they continue to do. Actions decades earlier, if not continued since at most you could say that that person may have a tendency toward that. But that doesn't flat out determine whether they will go and repeat that. Only a percentage chance type thing. If we say that people can't change, and that actions taken decades earlier are a representation of that persons true nature, then that would rule out a fairly large percentage of people from the majority of jobs out there.
So I disagree with that. I think people can change, and deserve second chances. Life is making choices, sometimes bad, sometimes horrible ones. What matters is what occurs after. Do we realize that an action(s) were bad and make steps to fix that so it never happens again, or do we let that be the catalyst to further increasing bad things. We all go through this at one point or another in life. Some as kids, some as adults. Note that I'm talking quite broadly with this and applying to all mistakes one makes in life. Who we are as children is not an accurate representation to who we will be as adults.
Vae on 28/9/2018 at 13:32
So we have arrived to the day where Kavanaugh's fate will likely be determined.
The key point to understand here, is that there wasn't any substantiated evidence that would warrant any further investigation. The fact that all four of Ford's named witnesses either refuted or could not corroborate the alleged assault, was critical to determining her credibility, in regards to Kavanaugh. So from a rational perspective, Ford's testimony should be considered null and void. However, human psychology is prone to blind emotional belief, just by being exposed to certain ideas. One is especially susceptible to this, if a particular idea holds a strong emotional value for them.
So we will soon see if the Dems strategy worked to sway the swing votes with blind emotional belief.
demagogue on 28/9/2018 at 13:35
The evidence is first of all Mark's cross examined testimony. Kavanaugh even literally said at one point "How should I know. Why don't you ask him?" That's a great idea. The therapist's notes are also probative if they back up all the details, considering they were written in confidence in 2012 when she wasn't dreaming of telling another soul.
I'm sympathetic with the "people change" argument. This would have been a different hearing if Kavanaugh owned up to being a stupid kid and having grown up since then (although his college antics don't do favors to that argument either). But he went down the "total conspiracy" route and tried to sell the story that he was a choir boy, even denying obvious stuff he didn't need to. So he's the first one that's going to nuke that argument.
heywood on 28/9/2018 at 14:22
I didn't think that yesterday's testimony would have any effect on my view of Kavanaugh, but it did.
Prior to the hearings, I didn't think there was enough information and verifiable/falsifiable details for me to make a judgment about whether the allegations were true or not. That hasn't changed. However, everything I've learned about him outside of the allegations suggest that he embodies all the negative stereotypes of East coast prep school boys who think they are above everybody else. He strikes me as being selfish, self-righteous, entitled, overly defensive or even petulant, and basically dishonest about the way he conducted himself in his youth. Also, I couldn't tune in for the full day yesterday, but I heard enough of his testimony in the afternoon to conclude that he lacks the maturity, thoughtfulness, seriousness, empathy, and even temperament for the job. And worse yet, he is overtly political and combative like a politician. I would have expected a SCOTUS nominee to try to stay above politics and conduct himself with more class and professionalism than the Democratic Senators questioning him. That didn't happen. I'm concerned that he is going to abuse his judicial power for partisan interests. I think he should just resign from the judiciary and run for office, as that seems to suit him better.
Anyway, I was against him before on ideological grounds, but now I'm against him on personal grounds too, and I'm not even considering the sexual assault allegations in that. Both of my Senators are Democrats, so there isn't much I can do to influence the outcome. But I really, really hope his nomination goes down in flames.
EDIT: By the way, there was some interesting questioning of Feinstein yesterday by her colleagues. She and/or her staff was accused of leaking Ford's story to the press in order to pressure Ford to come forward. I don't know whether that's true, but it's plausible. I also think the timing of the second and third allegations is suspect. So as other alluded to earlier in the thread (Nicker?), there may be a conspiracy in the Democratic party to time these releases for maximum effect, but I don't have any reason to believe Ford was part of that. And it really doesn't affect my opinion of Kavanaugh at all.
icemann on 28/9/2018 at 14:34
And that he's ruined for life whether he really did it or not aye.
Starker on 28/9/2018 at 14:41
Quote Posted by Vae
The fact that all four of Ford's named witnesses either refuted or could not corroborate the alleged assault, was critical to determining her credibility, in regards to Kavanaugh.
Only two of these witnesses were in the room and they have every motive to deny they didn't assault her. And the Republicans didn't even bother to question them. Basically, "I didn't do it" is good enough for them.
Also one of those witnesses said she didn't write the statement, but her lawyer did, and she apologised to Ford.
Quote Posted by heywood
EDIT: By the way, there was some interesting questioning of Feinstein yesterday by her colleagues. She and/or her staff was accused of leaking Ford's story to the press in order to pressure Ford to come forward. I don't know whether that's true, but it's plausible. I also think the timing of the second and third allegations is suspect. So as other alluded to earlier in the thread (Nicker?), there may be a conspiracy in the Democratic party to time these releases for maximum effect, but I don't have any reason to believe Ford was part of that. And it really doesn't affect my opinion of Kavanaugh at all.
Isn't it also plausible that one of Ford's friends leaked the story? They were the ones advising her to go to the press, after all.
jkcerda on 28/9/2018 at 14:49
Quote Posted by icemann
And that he's ruined for life whether he really did it or not aye.
meh, it's going to take a few years but it will go away.
Quote Posted by Starker
Only two of these witnesses were in the room and they have every motive to deny they didn't assault her. And the Republicans didn't even bother to question them. Basically, "I didn't do it" is good enough for them.
Also one of those witnesses said she didn't write the statement, but her lawyer did, and she apologised to Ford.
Isn't it also plausible that one of Ford's friends leaked the story? They were the ones advising her to go to the press, after all.
the other people who SHE mentioned including her own friend said they don't know WTF she was talking about.
Quote Posted by demagogue
The evidence is first of all Mark's cross examined testimony. Kavanaugh even literally said at one point "How should I know. Why don't you ask him?" That's a great idea. The therapist's notes are also probative if they back up all the details, considering they were written in confidence in 2012 when she wasn't dreaming of telling another soul.
I'm sympathetic with the "people change" argument. This would have been a different hearing if Kavanaugh owned up to being a stupid kid and having grown up since then (although his college antics don't do favors to that argument either). But he went down the "total conspiracy" route and tried to sell the story that he was a choir boy, even denying obvious stuff he didn't need to. So he's the first one that's going to nuke that argument.
Ford was the one who provided partial therapist notes, only Ford can release the rest thanks to HIPPA
Starker on 28/9/2018 at 14:53
They have no reason to remember it, if they didn't witness the assault. Do you remember every party you went to 30 years ago?
Vae on 28/9/2018 at 14:54
Quote Posted by Starker
Only two of these witnesses were in the room and they have every motive to deny they didn't assault her. And the Republicans didn't even bother to question them. Basically, "I didn't do it" is good enough for them.
That doesn't change the underlying fact that there's no corroborating evidence for Ford's unsubstantiated claims...Therefore, her testimony is ineffectual.
The burden of proof is on Ford, not Kavanaugh...and if one believes otherwise, then they're not thinking in a rational manner.
Starker on 28/9/2018 at 14:56
Also, her friend actually said she believes Ford.
The burden of investigation is on the Senate, however. It's an issue of evaluating a candidate, after all, not an issue of establishing guilt.
