Supreme Court Nominee

[Inthedetails]

What no politics rule? This thread has numerous political posts in it.

Past political threads have been shut and political topics basically banned on WS because people don't behave. It's my understanding that Tricia is keeping this thread open as long as we don't spiral into political fights. I'm not going to test her patience with us as I enjoy the discussion and appreciate a conversation that doesn't include political insults.

But, I could be wrong about what the boundaries are. Wouldn't be the first time I was wrong on WS. Whatever the case, I hope we can manage to keep the thread open.

jmo

 

[RANCH]

I've seen people say that the FBI does lousy background checks implying that the numerous background investigations done on Kavanaugh wouldn't find any bad activities committed by him.

Then I see people saying they want an FBI investigation into the unsubstantiated claims made by Dr Ford. Interesting. JMO

 

[human]

He was a busy boy, wasn't he?

Those were all in between going to church and teaching Sunday school

 

[RANCH]

Past political threads have been shut and political topics basically banned on WS because people don't behave. It's my understanding that Tricia is keeping this thread open as long as we don't spiral into political fights. I'm not going to test her patience with us as I enjoy the discussion and appreciate a conversation that doesn't include political insults.



But, I could be wrong about what the boundaries are. Wouldn't be the first time I was wrong on WS. Whatever the case, I hope we can manage to keep the thread open.

jmo

I'm not aware of details on what is or is not allowed. That's why I said that I'm treading lightly.

I would never post political insults. JMO

 

[RANCH]

In answer to a query upthread ...

Unless Tricia decides otherwise, Kavanaugh is the accused and his accusers are considered the victims in this matter. They are to be discussed according to Websleuths victim friendly policies.

So this thread is like a criminal trial with Kavanaugh being the accused and every person who accuses him, no matter how flimsy the evidence, is a victim.

That should keep things pretty one sided IMO.

 

[Locksley Hall]

Kavanaugh's a child of privilege and what he didn't inherit he evidently still felt entitled to grope.

 

[sorrell skye]

While we're on the topic of sexual assault/rape: A girl/woman's sexual history has absolutely ZERO relevance in terms of whether or not her claims of sexual assault/rape are valid.

Sexual assault/rape has NOTHING to do with a victim/survivor's sexual history. Even if a woman is a sex worker, she still has rights over her body and she still has the absolute right to refuse a sexual encounter.

"No" sure as hell doesn't mean 'Yes", regardless from which distorted, privileged world of white male entitlement one may have been spawned.

"No" always means "No". Full stop.

 

[mickey2942]

WTH? This entire situation is spinning out of control! Now, both sides are discussing the choice of using a female prosecutor, to direct the questioning and review. Some think it is sexist, others find it myopic that a prosecutor is being used to direct the questioning.

Who would make everyone happy? At this point, the circus needs a gender neutral approach, maybe Dr. Frankenfurter, from "Rocky Horror Picture Show" is available...couldn't make it any crazier!

 

[BayouBelle_LA]

You would think that at least one democratic senator would have asked BK about the alleged SA without revealing the woman's identity. No one bothered to mention it. They didn't even bring it up in the closed session. I have to wonder why. Maybe they didn't think it was credible idk.

 

[sds71]

Dr. Ford’s Testimony
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4945893/Ford-Written-Testimony.pdf

 

[Jennifer17]

While we're on the topic of sexual assault/rape: A girl/woman's sexual history has absolutely ZERO relevance in terms of whether or not her claims of sexual assault/rape are valid.

Sexual assault/rape has NOTHING to do with a victim/survivor's sexual history. Even if a woman is a sex worker, she still has rights over her body and she still has the absolute right to refuse a sexual encounter.

"No" sure as hell doesn't mean 'Yes", regardless from which distorted, privileged world of white male entitlement one may have been spawned.

"No" always means "No". Full stop.

All those years ago a woman's sexual history was allowed to used by the defense and there were many good ole boys who were prepared to lie for another good ole boy.

 

[Inthedetails]

So this thread is like a criminal trial with Kavanaugh being the accused and every person who accuses him, no matter how flimsy the evidence, is a victim.

That should keep things pretty one sided IMO.

The way I'm seeing it is the discussion is about the nomination and the examination of the job candidate. The candidate for one of the most important jobs in our country has been accused of wrongdoing. The PROCESS is what I'm interested in - not so much being one-sided about it, ykwim?

FWIW, I'm not particularly swayed by recent anonymous accusers that have surfaced today. Those cases should be investigated before jumping into the news cycle, in my opinion. So, for me, I'm disregarding them at the moment, subject to changing my mind later if more info is compelling.

My eyes at the moment are on Ford and Rodriguez especially and on what the committee is doing with the nomination process. I'm interested, very interested, in how this is handled by the committee and how the nominee proceeds.

This is an important process for an important position, as I don't need to remind anyone here. The questions and issues are beyond simply asking "who is the victim?!"

That's my take on it. Others will have different interests, of course.

jmo

 

[sorrell skye]

All those years ago a woman's sexual history was allowed to used by the defense and there were many good ole boys who were prepared to lie for another good ole boy.

Yep, Jennifer, and there are STILL folks who - in this day & age - believe that a girl/woman's sexual history is legal fodder to be used to burn her at the stake, because How-Dare-a-Lowly-Woman, when it has been 'ordained' that a woman must be Silent and Submissive.

Hell No!!!

And, IMO, good ol' boys are still willing to lie for another good ol' boy.

 

[Inthedetails]

"The attorneys for Judge Brett Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford have released results from a polygraph test she took last month — which she apparently passed with flying colors."
https://nypost.com/2018/09/26/lawyers-for-christine-blasey-ford-release-polygraph-results/

 

[Jax49]

Dr. Ford’s Testimony
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4945893/Ford-Written-Testimony.pdf

Very believable, imho.

 

[Sillybilly]

So this thread is like a criminal trial with Kavanaugh being the accused and every person who accuses him, no matter how flimsy the evidence, is a victim.

That should keep things pretty one sided IMO.

It's the standard Websleuths TOS ... you may discuss what is said in MSM about the main case players. If there is information about, or statements by the accusers in MSM, that may be discussed.

from The Rules: Etiquette & Information

VICTIM FRIENDLY

Websleuths is a victim friendly forum. Attacking or bashing a victim is not allowed. Discussing victim behavior, good or bad is fine, but do so in a civil and constructive way, and only when such behavior is relevant to the case.

The "victim friendly" rule extends to the family members of victims and suspects. Sleuthing family members, friends, and others who have not been designated as suspects is not allowed. Don't make random accusations, suggest their involvement, nor bash and attack them. Posting their personal information, including names, addresses, and background data -- even if it is public -- is not allowed. That does not mean, however, that statements made by family members and other third parties cannot come into discussion as the facts of the case are reported in the media.

What you cannot do is speculate negatively about or cast aspersions against the victims.

Any questions, please send a private message to WS staff.

 

[RANCH]

Kavanaugh accuser Christine Ford releases results of polygraph test, but key detail appears to contradict past statements

In the handwritten statement, Ford writes that "there were 4 boys and a couple of girls" at the party.

But in Ford's letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., in July, Ford gave a different tally, writing that the gathering "included me and 4 others."

Even well-intentioned individuals who have come to believe that their false stories are, in fact, true -- whether because of therapist-induced memories or other causes -- can sometimes pass polygraph tests, former FBI officials and psychology experts told Fox News.

Kavanaugh accuser Christine Ford releases results of polygraph test, but key detail appears to contradict past statements

 

[Fairy1]

All those years ago a woman's sexual history was allowed to used by the defense and there were many good ole boys who were prepared to lie for another good ole boy.

All those years ago? I feel pretty confident that we'll see the same tired, irrelevant BS in the hearing tomorrow. <modsnip: snipped as offensive to some or many>

To those who are questioning why Dr. Ford and the others who didn't come forward before now....How willing would YOU be to open yourself and your family to death threats? How willing would you be to have your own name and reputation dragged through the mud? To possibly jeopardize your career? Even if it was to do the right thing.

Brett Kavanaugh stands to be appointed to the highest court in the United States of America for the rest of his life. His decisions will affect each and every one of us and the generations to come. It's kind of a big deal. And no stone should be left unturned. Not just with him but with anyone - male or female - nominated for the Supreme Court.

 

[BingoBongo]

Let’s pick up the white courtesy phone and page @Tricia or @sillybilly and see what they have to say.

Kavanaugh is the accused. He isn’t proven guilty, but that’s not intellectually or literally synonymous with him being the victim. He’s also a public figure.

So, if I accuse you of something I cannot prove (so far) and try to hold you accountable for that thing (whatever it is), and you lose your job, your credibility, your reputation as a result...you're not a victim?

Wow.

 

[BingoBongo]

No one is being accused of burning anyone with a cigarette.

Furthermore, being accused of allegedly "burning someone with a cigarette" isn't even in the same category of being accused of allegedly sexually assaulting/raping someone.

I fail to understand the comparison of "burning someone with a cigarette" with allegations of sexual assault/rape.

It's an anology, a comparison of concepts. No one is making a side-by-side comparison (but I think you already know that). It's the concept that he brought up the virginity for the same reason one might say not only did they not burn someone with a cigarette, but they're not even smokers.