icemann on 30/9/2018 at 07:34
End of the day, unless there is unequivable (sp?) facts that he did it, then not guilty. The end. Any doubt at all must always = not guilty in these cases.
Renzatic on 30/9/2018 at 07:44
This isn't a criminal hearing, Ice. A preponderance of evidence is all that's required.
This is a lifetime nomination for the highest court in the land. If the evidence presents an inclusive case that points towards a still high possibility he's been lying, he could lose his nomination. I mean hell, Douglas Ginsburg withdrew himself from the running after being pressured into admitting he fired up a fatty blunt back in Harvard. Now here we have a guy who's been accused of sexual assault by 4 women, and all but freaked out on live TV during his own testimony. Yet for some reason, we're expecting him to be held to more granular and exacting standards?
It's like the guy could be innocent. Ford could be lying through her teeth for all we know. But that testimony? Jesus. He obviously can't handle pressure with any grace or poise. That alone should've disqualified him right there on the spot.
Tocky on 30/9/2018 at 08:24
Fuck Renz do you ever sleep? We have got to party one day and discuss life. It's three in the morning here and it must be four there. One day I'm going to knock on your door. We are going to play poker. You aren't that far away and we are going to talk. And drink. I wouldn't count on it being shoes and ships but it's going to be something you won't forget. Right now I think I'm going to try to sleep. You know how this stuff pisses me off right? Well I'm not going to make you erase one of my posts tonight. No righteous hammer of words smiting for justice tonight. I'm too mean when I do. But goddamnit the hurt the ones we are supposed to protect endure. Fuck man. I think you know what I'm saying. I will cry and rage and bare my soul and you will be sore afraid. But it's okay because I'm as sane as anyone. Mores the pity. Shit I'm drunk. I'm going to regret this tomorrow aren't I?
Renzatic on 30/9/2018 at 09:00
Yeah, I sleep. I sleep like a log. The problem is I slept like a log during what was supposed to be a 45 minute catnap earlier today, and now I'm wide awake. And yeah, if you want to swing by one day, feel free. Just give me a week or two heads up so I can clear out my day.
Now back on topic.
Ice, let me expand upon what I stated above. You need to keep in mind that this is primarily a job interview for a particularly important position where the candidates character is of the utmost importance. Kavanaugh, if he wins the nomination, will be deciding law, effecting millions of people for the next 20-30 years at least. It's in the nations best interest that we make damn sure he's fit for the job.
Ford doesn't believe he is, for what are now very obvious reasons. We don't know if she's telling the truth or not. Her case is about paper thin, but she presented a good front during her testimony. Enough to raise doubts about Kavanaugh's character. If she's lying, she'll get her just desserts. It's not just Kavanaugh who will potentially face a lifetime of consequences over what's happened these last few days. But if she's telling the truth, if she risked her livelihood to inform us who exactly she believes Kavanaugh to be, do you really want someone who, in response to these accusations, not only lied about about the night in question, but threw a massive temper tantrum on live TV, blaming people entirely disconnected from the current situation, stirring up even further discord in a political clime already rife with ill will and harebrained conspiracies, just to cover his ass enough to gain the right to sit in the highest court of the land?
If he did sexually assault Ford, if he really did hang his junk out and force himself upon multiple women over the years, then proceeded to attack these women as conspirators in a scheme to take him down the moment he's taken to task over it, well...would you put the interpretation of all the laws in the land on his shoulders? Would you trust him to always try to do the right thing?
Don't you think we should do everything in our power to find out who's lying here?
Starker on 30/9/2018 at 09:14
Here's an article that goes into quite some length just how badly Kavanaugh botched his interview:
Quote:
(
https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/09/how-we-know-kavanaugh-is-lying)
Alright, so Kavanaugh is a proven serial liar whose shocked, innocent presentation was obviously an act. What of Ford's testimony? If we care about getting to the actual truth, we have to apply equal scrutiny to both sides. Ford cannot be believed merely because accepting her allegations as true would be politically advantageous. If she isn't believable, the left needs to acknowledge that. But, well, read her testimony for yourself. Watch her answers to questions. See if you see the same tendencies that I've shown Kavanaugh demonstrated. See if you see tactics like changing the subject, answering a question with a question, playing dumb, bursting into tears and accusing critics of waging a conspiracy to destroy you, fabricating nonexistent corroboration, deleting inconvenient facts, and issuing an angry how-dare-you-sir every time things look dicey for you. All of this, as we have seen at exhaustive (and exhausting) length, is present throughout Kavanaugh's testimony. Go and find similar reasons to doubt Ford.
[...]
What most impressed me about Ford was not that she stayed calm, but that she gave the answers an honest person would tend to give. By this I mean that she did not, as Kavanaugh did, try to avoid conceding even the slightest fact that might appear to affirm the other side's story. Instead, she freely admitted facts that she knew would “help” Kavanaugh. She offered corrections to her original letter, even though she knew that these could be construed as “changing her story.”
[...]
But I am not actually trying here to prove that Christine Blasey Ford is telling the truth, even though I don't think Kavanaugh or the Republicans have produced good arguments against her. The idea that her testimony is disproven by the calendars or the witness statements is false. The idea that Kavanaugh is an honest upstanding person who was a gentleman in high school is false. The sole Republican argument is that Ford cannot prove it, but it is very hard to prove a crime like this. I'm mainly interested, though, in showing that Kavanaugh isn't telling the truth. Not because I am unfairly giving him higher scrutiny, but because he's the one being considered for the Supreme Court, and if he's lying, that should be the end of the issue as far as the Senate is concerned. Out he goes!
[...]
What does it say about this country that this is the state of our discourse? That Kavanaugh even stands any chance of being made one of the most powerful figures in the American government, with control over life and liberty? That a man like this is even a judge? He went before the United States Senate and showed total contempt for his vow to tell the truth. He attempted to portray a highly esteemed doctor as a crazy person, by consistently misrepresenting the evidence. He treated the public like we were idiots, like we wouldn't notice as he pretended he was ralphing during Beach Week from too many jalapeños, as he feigned ignorance about sex slang, as he misread his own meticulously-kept 1982 summer calendar, as he replied to questions about his drinking habits by talking about church, as he suggested there are no alcoholics at Yale, as he denied knowing who “Bart O'Kavanaugh” could possibly be based on, as he declared things refuted that weren't actually refuted, as he claimed witnesses said things they didn't say, as he failed to explain why nearly a dozen Yale classmates said he drank heavily, as he invented an imaginary drinking game to avoid admitting he had the mind of a sports jock in high school, as he said Ford had only accused him last week, as he responded to his roommate's eyewitness statement with an incoherent story about furniture, as he pretended Bethesda wasn't 5 miles wide, as he insisted Renate should be flattered by the ditty about how easy she was, as he declared that distinguished federal judges don't commit sexual misconduct even though he had clerked for exactly such a judge.
And what does it say about us, and our political system, that he might well get away with it?
Vae on 30/9/2018 at 10:25
Quote Posted by icemann
End of the day, unless there is unequivable (sp?) facts that he did it, then not guilty. The end. Any doubt at all must always = not guilty in these cases.
Yes icemann, you are quite correct...and to say otherwise would be to
rationalize an unjust action against Kavanaugh, or anyone else for that matter.
The burden of proof is on Ford or any other accuser, not Kavanaugh...
and if an allegation can't be substantiated, then it must negated, bearing no effect upon the accused.Starker on 30/9/2018 at 11:10
Even in criminal courts, you're only required to prove a person's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This is not a court, however, and Kavanaugh is not on trial. His guilt is not what's in question, his conduct, his character, and his fitness for the job are. And, in most countries, a judge that does even some of the things laid out in the above article is usually not seen as fit for office.
Vae on 30/9/2018 at 11:22
That's your opinion about his character...not an objective fact.
The Senate Judiciary Committee voted to recommend Kavanaugh for nomination after assessing the facts, and in their collective opinion as a committee, found his character intact.
Starker on 30/9/2018 at 11:26
His conduct is a fact. That the Senate Judiciary Committee found it acceptable is a scathing indictment of the Senate Judiciary Committee more than anything else.
Vae on 30/9/2018 at 11:31
You're interpretation of Kavanaugh's conduct is an opinion...not a fact.
You need to able to understand the difference between an opinion and a fact, in order to make proper assessments.
