Supreme Court Nominee

[Brubeck]

Senate Democrats investigate a new allegation of sexual misconduct, from Brett Kavanaugh's college years

As Senate Republicans press for a swift vote to confirm Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump’s nominee to the Supreme Court, Senate Democrats are investigating a new allegation of sexual misconduct against Kavanaugh. The claim dates to the 1983-84 academic school year, when Kavanaugh was a freshman at Yale University. The offices of at least four Democratic senators have received information about the allegation, and at least two have begun investigating it. Senior Republican staffers also learned of the allegation last week and, in conversations with The New Yorker, expressed concern about its potential impact on Kavanaugh’s nomination. Soon after, Senate Republicans issued renewed calls to accelerate the timing of a committee vote. The Democratic Senate offices reviewing the allegations believe that they merit further investigation. “This is another serious, credible, and disturbing allegation against Brett Kavanaugh. It should be fully investigated,” Senator Mazie Hirono, of Hawaii, said. An aide in one of the other Senate offices added, “These allegations seem credible, and we’re taking them very seriously. If established, they’re clearly disqualifying.”
..

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Hey Everyone,

The thread is opening back up.

Please do not get personal with each other. Stay on topic. If someone is annoying you put them on ignore.

I really hope we can keep this thread open but if this thread starts to take up too much time we will have to close the discussion.

Thanks,
Tricia

How far can I go with politics on this thread?

I don't want to get in trouble for posting about politics because I know it's not allowed on Websleuths.

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

Bumpity bumpity, just a reminder.

Nobody’s dealing with a criminal trial here.

He's not charged with anything.

This isn't a criminal trial. These are (mostly) public hearings.

He can't be "convicted," per se. Its a senate judiciary committee hearing.

You guys ... this isn't a sexual assault trial.

*sigh*

... Is anyone really reading/paying attention to the news? Serious question. No offense meant.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Bumpity bumpity, just a reminder.

Nobody’s dealing with a criminal trial here.

No it's not a criminal trial. It's a political trial. JMO

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

https://www.google.com/amp/www.foxn...exposed-himself-to-her-at-yale-party.amp.html

College classmate says Kavanaugh exposed himself to her at Yale party

The woman, Deborah Ramirez, has called on the FBI to investigate the alleged incident. The magazine's report, which is co-written by Pulitzer Prize winner Ronan Farrow, states that four Democratic senators have received information about Ramirez's allegation and at least two have begun investigating it.

The report was published days before Kavanaugh is to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee about an allegation of sexual assault against him dating to his days as a high school student in the early 1980s. The accuser in that case, Christine Blasey Ford, has agreed to go before the committee and tell her story.​

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

Twitter Roasts Brett Kavanaugh For Calendars He Claims To Have Kept At 17 | HuffPost

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is providing calendars he kept in 1982 to the Senate Judiciary Committee to back up his denial of a sexual assault allegation against him, The New York Times is reporting.

Kavanuagh’s team admits the calendars do not disprove the alleged assault took place, but say they also do not corroborate the allegations of his accuser, Christine Blasey Ford. Blasey claims Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed and groped her when they were at a party in high school, and that she only escaped when his friend Mark Judge jumped on them.
​

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

Brett Kavanaugh responds after 2nd woman accuses him of sexual misconduct

Kavanaugh released a statement regarding Ramirez’s claims to Fox News saying,

“This alleged event from 35 years ago did not happen. The people who knew me then know that this did not happen, and have said so. This is a smear, plain and simple. I look forward to testifying on Thursday about the truth, and defending my good name–and the reputation for character and integrity I have spent a lifetime building–against these last-minute allegations.”

White House spokesperson Kerri Kupec also released a statement to Fox News defending Kavanaugh. It says,

“This 35-year-old, uncorroborated claim is the latest in a coordinated smear campaign by the Democrats designed to tear down a good man. This claim is denied by all who were said to be present and is wholly inconsistent with what many women and men who knew Judge Kavanaugh at the time in college say. The White House stands firmly behind Judge Kavanaugh.”

​

 

[mickey2942]

I don't see a "win" here for anyone. Judge Kavanaugh, even if he gets the Supreme Court appointment, this taint will never go away. His wife, daughters, colleagues will always wonder "if he did it".

When the accuser testifies, it may already seem very intimidating, and "victim blaming", "Why didn't she report this earlier?". I don't see any positive note here, except she will be able to tell her story, and her personal experience with the accused.

The politics of this situation are meaningless to me, I am intrigued by the fact that people are presumed innocent until proven guilty, and I don't see a lot of this occurring here. It appears to be a "Salem Witch Trial", he is accused, therefore, he is "guilty".

That should scare everyone.

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

No it's not a criminal trial. It's a political trial. JMO

Yes. Like Neil Gorsuch or Merrick Garland. But they didn’t have any sexual assault claims made against them, did they. They also weren’t slammed for perjuring themselves, either.

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

The politics of this situation are meaningless to me, I am intrigued by the fact that people are presumed innocent until proven guilty, and I don't see a lot of this occurring here. It appears to be a "Salem Witch Trial", he is accused, therefore, he is "guilty".

That should scare everyone.

A crime might have been committed — multiple crimes, including perjury.

Of course it needs to be investigated.

Of course the details need to be heard.

That what these processes are for.

I'm not saying he's guilty.

I'm saying she's not a liberal operative trollop with ulterior motives, and not in it for money or infamy.

C'mon, folks.

Things are not always one extreme or the other.

 

[kaen]

Well, now. I wasn't expecting this new incident. There appears to be witnesses in this situation. Wow.

 

[kaen]

One has to wonder how many drunken incidents he doesn't really remember.

 

[mickey2942]

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ne...-kavanaughs-college-years-deborah-ramirez/amp

Now, this is intriguing.

Kavanaugh would have done better to have actually admitted wrongdoing, if he had been drinking alcohol, rather than the categorical denial. If he is guilty. Still allowing for reasonable doubt here...but as more women come forward, he will have a steep hill.

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Yes. Like Neil Gorsuch or Merrick Garland. But they didn’t have any sexual assault claims made against them, did they. They also weren’t slammed for perjuring themselves, either.

That's because the politics are different.

It's hard for me to explain until Tricia makes it clear whats allowed on this thread. JMO

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

That's because the politics are different.

It's hard for me to explain until Tricia makes it clear whats allowed on this thread. JMO

Kavanuagh is accused of multiple crimes.

The others weren’t.

There’s the difference.

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

WS ToS prohibit victim-blaming. Just a heads-up.

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

And before anyone goes here, I’ll repost this, too.

Yes, let's talk about Anita Hill for a moment.

The hearings were not to determine whether or not Clarence Thomas was guilty of sexual harassment. (And he wasn't accused of sexual assault, btw.)

Facts are especially important here, so thank you for this opportunity to clarify the record.

Hill passed a polygraph test. But that's irrelevant.

Her allegations in those Senate hearings were not determined to be false, because the intent of the hearings wasn't to determine guilt or non-guilt of harassment.

There was little question that he acted inappropriately. The behavior just didn't influence the decision to vote him onto the Supreme Court.

"In my opinion, based on my reading of the law, yes, it was [sexual harassment]. But later on, immediately following that response, I noted to the press that I did not raise a claim of sexual harassment in this complaint. It seems to me that the behavior has to be evaluated on its own with regard to the fitness of this individual to act as an Associate Justice. It seems to me that even if it does not rise to the level of sexual harassment, it is behavior that is unbefitting an individual who will be a member of the Court."

~ Anita Hill, excerpt from 1991 Senate hearing​

 

[Deleted member 39678]

Kavanuagh is accused of multiple crimes.

The others weren’t.

There’s the difference.

Yes because of politics.

 

[EuTuCroquet?]

And I’ll repost this, too, because I don’t feel like typing this out again after I did the research the other day. Source linked at end of post. Cheers

I agree. Just wanna jump off your post to say something about "false allegations" and what that means.

An exception doesn't invalidate the rule. Most sexual assault allegations aren't "false."

Around 2-10 percent can be "unfounded" or "baseless" (which is not the same as false, btw). "Unfounded" doesn't mean untrue, though a percentage of the 2-10 percent might be.

That isn't an insignificant number, but it certainly doesn't negate the other 90-98 percent.

For example, unfounded cases include those that law enforcement believes do not meet the legal criteria for rape. It does not mean that some form of sexual assault may not have occurred, but only that from the legal perspective, in that jurisdiction, the case does not meet the legal criteria, or it is “baseless.”
​

 

[mickey2942]

Brett Kavanaugh - Wikipedia

If these women are found to be credible and more come forward, he may well have issues with his current position as well.

Due to the current political climate, I wonder who would even want their entire life open to public scrutiny if his nomination fails.