Politics

PSUgrower
Posts: 710
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:52 am

Re: Politics

Postby PSUgrower » Tue Sep 25, 2018 10:48 pm

I don't jump in this thread too much because your politics depends on the glasses you wear. But this Kavanaugh crap is unreal. It matters that this guy possibly touched girls/women inappropriately decades ago (some people have said this was a long time ago). Guess how many women could tell the world that I touched them inappropriately? NONE! Get this chump out and nominate a woman!

side note: I am sooo tired of people saying that this was a "good person". I absolutely HATE that statement and it should have ZERO merit! People are not going to be rotten in front of other people for the most part so the argument that someone is good is silly and annoying.

tempe
Posts: 240
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 8:54 pm

Re: Politics

Postby tempe » Wed Sep 26, 2018 1:05 am

I'm with you grower. Besides, "good" is for chumps - I want a "great person."

sameoldlama
Posts: 660
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 7:43 am

Re: Politics

Postby sameoldlama » Wed Sep 26, 2018 10:07 am

Actually grower any woman anywhere could accuse you of touching her inappropriately - wouldn't mean it happened. People can accuse anyone of anything - it's having that thing called proof that can be pesky.

Let's remember Penn Staters - we have seen players falsely accused of assault (Rashard Casey), sexual assault (Anwar Phillips) and we were all skeptical of the person who claimed he had told Joepa via phone call that he had been molested by Sandusky.

In this partisan day and age you have zero chance of finding a nominee whom everyone thinks is a great person - so let's aim for a great jurist with a clean background.
Look at how contentious and politicized the process has become - just think - Ruth Bader Ginsburg (by all accounts a liberal leaning judge) was confirmed by a 96-3 vote.

I can't think of a single thing facing the Senate today that would garner a 96-3 vote.
Wendall : That's very linear Sheriff
Ed Tom : Age will flatten a man Wendall

Blue&White
Posts: 2597
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:01 am

Re: Politics

Postby Blue&White » Wed Sep 26, 2018 2:55 pm

Third woman has coming forward claiming that back in highshool Kavanaugh and his friends drugged and gang raped her. She does not say that she was specifically raped by Kavanaugh but she does name him as someone involved in ongoing behavior that involved drugging and raping girls. She has issued a sworn statement and claims there are corroborating witnesses, but she has not named them publically.

Her lawyer is Michael Avenatti. Trump has responded and calls Avenatti a "third rate lawyer who is good at making false accusations". The problem with that is the accusations he made against Trump about Stormy Daniels were 100% true. It's been proven now. There are tapes and confessions. So, so much for him making false accusations.

Anyway, at minimum, I have to believe that the Republicans are going to seriously re-think their strategy of pretending to care about this hearding tomorrow and holding a vote on Friday. The idea that they are going to vote without vetting some of this just seems insane. They will get killed in November if they do that. And, if any part of this claim is remotely true then I think Kavanaugh is effectively finished. I hope there is truth to all these allegations, because this is a pretty scummy thing to do to someone if there isn't.

as for Avenatti, I really don't appreciate the grandstanding. He's been saying for a few days that he has some bombshell coming. Who was served by doing this the day before the Ford hearing? Not his client. Not the American public. Not anyone except maybe his desire for maximum plubicity. I agree with Trump's opinion on this guy. Not impressed at all.
Is it baseball season yet?

PSUgrower
Posts: 710
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:52 am

Re: Politics

Postby PSUgrower » Wed Sep 26, 2018 11:19 pm

sameoldlama wrote:Actually grower any woman anywhere could accuse you of touching her inappropriately - wouldn't mean it happened. People can accuse anyone of anything - it's having that thing called proof that can be pesky.

Let's remember Penn Staters - we have seen players falsely accused of assault (Rashard Casey), sexual assault (Anwar Phillips) and we were all skeptical of the person who claimed he had told Joepa via phone call that he had been molested by Sandusky.

In this partisan day and age you have zero chance of finding a nominee whom everyone thinks is a great person - so let's aim for a great jurist with a clean background.
Look at how contentious and politicized the process has become - just think - Ruth Bader Ginsburg (by all accounts a liberal leaning judge) was confirmed by a 96-3 vote.

I can't think of a single thing facing the Senate today that would garner a 96-3 vote.

We will agree to disagree. The women from high school (I think Ford) is giving a pretty detailed account of the incident. I know that people can be falsely accused but these are pretty detailed accounts. BTW, they have his calendar from 1982. He has been coming off as this choir boy but all I see in that calendar is a kid who has privilege. He is already lying so what else is he lying about? Anyone can accuse anyone of something but there has to be some merit behind it. You can falsely accuse me all day but there is zero merit behind it.

Clearly this guy does not have a clean background

sameoldlama
Posts: 660
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 7:43 am

Re: Politics

Postby sameoldlama » Thu Sep 27, 2018 9:01 am

As I have said previously the truth in the Kavanaugh story is likely somewhere in between what he is saying and what the accusers are saying. Two people can take away totally different views of an event when it happens - much less 36 years later when they apply a completely new set of values and standards (those of a reasoned adult vs those they had as a drunken teen).

You may disagree but the calendar (if verifiable) is about the only actual thing I've seen to date that would be considered evidence. Even that said I think it's absolutely weird anyone would still have calendars from 36 years ago. I don't think this guy was an alter boy, eagle scout running around with a halo on his head but probably like a million other teen age boys out there trying to get a beer and have fun at parties and hook up with the girls - that's just about every guy I ever knew (that privilege comment is PC nonsense - every guy, no matter what economic strata were much the same in the 80s I grew up in).

Tread lightly with the precedent being set - revisionist history without evidence being used to destroy people will eventually be negative to us all. Due process and the presumption of innocence are bedrocks of our legal system and the essence of the protection of our freedom.
Wendall : That's very linear Sheriff
Ed Tom : Age will flatten a man Wendall

Blue&White
Posts: 2597
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:01 am

Re: Politics

Postby Blue&White » Thu Sep 27, 2018 10:07 am

The presumption of innocence and all that other grand stuff refers to criminal charges. It's a slightly different standard for a lifetime apointment to the US Supreme Court. And, that calendar would not make it into a court of law as evidence.

As for Kavanaugh, he's been full of shit through most of this. He is now trying to claim that back in highschool he spent all his time in church and doing charity work. But, his yearbook and his friends from that time tell a very different story. He may not have sexually assaulted anyone in highschool but he's clearly being less than truthful about how he spent his time. And, that's a not a new thing for him.

The Republicans knew he wasn't a great choice. They held of releaseing documentation and then they dumped it all at once. Why? Well, I can only speculate, but I suspect it has a lot to do with what he said under oath during his confirmation to the fedearl bench vs. what the released emails showed. The stories do not match up. And now he's telling a story about his past that is inconsistent with what he put in his own yearbook and what people who knew him back then are saying about him. At least one of the women who signed that letter of support for him is now having remourse after finding out what was said about her back in the early 1980s. Other people have come forward and said he was a heavy drinker and bad drunk. Lots of people in his age bracket were heavy drinkers and bad drunks at that time, but he's saying that none of this is true and everyone else is lying. Not just the women accusing him but everyone who knew him. His one friend wrote a freaking book about their parties and Kavanaugh still is claiming it's not true. Seriously, how likely is it that everyone but him - the only one who has anything to lose - is thsi liar?

As for the women accusing him - while it's true that false accusations do happen women generally do not accuse men of rape if there was no rape. That is a rare thing. And, when women do it, it's usually not women who have told their story to others over a perod of time and have as much to lose as these women do. They are all very accomplshsed and have nothign to gain by putting themselves out there. The latest woman has had multiple security clearances. She's not just some flake. And, there are other women who have come forward and said they will corroborate her story.

Kavanaugh seems like he was a bad choice. You may not like how this has gone down, but the moral to the story is don't put up a nominee who has all the issues he apparently had. The Dems didn't like Gorsuch either, and they didn't vote for him. But, they equally didn't come at him with 35 year old allegations of sexual assault. That's probably because there weren't any.

Trump is going to have to start over. I can't imagine Kavanaugh is getting in after these latest accusations. He even indicated last night that he is considering pulling the plug.
Is it baseball season yet?

sameoldlama
Posts: 660
Joined: Wed Aug 16, 2017 7:43 am

Re: Politics

Postby sameoldlama » Thu Sep 27, 2018 5:04 pm

Probably the most believable thing I've heard came from former NBA big man Chris Dudley - who was friends with Kavanaugh.

He said he and Kavanuagh went out together and - yes they drank, and yes they got drunk. He said he never saw Kavanaugh get black out drunk or become angry and belligerent when drinking. His basic statement - yeah we partied - pretty much like your average college kid in the 80s. He also said he never missed a class and was very serious about academics saying "you don't graduate at top of your class if you are constantly drunk and hungover".

So he didn't claim Kavanuagh was a saint but certainly didn't paint a picture of a raging, violent alcoholic. And that - to me seems to be most credible thing I've heard to date.

B&W I'm curious as to why you don't feel calendars would be admissible - they certainly could be tested to determine age - a lawyer could question how legitimate the entries are but I think you'd have a hard time selling to someone this guy plotted to make fake calendars so he would have an alibi against sexual assault allegations 30 years later.

I'd also have a question for woman accusing him of facilitating "gang rapes" - asserting he spiked drinks to allow other guys to assault women. Those questions would be:
1. Why didn't you say something while it was happening
2. What did you do after it happened - did you offer to go to police with victim
3. Did you warn others about the guys involved
4. Did you ever go around the guys involved again

I can understand if she didn't feel capable of 1 or 2 or if victim didn't want to pursue. But the answer to 3 better be "yeah I warned my friends and here's who I told". And 4 better be absolutely not.

And this may not be a criminal trial but designating someone guilty of something serious to the point you severely damage their life should be based - well the accuser is probably telling the truth.
Take a look at what a few biased people in the intelligence community did in favor of one POTUS candidate and in opposition to another. Sadly in this day and age lining up a few liars to advance a political end (and both sides are guilty) is becoming all to common.

I stand by my original assessment - we will never know the truth and it's likely somewhere in between the he said, she said - neither side of the political aisle cares what the truth is - they only care about how it plays out politically. Either which way this lands - there will be fallout for us all and their will be payback from the "losing" political party.
Wendall : That's very linear Sheriff
Ed Tom : Age will flatten a man Wendall

PSUgrower
Posts: 710
Joined: Thu Aug 17, 2017 10:52 am

Re: Politics

Postby PSUgrower » Thu Sep 27, 2018 5:18 pm

sameoldlama wrote:As I have said previously the truth in the Kavanaugh story is likely somewhere in between what he is saying and what the accusers are saying. Two people can take away totally different views of an event when it happens - much less 36 years later when they apply a completely new set of values and standards (those of a reasoned adult vs those they had as a drunken teen). I completely agree!

You may disagree but the calendar (if verifiable) is about the only actual thing I've seen to date that would be considered evidence. Even that said I think it's absolutely weird anyone would still have calendars from 36 years ago. I don't think this guy was an alter boy, eagle scout running around with a halo on his head but probably like a million other teen age boys out there trying to get a beer and have fun at parties and hook up with the girls - that's just about every guy I ever knew (that privilege comment is PC nonsense - every guy, no matter what economic strata were much the same in the 80s I grew up in). I have no problems if the guy drank beer back in the day, got drunk with friends or even blacked out with friends. But don't tell people you never did any of the this stuff. This is a huge problem IMO. What else is he not telling us

Tread lightly with the precedent being set - revisionist history without evidence being used to destroy people will eventually be negative to us all. Due process and the presumption of innocence are bedrocks of our legal system and the essence of the protection of our freedom.


I have always said that someone who vehemently denies something has more credibility IMO, but Dump has changed that for me. Any, let the FBI investigate. Kavanugh seems like he doesn't want the FBI to investigate. I wonder why. If he is truly innocent then let the FBI investigate and then you get your evidence

One last thing. I haven't watch Ford at all today. Did anyone ask her if she told any of her friends? Just wondering. I bet the FBI could find that out

Blue&White
Posts: 2597
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2017 10:01 am

Re: Politics

Postby Blue&White » Thu Sep 27, 2018 5:35 pm

B&W I'm curious as to why you don't feel calendars would be admissible

It's hearsay, that's why. And, beyond that, how do you establish authenticity and chain of custody? I've never done any trial work and my class in Evidence was back in the spring of 1993 or thereabouts, so perhaps my recollection of the evidentiary rules is not quite correct. Or, perhaps they have changed over time. But, from what I recall, you couldn't use that evidence as an offer of proof to establish Kavanaugh's whereabouts at a given time 36 years earlier.

Also,

I'd also have a question for woman accusing him of facilitating "gang rapes" - asserting he spiked drinks to allow other guys to assault women. Those questions would be:
1. Why didn't you say something while it was happening
2. What did you do after it happened - did you offer to go to police with victim
3. Did you warn others about the guys involved
4. Did you ever go around the guys involved again

I can understand if she didn't feel capable of 1 or 2 or if victim didn't want to pursue. But the answer to 3 better be "yeah I warned my friends and here's who I told". And 4 better be absolutely not.


The sad reality is that the overwhelming majority of women do not report it, do not go to the police, and are likely to stay around the guys who did that. And, how do you say something when it happened if you were unconscious? As for warning others, women have historically not been believed, even by other women.

Your 4 questions seem like you have lived in a vastly different world than many of us. I don't know what women you have in your life, but I strongly suspect that more of them that you realize have put up with some level of what is being talked about here. Maybe not being drugged and gang raped - that is certainly a rarity (fortunately) - but a lot of what is being discussed is far more common than I suspect you realize. And, when women report it or talk about it they are shot down. I had no idea how bad it was until I started talking to the women around me recently. It's been a real eye opener. Women I've know for years have some really horrible stories and I had no idea.

Here's a fun one - the daughter of a good friend of my wife was druged, beaten up and raped at college just under 2 years ago. The doctor told her it was her fault for "putting herself in that position" and the local cops have advised her to drop it. Her mom (my wife's friend) has been fighting with the cops trying to get them to do their job, but they don't seem inclinded. They get a lot of bullshit about how hard it is to investigate these things (even harder when you don't try). And, this is an obvious case where she was at a party and her drink was spiked, she was punched and raped. There is no question what happened and the cops argued about even questioning people who were there. It's unreal.

There was also a thing going around earlier this week from a West Point grad who was raped while at the Point. She goes into great detail about what happened to her after she reported it. It was not at all encouraging. So, I think your willingness to be dissmissive of these women because while teenagers they didn't act in a way you think was appropriate is unreasonable.

As for Kavanaugh - I agree we will never really know what happened with him. But, there are enough women coming up and talking that it seems to me the FBI should be opening up the background check and checking it out. Lying to the FBI is a crime. People have gone to jail for it. so, sending them to ask questions may get some answers. Maybe not. Maybe it won't. It was all a long time ago. But, the refusal to spend a week or so to do it seems a bit mystifying to me.
Is it baseball season yet?