[Merged] Kavanaugh Hearing

[bee]

1 minute ago, MissMelsWell said:

You're wrong Bee. She has EVERYTHING to lose. 

This is an educated woman and scientist, who is a HIGHLY respected and VERY well known research scientist who has TONS of published research. She's extremely dedicated to her work and her family. She has EVERYTHING to lose. 

Her family is in danger now, she is in danger, Lord knows she may be at risk with her employers now because she tried to anonymously tried to do her civic duty.

She went to ONE women's march and that's about the extent of her so-called "resister activist" background. 

I don't think the timing is strange at all. She voiced the concern months ago, it sat with Eschoo who then interviewed her, then Eschoo took it to Feinstein. They both tried to keep Ford anonymous. 

You're just wrong. 

 

well we will have to agree to disagree on that....  

intelligent and educated people are not immune to taking crazy risks when they are caught up in
what they see as a mission to Save America... by saving the Democrats.... and getting rid of Trump -

many of the Intelligentsia have literally lost their minds and sense of proportion to the anti Trump
propaganda being pumped out daily - 

IMO

 

[RoofGardener]

4 minutes ago, MissMelsWell said:

Not believing someone who reluctantly put their lives on the line to come forward does a FAR bigger disservice. 
 

So we should automatically believe every accusation ? Is that what you're saying ? 

[MissMelsWell]

Where is the proof she was on a Save America mission? The "proof" actually shows the opposite. She may have been used by Eshoo and Feinstein ... that IS a possibility, Maybe even a probability... but SHE didn't want to have her name tied to it for ALL the reasons that are coming up now. Death threats, testifying, media, etc... 

[MissMelsWell]

1 minute ago, RoofGardener said:

So we should automatically believe every accusation ? Is that what you're saying ? 

Don't be obtuse. Nor will I take that bait. 

[bee]

3 minutes ago, MissMelsWell said:

Not believing someone who reluctantly put their lives on the line to come forward does a FAR bigger disservice. 

I'm glad you don't vote in the USA. 

It could easily just be a carefully constructed show piece to smear Kavanaugh, strike a blow at Trump
and influence the Mid Term elections..

The timing of it and lack of any evidence points to that - 

Again.... IMO...

 

 

[RoofGardener]

10 minutes ago, MissMelsWell said:

Not believing someone who reluctantly put their lives on the line to come forward does a FAR bigger disservice. 

 

4 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

So we should automatically believe every accusation ? Is that what you're saying ? 

 

2 minutes ago, MissMelsWell said:

Don't be obtuse. Nor will I take that bait. 

Well, YOU where the one who wrote quote #1 ? 

[MissMelsWell]

Just now, RoofGardener said:

 

 

Well, YOU where the one who wrote quote #1 ? 

And yet you still chose to be obtuse about it. 

[RoofGardener]

Just now, MissMelsWell said:

And yet you still chose to be obtuse about it. 

Obtuse (adjective) Annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand  

And in what way was I being obtuse, when I merely questioned your statement ? 

[MissMelsWell]

4 minutes ago, bee said:

It could easily just be a carefully constructed show piece to smear Kavanaugh, strike a blow at Trump
and influence the Mid Term elections..

The timing of it and lack of any evidence points to that - 

Again.... IMO...

 

 

Like I stated before, there isn't ever any physical "evidence" in these cases. so does that mean the accuser is always lying and part of a vast conspiracy?

Edited September 22, 2018 by MissMelsWell

[MissMelsWell]

2 minutes ago, RoofGardener said:

Obtuse (adjective) Annoyingly insensitive or slow to understand  

And in what way was I being obtuse, when I merely questioned your statement ? 

Again, not taking your bait. That would make ME obtuse. Go away.

[bee]

1 minute ago, MissMelsWell said:

Like I stated before, there isn't ever any physical "evidence" in these cases. so does that mean the accuser is always lying and part of a vast conspiracy?

no it doesn't mean they are always lying - but it doesn't automatically mean they are telling the truth
or the whole truth either...especially where politics and political gain is involved  

Cui bono and all that...

Like I said before she's 'taking one for the team' whether she is making the whole thing up or not...

 

 

[+Hammerclaw]

5 minutes ago, bee said:

no it doesn't mean they are always lying - but it doesn't automatically mean they are telling the truth
or the whole truth either...especially where politics and political gain is involved  

Cui bono and all that...

Like I said before she's 'taking one for the team' whether she is making the whole thing up or not...

 

 

Oh, she's "taking" alright. They've already #go funded over a 100,000 to pay to "protect" her from hordes of assassins.

Edited September 22, 2018 by Hammerclaw

[RoofGardener]

12 minutes ago, MissMelsWell said:

Like I stated before, there isn't ever any physical "evidence" in these cases. so does that mean the accuser is always lying and part of a vast conspiracy?

No, of course not. Neither lying, NOR part of a conspiracy. 

But, by the same token, it doesn't mean they are telling the truth, either. Or rather... they MAY be telling the truth AS THEY RECALL IT... but that doesn't necessarily make it objectively true. 

[+and-then]

On 9/20/2018 at 6:24 PM, OverSword said:

I don't believe they will find a reason not to.  If all it takes is hearsay to derail this process then this process needs to go.  You have one persons word against another, so they will have to judge on Kavanaugh's character based on what they know about and have proof of how the man has led his life.  Since nothing but this has come up I assume he must live in a very honest and forthright manner.  There is no factual reason that any of us know of that should stop this appointment.

This is a VERY thoughtful, deliberative explanation of why Kavanaugh's accuser should not be able to derail his appointment - EVEN if he was guilty of such an act as a teen.

https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/09/18/prager-the-charges-against-judge-kavanaugh-should-be-ignored/

[Farmer77]

5 minutes ago, and then said:

This is a VERY thoughtful, deliberative explanation of why Kavanaugh's accuser should not be able to derail his appointment - EVEN if he was guilty of such an act as a teen.

https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/09/18/prager-the-charges-against-judge-kavanaugh-should-be-ignored/

While I largely agree that it shouldnt be an automatic disqualifier I do disagree with how the author sums it up

Quote

In sum, I am not interested in whether Mrs. Ford, an anti-Trump activist, is telling the truth. Because even if true, what happened to her was clearly wrong, but it tells us nothing about Brett Kavanaugh since the age of 17.

 

Having heard the allegation the responsible thing is for our representatives to go back through Kavanaufgh's case history with it being cast in the new light of the accusation. Most likely the result would be the same but perhaps not. Perhaps his decision making starts to look a little different.

Kinda like at one point in time the concept of kids working in the church seemed quaint and wholesome, but now knowing what we know , it comes across as creepy and predatory.

NO im not equating Kavanaugh with pedophiles that was just the first analogy that popped in my head.

Edited September 22, 2018 by Farmer77

[+and-then]

4 hours ago, Tatetopa said:

That too says nothing about his character or what he does, just a fact of his social position.

Rubbish!  If this man had made a habit of behaving in an immoral, sleazy manner toward women he never would have reached the heights he has in his career.  You really should read Dennis Prager's thoughts on this situation.  Essentially he argues that no culture or society on the planet work from the premise that a single act of stupidity in an adults childhood should be given enough weight to destroy them if the rest of their life has been productive, moral and beneficial to society.  There have NEVER been other accusations against this man.  NONE.  How would you like it if the worst thing you ever did as a youth was used to judge your entire life?

[+and-then]

4 hours ago, Astra. said:

Again, I just find her timing of reporting this somewhat interesting. That's whats mainly bugging me. 

As it should any fairminded individual.

[+and-then]

4 hours ago, MissMelsWell said:

It's a CRIME. 

That NO ONE has provided the slightest EVIDENCE of.  What part of "innocent until PROVEN GUILTY do you disagree with?  Or is that only for people whose politics you agree with?  Do you really want to live in a country where a person can make accusations with no proof and destroy another person's life and livelihood?  Don't be a hypocrite.

[bee]

1 minute ago, Farmer77 said:

Having heard the allegation the responsible thing is for our representatives to go back through Kavanaufgh's case history with it being cast in the new light of the accusation. Most likely the result would be the same but perhaps not. Perhaps his decision making starts to look a little different.

 

and at the same time they could go over Ford's deleted Social Media account - Facebook I think it was - 
(it will still be accessible but not by the public ?)....

to get a better idea of her possible motives for coming forward with the accusation now...
and the strength of her political views... and if she approved of the '''''Resistance'''' by fair means
or foul...

 

 

 

[+and-then]

3 hours ago, MissMelsWell said:

The point is ... this is systemic. Dr. Ford is NOT lying. 

You have absolutely NO proof of this.  No one does.  You're beginning to sound like a harpy on the topic.  He will be voted up and sworn before the next session of the Court convenes and the country will be better and safer for that.  If this had been Republicans finding last minute excuses to stop a vote you and the rest of the Progs here would be taking the exact opposite stance.  Hypocrites are never very credible when they cry crocodile tears.  I sense your passion on this topic and I respect it.  My point is that you are too emotionally invested in wanting to string a man up who has had NO PROOF or evidence shown that he did anything wrong.

[+and-then]

3 hours ago, MissMelsWell said:

I'm pretty sure you never attempted to rape anyone. But, I suppose I could be wrong. 

Of course, you could.  Hell, ALL men are rapists at heart, aren't they?  What a piece of work....

[Farmer77]

6 minutes ago, bee said:

 

and at the same time they could go over Ford's deleted Social Media account - Facebook I think it was - 
(it will still be accessible but not by the public ?)....

to get a better idea of her possible motives for coming forward with the accusation now...
and the strength of her political views... and if she approved of the '''''Resistance'''' by fair means
or foul...

Well if she were up for a lifetime appointment on the SCOTUS I would agree with you. As is you're just a little too close to victim shaming for my comfort level.

For the coming forward now part I think people dont give enough credence to what having your attacker suddenly beamed into your living room would do to one's psyche. Dont get me wrong, im not saying its a slam dunk he's guilty or that shes automatically credible, I just think theres a very logical reason for the "why now" question in this and several other recent high profile cases.

Edited September 22, 2018 by Farmer77

[bee]

1 minute ago, Farmer77 said:

Well if she were up for a lifetime appointment on the SCOTUS I would agree with you. As is you're just a little too close to victim shaming for my comfort level.

For the coming forward now part I think people dont give enough credence to what having your attacker suddenly beamed into your living room would do to one's psyche. Dont get me wrong, im not saying its a slam dunk he's guilty or that shes automatically credible, I just think theres a very logical reason for the "why now" question.

 

she has now involved herself in trying to stop the lifetime appointment of the SCOTUS so she can't expect
to just have her word belived and be left alone.... 

and re victim shaming.... looks like you are comfortable using the shaming tactic... accusing people of victim shaming to shame THEM.... 

 

 

[+and-then]

1 hour ago, bee said:

 

I think she does have a lot to gain - because she is 'taking one for the team' and is a heroine to the Democrats
and their Backers for possibly firing the killshot at Kavanaugh, who her 'side' are desperate to stop ...

It's just all a little too convenient to bring up an alleged assault now from decades ago that cannot be proved or disproved
either way.. but regardless of the truth of it, the perception is now set in stone and she has already more or less
ruined his career whether he becomes SCOTUS or not...

I think she probably cooked it all up with Feinstein and a whole team of people who see themselves as 'resisters'
and this was a last ditch operation to prevent his appointment and try to influence the mid term elections...

 

Once appointed he could STILL be impeached.  In his position, I would hire counsel and investigators and would do everything in my power to legally DESTROY HER.  When I was finished with her, her own family would doubt her if she said the sun was going to rise tomorrow.  There HAS to be accountability at some point or these people will keep slandering and libeling to push political agendas.  The credibility of our legal processes is at stake and once respect for the law is gone in a "nation of laws, not men" we're pretty much done...

[Farmer77]

2 minutes ago, bee said:

 

she has now involved herself in trying to stop the lifetime appointment of the SCOTUS so she can't expect
to just have her word belived and be left alone....

Thats not really how things work though. Do you really want to live in a world where you're forced to defend your personal life when you're the victim? 

Let there be an investigation, just do it respectfully.