Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

I know. I was just being anal. :-) And educational.

On a more serious point, this is why psychologists say that young males, early 20s, are still prone to rash decisions and violent outbursts, more so than after 25.

Makes sense.

[SJHovey]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

It's just unfortunate that what will happen today and tomorrow is a political tennis match and not a search for the truth. It takes real stones for anyone in Ford's position to put themselves in this position. Kavanaugh has a lot to lose here but also a huge amount to gain. For Ford, it's mostly a matter of avoiding or dealing with harm.

It is a political event. That's why I personally don't feel sorry for any of the parties involved, or worry particularly about any harm to them or their reputation.

The simple truth is this. The Senate, this Senate, any Senate can install a serial killer on the Supreme Court if they choose. Those are our rules. We made those rules and agree to play by them. Our only remedy, if we're unhappy with their choice, is vote the Senators out of office. It's a political game. The Senators weigh the political impact of their choice.

Handy complains about the Senate rushing the nomination through. Of course they are rushing the nomination through. It is politically expedient for them to do so. They would be idiots to not rush the nominee through. They could lose the majority and not control who gets installed. Again, that is politics. It is played that way, by all politicians, since politics was invented.

I don't feel sorry for people who inject themselves into political feuds, then get splashed with mud. If Kavanaugh is 100% innocent of all of the scandalous claims that have been made against him, I don't feel one bit sorry for him. He chose to let himself be nominated for this position and be injected into a political feud. The same with the accusers.

I may respect or admire people who are willing to so inject themselves. I probably wouldn't do it. But I don't feel sorry for anyone who takes that step.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

It is a political event. That's why I personally don't feel sorry for any of the parties involved, or worry particularly about any harm to them or their reputation.

The simple truth is this. The Senate, this Senate, any Senate can install a serial killer on the Supreme Court if they choose. Those are our rules. We made those rules and agree to play by them. Our only remedy, if we're unhappy with their choice, is vote the Senators out of office. It's a political game. The Senators weigh the political impact of their choice.

Handy complains about the Senate rushing the nomination through. Of course they are rushing the nomination through. It is politically expedient for them to do so. They would be idiots to not rush the nominee through. They could lose the majority and not control who gets installed. Again, that is politics. It is played that way, by all politicians, since politics was invented.

I don't feel sorry for people who inject themselves into political feuds, then get splashed with mud. If Kavanaugh is 100% innocent of all of the scandalous claims that have been made against him, I don't feel one bit sorry for him. He chose to let himself be nominated for this position and be injected into a political feud. The same with the accusers.

I may respect or admire people who are willing to so inject themselves. I probably wouldn't do it. But I don't feel sorry for anyone who takes that step.

Correct. And this is why I find Bren't musings about the word "Fair" and destroying a persons life hilarious.

1. There is nothing "fair" about this life. Never has been, never will be.
2. You have things like this in your past, you know it, you don't put yourself in the public eye. It's pretty simple calculation to make. And if you don't and you're being railroaded, truly railroaded you beg, scream, holler for an FBI investigation. Which is not happening here.

[rufus]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

If one of these women are believable, beyond their rep as just being credible in other areas of their careers, if their STORY is credible, I am with you. Just going by other outside factors, that's not enough for me.

If they can have us believe that he assaulted one of these women, and not just ride on their reputation (and his questionable one), using info, facts, events, etc....ok, then we move on from there.

How do you determine what constitutes credible, and what's just a woman making up stories?

I mean, for me, just reading his yearbook page tells me everything I need to know how what sort of person he was in high school, and whether he was capable of doing something like this.

[burd]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

It is a political event. That's why I personally don't feel sorry for any of the parties involved, or worry particularly about any harm to them or their reputation.

The simple truth is this. The Senate, this Senate, any Senate can install a serial killer on the Supreme Court if they choose. Those are our rules. We made those rules and agree to play by them. Our only remedy, if we're unhappy with their choice, is vote the Senators out of office. It's a political game. The Senators weigh the political impact of their choice.

Handy complains about the Senate rushing the nomination through. Of course they are rushing the nomination through. It is politically expedient for them to do so. They would be idiots to not rush the nominee through. They could lose the majority and not control who gets installed. Again, that is politics. It is played that way, by all politicians, since politics was invented.

I don't feel sorry for people who inject themselves into political feuds, then get splashed with mud. If Kavanaugh is 100% innocent of all of the scandalous claims that have been made against him, I don't feel one bit sorry for him. He chose to let himself be nominated for this position and be injected into a political feud. The same with the accusers.

I may respect or admire people who are willing to so inject themselves. I probably wouldn't do it. But I don't feel sorry for anyone who takes that step.

A lot of truth to all that.

But don't you feel sorry for Mr. Avenatti? The guy just wants justice.

[Wisko McBadgerton]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

No shyt? For these kinds of crimes specifically? I know there's usually no SOL for murder.

I looked this up last week, and I guess if I get a minute I can find it again, but it seems to me that even if Ford's case was prosecuted in 1982, the most a prosecutor could hope to get from a jury would be 4th degree sexual assault. Higher degrees involve actual rape in the statutes. Hard to see how a jury could be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that more than 4th degree was committed even taking Ford at her word and discarding Kav and Judge's denials, as well as the denials of other people named by Ford as being there today. If that is the case, 4th degree isn't a felony and the SOL expired long ago for non-felony sexual assault.

[SJHovey]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

A lot of truth to all that.

But don't you feel sorry for Mr. Avenatti? The guy just wants justice.

Avenatti will get his justice when he makes the foolhardy decision to run for President.

[rufus]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

SOL has probably run on those offenses, so they could come forward now without fear of prosecution. uno would likely know.

Doesn't matter. Use common sense. Why would two men come forward and admit to a sexual assault that was purportedly done 35 years ago by a man they don't even know?

Even if you did do it, you keep your mouth shut, and hope no one ever finds out it was you.

[rufus]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Marcy Wheeler over at emptywheel made a good point that I'll paraphrase here.


Kavanaugh spent that entire Fox interview saying that he had never sexually assaulted anyone. Immediately after his first use of that term 'sexual assault", he pivoted to how he had never even had intercourse in high school, nor for many years after. He's trying to equate "sexual assault" with the actual sex act. No penetration, no sexual assault. Can't have sexual assault without sex.

He then went on to say never committed "sexual assault", like nine times over the course of the interview.


It's "depends on what the meaning of the word 'is' is". Kinda ironic, that.

[burd]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Doesn't matter. Use common sense. Why would two men come forward and admit to a sexual assault that was purportedly done 35 years ago by a man they don't even know?

Even if you did do it, you keep your mouth shut, and hope no one ever finds out it was you.

Sure, but I was just basing my comments on DGF's post that two people may have already come forward. I know that post didn't claim they identified themselves.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

I looked this up last week, and I guess if I get a minute I can find it again, but it seems to me that even if Ford's case was prosecuted in 1982, the most a prosecutor could hope to get from a jury would be 4th degree sexual assault. Higher degrees involve actual rape in the statutes. Hard to see how a jury could be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that more than 4th degree was committed even taking Ford at her word and discarding Kav and Judge's denials, as well as the denials of other people named by Ford as being there today. If that is the case, 4th degree isn't a felony and the SOL expired long ago for non-felony sexual assault.

And all of that is irrelevant to what is happening today. He is in the middle of a job interview not a court proceeding.

[SJHovey]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

How do you determine what constitutes credible, and what's just a woman making up stories?

I mean, for me, just reading his yearbook page tells me everything I need to know how what sort of person he was in high school, and whether he was capable of doing something like this.

Let me ask you this question.

Have you ever had the responsibility to make this type of decision? I'm not talking about sitting up here in the peanut gallery where you and I and everyone else is at watching these Senate events unfold. I'm talking about it being your responsibility, with real consequences to both parties, to make a credibility decision on this type of issue.

I have. I will tell you, it is not easy. In fact, it's one of the harder things I've had to do.

It wasn't as a juror, where someone's freedom was at stake, but I would have the help of 11 other people to shoulder the responsibility. It was in the employment setting. And it hasn't been on just one occasion.

I will tell you that it feels different when it's up to you. When you hold their fate in your hands and it's your decision that will be second-guessed. In each of those instances there were always people who would say, "I don't know how you can't believe him because of _________," or "it was __________ that made it clear to me she was telling the truth."

It is not an easy task.

[rufus]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Sure, but I was just basing my comments on DGF's post that two people may have already come forward. I know that post didn't claim they identified themselves.

i'm wondering if he wasn't confusing that with the man who reported to the committee that he had assaulted two men from the boat in Newport who had allegedly raped his friend?

[Wisko McBadgerton]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

And all of that is irrelevant to what is happening today. He is in the middle of a job interview not a court proceeding.

Oddly, I think I looked it up because you posted that the SOL hasn't expired in MD.

The question was, why would two men come forward and expose themselves to prosecution. They aren't exposed to prosecution as far as I can see.

[rufus]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Let me ask you this question.

Have you ever had the responsibility to make this type of decision? I'm not talking about sitting up here in the peanut gallery where you and I and everyone else is at watching these Senate events unfold. I'm talking about it being your responsibility, with real consequences to both parties, to make a credibility decision on this type of issue.

I have. I will tell you, it is not easy. In fact, it's one of the harder things I've had to do.

It wasn't as a juror, where someone's freedom was at stake, but I would have the help of 11 other people to shoulder the responsibility. It was in the employment setting. And it hasn't been on just one occasion.

I will tell you that it feels different when it's up to you. When you hold their fate in your hands and it's your decision that will be second-guessed. In each of those instances there were always people who would say, "I don't know how you can't believe him because of _________," or "it was __________ that made it clear to me she was telling the truth."

It is not an easy task.

You're assumption being that you're actually invested in making the correct determination. The Republican members of the Judiciary Committee have already admitted that they are not.