I gotta say if you sat on this like Feinstein did since July, I have real issues with it coming up now.
Link: https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/california-professor-writer-of-confidential-brett-kavanaugh-letter-speaks-out-about-her-allegation-of-sexual-assault/2018/09/16/46982194-b846-11e8-94eb-3bd52dfe917b_story.html?utm_term=.70279a18889e
Her behavior proves she hates Trump (not that there is anything wrong with that but does speak to motive). Supposedly she passed some kind of lie detector test (who knows what questions) which could mean she actually believes the bs made up in her head or because she is a psychologist she knows how to lie and still pass.
Add to that she is prompted by a #metoo lawyer who just happened to defend Bill by raking his sexual victims over the coals before she figured there was more money in “woman’s rights” issues and who demonstrated she hates Trump even more than this woman.
This thing is worse than the high tech lynching of Justice Thomas and makes Anita Hill look believable by comparison.
of Douche bag Trump's.
Isn't it always the same with you guys?
If someone says a negative about your guy, they're lying and have zero credibility.
I'll bet you side with all the women who came forward claiming Clinton abused them.
See what I did there, hmmmm?
Trumpoid! Traitor!
This screams political takedown.
(no message)
first attempt?
Because I have to assume if there were other cases out there we'd have heard about them by now. Ya know, like what Hillary would call a "bimbo eruption".
(no message)
Therefore, we have to look at the credibility of the accusation vs the credibility of the accused.
Always remarkable R's going after the credibility of the accuser when their guy is on the dais.
Funny thing, when Anita Hill was in front of the panel all the old white guys questioned her credibility but when Clinton was being investigated (and even now) all his accusers have major cred. You and your group have NO CREDIBILITY when judging the credibility of others.
The republicans kicked your ass on the judge thing, deal with it, the worm will turn at some point and you'll get more Marxists for the court. (intentionally confrontational, posting in kind) I don't really care about Kavanaugh.
(no message)
(no message)
Either she knows how to lie and pass a polygraph, or she actually believes her delusion.
He may have done this and whether he was 17 or 37, it's a very serious charge and should not be dismissed in this context.
A psychology prof hooked me up to the equivalent of a polygraph in high school for our psych class. In a few short minutes, I had already started to learn how to fool it. The teacher commented that no one had ever been able to take their heart rate/body temperature as low as I had in that class. I'll bet I could fool it at least half the time. You probably could, too, with some preparation.
evading and telling half truths profoundly disturbs me.
By way of distinction, while I may disagree with Mr. Chief Justice Roberts politically, I trust him as a Jurist.
derailing IMHO.
I don’t think that she’s completely lying that some type of nasty experience took place between the two. Beyond that, a 35 year old story of what took place between high school kids isn’t compelling evidence. It might be, if there were additional allegations later that don’t seem to be there.
If there is more or other victims, I’m willing to listen, but it doesn’t seem that there are.
As I said elsewhere it doesn’t appear to be the traditional pattern like Orange and Bill who commit serial offenses, and the weight of the evidence is compelling.
(no message)
My guess is that it does not change a single vote. Anita Hill had a far stronger case and Clarence has been on the Court for a long long time.
(no message)
What Would Mitch McConnell Do? He's a scourge on Democracy but he's also an evil genius. He made sure Obama didn't get his nominee and he claims his greatest accomplishment to be, "Citizens United." That's one fucked up individual who has won way too many of these battles. Kavanaugh has been well trained and vetted to implement dangerous agenda. There's zero impartiality with this guy. He's big mouth ass hole and has no interest justice for the common good or the common man.
I'm inclined to let this thing play out and see where it goes. And I suspect this wise ass has plenty of impropriety in his past to make him unfit for the Supreme Court. Kavanaugh is an arrogant prick who hasn't been quiet about his "hidden" agenda over the years. And he's flaunted it with Diaper Donald type arrogance. Furthermore, it's time for the Dems to utilize the exact type of ruthless tactics regularly employed by the Republican Party. The Republican Party has been nothing but an enabler for the 1/10 of 1% at the expense of the majority for much too long. This shit has got to end and the time to end it is NOW.
Unfortunately when you are dealing with ruthless pricks, the end justifies the means. Being a nice guy with Republicans is a suckers game. The irony of it all is that morons like WestCoast, Cole, Baron, Eli et.al. have little understanding that the politicians they worship wouldn't piss in a cup for them if they were dying of thirst in the desert. They foolishly follow leaders who work against their own personal interests but they are angry blind old fools and cannot see it.
This is what the rational minority call confirmation bias.
Also, Mitch McConnell is an asshole, but no more so than Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer or Diane Feinstein. Something a self-identifying anti-hypocrisy sheep dog might note.
"willing to let the sham play out" makes you no better than the trump bots you oppose.
I haven't done this, nor would I. I merely made an statement that I believe he exhibits the signs of the exact type of prick that would do this type of thing more than once. That's my opinion. I do research for a living asswipe. I go where the information takes me. And if I'm wrong, I claim it. And I've done so on this forum more than once.
Save your confirmation bias and hypocrisy arguments for Cole, Baron, Ned, Eli and yes, even yourself. I'm very, very clear when it comes to hypocrisy and bias. I write about it all the time in the forum.
Confirmation bias is the influence of your beliefs based on your desire.
In this context you could think of it as "wishful thinking". You really want Kavanaugh to be disqualified as a SC justice, so you'll believe anything and suspend rationality to promote (within your own mind) anything that could make your desired result come true. When it turns out you were obviously wrong, you go with. "But I still believe he's guilty of something."
There is no evidence to support "this wise ass has plenty of impropriety in his past" but it's your last refuge after failing with silly shit like the sexual misconduct in high school stuff. A rational person would recognize the fact that the dems couldn't find anything, therefore he's probably a pretty okay guy.
answer a question under oath. We saw an example of it. The techniques are used all the time to assist law enforcement, business decision making and so forth. Plus there's plenty of video that suggests his disingenuous tendencies. Ask any defense attorney if they liked his answer to Harris' question in the Senate? Attorney's are quite aware of the tactics and the best of them spend millions a year to weed out bullshitters in many aspects of their practice of law. Suspicion that someone is a wise ass isn't confirmation bias and ignoring such information is a fools game and you certainly are a fool.
(no message)
(no message)
And here I thought you were above the "I know you are but what am I" defense.
(no message)
(Jimbecile-esque = Assholesque in case you're confused.)
(no message)
That describes like 98% of the male population.
If ya got something real fine then bring it up. But this is BS.
(no message)
Again, give me evidence that the guy is an assaulter. In my experience is normally quite clear that an assaulter has both a history and a reputation.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
I have no doubt something happened, but as with most instances of immature youthful indiscretions the truth is likely between her version and his denial. So I will stick with groping for now.
she was making a bet that Kavanaugh would be nominated to the Supreme Court someday? I think you are getting a little bit ahead of the facts. Plus they are willing to open it up to an FBI investigation. Pretty risky strategy for a College Professor with little to gain but a whole lot to lose.
I’m sure something happened, but I don’t think it was entirely what she is claiming.
C’mon dude, now HS groping is a crime 35 years later?
Also, any further history? Real sexual assaulters like Orange and Bill keep it up their whole lives.
a sign of credibility. Furthermore, we've seen way too many instances that once one person comes forward there are more to follow. It deserves fair and reasonable investigation.
And Kavanaugh's personality raises reasonable suspicion. There's a verbal cockiness to this guy that raises red flags that he's inclined to hidden agenda's. That's just an opinion but I could back it up with really good research. Nonetheless it's no less opinion than what you have also suggested in your commentary.
hasn’t yet been revealed. Again, take your advice and follow the facts.
A 35 year old plus allegation of HS groping is not in and of itself worthy of belief under all of these particular circumstances where there is a clear agenda in my view. Again if there is more it should have been brought out by now and I trust there has been scurrying all over to dig up dirt on this guy. Nothing else to date. Plus these allegations should have been brought up before now. I also doubt she was a HS angel who only had one beer as claimed. That defies credibility for teenage drinkers. Something happened there, but none of us will really know what it actually was. Sorry, but this is BS to me right now. If others come forward, I’m willing to listen, but I doubt it.
And I agree that you can't hang the guy out to dry based solely on what we've heard so far. But Trump has a propensity for surrounding himself with the worst of the worst and Kavanaugh is a true wise ass. I haven't studied the personalities of Supreme Court nominees or Justices over history. Kananaugh appears to be a non-contemplative loud mouth as compared to Justices I'm familiar with. Also, I have done quite a bit of research on the tell-tale signs of liars and con men. Kavanaugh exhibits many of these characteristics. And his performance when faced with Harris's questioning was quite revealing. Very similar stumbling, mumbling, looking away, eye blinking that we saw with Manafort's performance two years ago. This guy is a liar and is not being forthright with respect to a very clear agenda he most certainly intends to carry out.