Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

[rufus]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

https://twitter.com/gagz_gaming/status/1042832457140076544


Here's someone the FBI could interview, Sic.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Here's someone the FBI could interview, Sic.

Nope. Nothing to see here. Nothing for the FBI to do. Confirm the ******* and be done with it. Let's vote tomorrow.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">"Even if Kavanaugh did try to rape her, he has my vote!"<br><br>-- Sen. Orrin Hatch<br><br>"Even if Trump did try to rape her, he has my vote!"<br><br>-- Jerry Fallwell, Jr.<br><br>NOTE TO WOMEN: Republicans don't mind if someone tries to rape you; they just mind if you don't carry his baby to term. <a href="https://t.co/JgX3dMhJEp">pic.twitter.com/JgX3dMhJEp</a></p>— Mrs. Betty Bowers (@BettyBowers) <a href="https://twitter.com/BettyBowers/status/1042394858021945346?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 19, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[Handyman]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

I'm wondering why Ellison isn't facing being DQ'd as MN AG when facing similar accusations. But ... Minnesota.

Oh shove it. Its not the same thing and you know it...or you would if you actually paid attention to the story.

Most liberals I know want to know the truth. This is a story because there is apparently a video of it which the son says he has. If he actually has said video all he has to do it release it. No one in Minnesota is stopping him or his mother from revealing the whole story. Hell a screengrab would be enough to destroy him. (and I would be out front saying it as would everyone I know) That case both sides have every reason to lie.

What incentive does Ford have to lie about Kavanaugh? You are so good at concern trolling...is that the question you should be asking? Why did she lie to her shrink 6 years ago about a specific incident with a specific man 30 years after it happened? I want to know. She never blackmailed him, she never contacted him at all, she never even tried to get him reprimanded. So what is her endgame here?

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

(Alleged) Attempted forcible gang rape (the friend was there helping hold her down) is not just "boys will be boys." It shouldn't disqualify you from all employment, but given that there hundreds of otherwise qualified attorneys for a very public and forward facing job, yes it would disqualify him from this specific job.

I think an "attempted forcible gang rape" is a big stretch based upon her letter to Feinstein. As I recall, she told Feinstein that Kavanaugh sort of pushed her into this room and the friend followed. The friend sat in another part of the room, alternating between "go for it" and "stop". On one, or maybe two instances, he ran over and jumped on top of Kavanaugh, including an instance where Kavanaugh was knocked off of Ford, apparently letting her leave the room.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

True. But do you really expect me to vote for the Republican ****tard? And I won't leave it blank. And I won't vote 3rd party. Making me sick to be honest with you.

You can vote for him and then when the full story comes out you can want him to be canned. Right now there isnt enough evidence to DQ him.

Kavanaugh is being vetted right now. There is time to look into this before he gets a lifetime appointment. (no one gets impeached) The GOP wont do it because they dont care and half of them probably dont think what he did was wrong.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

I think that has to do with a very sticky situation presented. The woman never came forward, her son did. She was contacted, said that her son's statements were true, that a video exists of the abuse, but she refuses to present it to either the authorities or to allow any member of the press to view it. Ellison, of course, is claiming that no such video exists because no such incident ever took place. This is an issue only two years old, and she's willing to talk about it but not press charges while claiming she has video evidence of the event. This is extremely troubling in terms of lending credence to her claims.


https://www.minnpost.com/glean/2018/08/rep-keith-ellison-denies-domestic-violence-allegations/

Nah it is liberal conspiracy because the Concern Troll said so.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

https://twitter.com/gagz_gaming/status/1042832457140076544


Here's someone the FBI could interview, Sic.

The boys were asking for it...

No matter how this plays out I have a feeling there is going to be a lot of scandals coming forward from Georgetown Prep and schools like it.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Right now there isnt enough evidence to DQ him.

I don't think the Kavanaugh and Ellison thing are the same, primarily because Ellison is not up for appointment to a position. He's up for election, and all of us in Minnesota will get to vote on whether we believe his story or not, or whether it's an important issue for us or not.

However, in terms of the evidence, in Ellison's case the alleged victim has stated Ellison abused her. Furthermore, she has posted a medical record that shows she made that same statement to a doctor some time ago. In terms of "evidence" does this differ markedly from Ford saying Kavanaugh assaulted her, and saying that she told a therapist about it six years ago?

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

I don't think the Kavanaugh and Ellison thing are the same, primarily because Ellison is not up for appointment to a position. He's up for election, and all of us in Minnesota will get to vote on whether we believe his story or not, or whether it's an important issue for us or not.

However, in terms of the evidence, in Ellison's case the alleged victim has stated Ellison abused her. Furthermore, she has posted a medical record that shows she made that same statement to a doctor some time ago. In terms of "evidence" does this differ markedly from Ford saying Kavanaugh assaulted her, and saying that she told a therapist about it six years ago?

I saw that up on the Strib today. The medical record is alarming.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

The boys were asking for it...

No matter how this plays out I have a feeling there is going to be a lot of scandals coming forward from Georgetown Prep and schools like it.

Good. It's about time. That ******* Kavanaugh saying "what happens at Georgetown Prep stays at Georgetown Prep should be disqualifying all by itself.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">"Women for Kavanaugh" consists of 7 men, 6 women. Cool. <a href="https://t.co/0gqV0g74Qa">https://t.co/0gqV0g74Qa</a></p>— Tim Hogan (@timjhogan) <a href="https://twitter.com/timjhogan/status/1042887325099941890?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 20, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">.<a href="https://twitter.com/OrrinHatch?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@OrrinHatch</a> just told 3 different women reporters that rape isn't cause for keeping a man off the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/SCOTUS?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#SCOTUS</a> for life and I am stunned.</p>— Victoria Brownworth (@VABVOX) <a href="https://twitter.com/VABVOX/status/1041778434593247233?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 17, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

....and I am NOT STUNNED!!!!!!!!!

 

[Handyman]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

I don't think the Kavanaugh and Ellison thing are the same, primarily because Ellison is not up for appointment to a position. He's up for election, and all of us in Minnesota will get to vote on whether we believe his story or not, or whether it's an important issue for us or not.

However, in terms of the evidence, in Ellison's case the alleged victim has stated Ellison abused her. Furthermore, she has posted a medical record that shows she made that same statement to a doctor some time ago. In terms of "evidence" does this differ markedly from Ford saying Kavanaugh assaulted her, and saying that she told a therapist about it six years ago?

Its about the same. It comes down to credibility right now and if she isnt willing to produce the video her son clickbaited about then she doesnt have much. Neither does he. If this had happened before the primary I would have prayed he didnt get the nomination because the optics are awful. I am most likely not voting for him.

If you ask me personally I think they probably had a very volatile relationship and they provoked the worst in each other. (my parents were like that to often almost violent ends) If the video never comes forward, it will be because that is what the video will show as well. I dont care unless she attacked him with a knife what he is accused of is just terrible. The video is what started this all and until it is released I just dont trust anyone in the case. (both sides have angles)

If Ford had kept her name silent I probably would not have given it much credence. (much like the tape) I have a hard time with anonymous accusations. When she went public that changed for me. Since, for now, she doesnt seem to want anything out of this that tends to lend credence to her credibility in my mind. Something about his denial doesnt play well either in my gut. I know a lot of people who used to drink like that, and I know a few that in todays climate would definitely be told they crossed a line. (not as far as what BK is accused of) When you ask them about it their answers tend to sound just like him. Categorical denial of everything with no possibility that maybe he made a mistake. The ones who tended not to do stuff like that, answered more often like how Franken did when he was accused. (that isnt how I remember things ...etc.) His denial is too black and white...he wants us to not only believe he never did this but also that he was never at any party that drunk where stuff like that happened. That just doesnt seem kosher.

Do I know for a fact he did it...nope and if he didnt I will be the first to say I was wrong. Something just doesnt sit right IMHO. I understand others dont see it that way.

edit: I havent had a chance to check the medical record FWIW. I will check the Strib after class.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">.<a href="https://twitter.com/OrrinHatch?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@OrrinHatch</a> just told 3 different women reporters that rape isn't cause for keeping a man off the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/SCOTUS?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#SCOTUS</a> for life and I am stunned.</p>— Victoria Brownworth (@VABVOX) <a href="https://twitter.com/VABVOX/status/1041778434593247233?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 17, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

....and I am NOT STUNNED!!!!!!!!!

Good god...

 

[leswp1]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

No they arent supposed to feel better but I dont think you can punish both equally either. My girlfriend works with trauma (she also has trauma though different type) so I know the score. Not every bad act causes trauma that is bad enough that the retribution should be to burn the witch in the town square. The retribution should equal the act.

I dont want to mitigate factors based on who the person is, I want to mitigate factors based on what happened which is what you are supposed to do. That is where the girlfriend and I agree. (hell she is more grey about it than I am) I was the one saying Franken should step down and she was vehemently against it. She acknowledges that some or all of the women may have felt he was inappropriate but she doesnt think that the acts warrant the outrage nor could cause the type of trauma the outrage brought about. Mitigating factors are important, knowing the whole story is important in the end. We dont live in a vacuum. That is the point she and I are making.

If every man is guilty they should be punished. I dont think I said otherwise. But I feel that they should be punished differently just like they would be in court. The different acts would be different level of crimes and they should be punished thusly.

You seem to think I dont want justice for the victims. I most certainly do. I have seen first hand what trauma can do and I know how hard it can be to get through. (sadly I have also seen what false accusations can do) This isnt about whether they deserve justice, this is about what that justice is.

And I am going to worry about the men in part because I am a man. How this gets defined and changed is going to change my behavior going forward and define my past behaviors.

I don't think I want everyone to burn in Hell but I do want there to be justice. And I would like to see a bit of remorse, not people giving excuses. Nothing has changed since Anita Hill except the woman has even more burden put on her.

I think this post asks some important questions. I don't think it necessarily answers those questions, but I'm not sure we have the answers yet.

Do I think something happened between Ford and Kavanaugh? I do. I don't know what. I have a hunch. My hunch is that we had a high school boy attending an all boys school who found himself at a party in mixed company, consumed more alcohol than he was capable of handling, with the assistance of a friend got Ford into a room and he physically groped her. She was undoubtedly was very frightened and probably thought she was about to be raped. He probably thought he was wowing her with his prowess as a lover.

Was his conduct wrong? Absolutely.

But here is a concern I've had for some time. We are moving to a place in society where degrees and context and nuance don't matter in these events. Furthermore, we are moving in the direction that says that because the victim has to live with the trauma of the events for the rest of his or her life, the perpetrator must also receive a life sentence. Finally, there is even a backlash against those who are open to listening to the perpetrator's story or giving the perp a chance at rehabilitation.

I saw that one of the top editors at The New York Review of Books was recently bounced from his job because he had the temerity to publish an essay by a man who had been charged with assaulting one or more women. The media backlash to the publication basically took the form that the perpetrator's voice should not be heard, that the perpetrator has no right to try to address the context of the events or to try to rehabilitate himself.

One of the things that has struck me about the Kavanaugh case is this. No one has even asked the question, "What if Kavanaugh, thirty years ago as a drunken high school student at a party, did physically grope and frighten Ford? Does that automatically disqualify him from this position?"

I mean, probably? But no one has even asked that question. If it disqualifies him from this position, what other positions does it disqualify him from? Too often I think the response to these events, regardless of degree, is burn them at the stake. And they need to stay burned.

The problem with that is twofold. First, I believe that while punishment must be leveled for wrongs, that punishment has to be appropriate both in terms of length and degree. Second, if our response is to tar every perpetrator with the scarlet letter for life, you are going to see events like we see now where the automatic response to a charge is denial, not acknowledgment and contrition. You have to deny, because the consequences are too great if you don't.

I am not sure there are clear answers to all the questions but it would be nice to not have an immediate reaction be trying to assassinate the character of someone who comes forward.
That question has been asked in a number of things I have listened to. The thing that disqualifies someone is the lack of remorse and lying about it so it will go away. I am not sure how one decides what the punishment is. The perp moves on. The woman for the most part carries that with her the rest of her life. We might not be able to find a good answer to it but that is easier to accept than hearing we should get over ourselves because the guy has moved on and become successful at X.

Because he's not being honest about it if it happened. If she's credible then he's lying. They can't both be telling the truth. I did a lot of boozing in my day, but I would have remembered something like this. Its also a bit odd to get blackout drunk at age 17 or whatever he was at the time.

Um. No. There are plenty of kids that do this.

I think if she testified and was credible the pressure on enough senators to vote no would be pretty high. Even frauds like Collins and Murkowski would feel the heat. Plus it has never looked good when a bunch of pasty old white dudes brow beat a woman for the world to see.

As it is if she doesnt they can just ignore her.

Yes they can. They have lots of practice. We have a President who grabbed a woman by the ***** and gee, there are a people right in this forum who forgot it before they knew. Their constituents are as morally corrupt as they are. The outside world might like to hold them accountable but their voters will be applauding.

My fear is that we are migrating from "innocent until proven guilty" to "guilty until proven innocent"; but, it's worse, as it seems in a #MeToo world it's "guilty upon accusation", with certain exceptions*.


*See: MN AG candidate Ellison

As someone who had a few very nasty me too moments it doesn't seem that way to me. It is more like a person comes forward. They are at risk. They are publicly attacked, their character and their accusation is denied, minimized and everything is done to discredit them. Then, as other people come forward there is less and less risk to them and then the pendulum swings wildly to the other side where the person said black masses and drank babies blood and all sorts of embelishments are added. THere has to be a way to deal with accusations without the re-victimizing the victim.

The most pragmatic answer seems to be that there are a bunch of cases coming next session that they want to win. Without Kav on board 4/4 goes back to lower court decision.

The rush doesn't make sense for any other reason to me because they would still seat a conservative even losing control of the senate which is unlikely.

This isn't pragmatic. They had no issue with leaving that seat blank 'waiting for the voice of the people' and having a bunch of 4-4 decisions this past time. They are scared the voice of the people will speak and it won't be to reinforce what they want.

 

[5mn_Major]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

And it looks like she may actually go forward: https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/for...awyer-tells-senators-report/story?id=57967972

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">.<a href="https://twitter.com/OrrinHatch?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@OrrinHatch</a> just told 3 different women reporters that rape isn't cause for keeping a man off the <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/SCOTUS?src=hash&ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#SCOTUS</a> for life and I am stunned.</p>— Victoria Brownworth (@VABVOX) <a href="https://twitter.com/VABVOX/status/1041778434593247233?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 17, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

....and I am NOT STUNNED!!!!!!!!!

A village in Utah is missing its dinosaur exhibit.

 

[rufus]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en"><p lang="en" dir="ltr">"Even if Kavanaugh did try to rape her, he has my vote!"<br><br>-- Sen. Orrin Hatch<br><br>"Even if Trump did try to rape her, he has my vote!"<br><br>-- Jerry Fallwell, Jr.<br><br>NOTE TO WOMEN: Republicans don't mind if someone tries to rape you; they just mind if you don't carry his baby to term. <a href="https://t.co/JgX3dMhJEp">pic.twitter.com/JgX3dMhJEp</a></p>— Mrs. Betty Bowers (@BettyBowers) <a href="https://twitter.com/BettyBowers/status/1042394858021945346?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 19, 2018</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

What the eff is wrong with Republicans? It's like they're allergic to basic human decency.

 

[rufus]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

I think an "attempted forcible gang rape" is a big stretch based upon her letter to Feinstein. As I recall, she told Feinstein that Kavanaugh sort of pushed her into this room and the friend followed. The friend sat in another part of the room, alternating between "go for it" and "stop". On one, or maybe two instances, he ran over and jumped on top of Kavanaugh, including an instance where Kavanaugh was knocked off of Ford, apparently letting her leave the room.

Let me see. Turning up the music so no one would hear her screams. Covering her mouth for same. Grabbing at and trying to remove her clothes and bathing suit she had underneath. Jumping on both of them, not just Kavanaugh. Who knows what else may have happened? You have a foggy, probably a little drunken memory of 35 years, a memory that she tried her best to suppress and forget.