Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Yup. We are. If the women even have a hint of credibility it’s disqualifying. This isn’t a criminal trial, it’s the highest court in the land. The bar isn’t “Did he not rape someone?”

<img src="https://thumb.ibb.co/mCcc1p/9_B4_F9_B54_311_E_418_E_BAEA_386_DE7_A199_DD.jpg">

 

[The Rube]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Yup. We are. If the women even have a hint of credibility it’s disqualifying. This isn’t a criminal trial, it’s the highest court in the land. The bar isn’t “Did he not rape someone?”

<img src="https://thumb.ibb.co/mCcc1p/9_B4_F9_B54_311_E_418_E_BAEA_386_DE7_A199_DD.jpg">

How about whatever facts/info that are out there? The guy prosecuting the Duke players had credibility, until he didn't. Rolling Stone had a ton of credibility, until they didn't.

Listen, I'm NOT defending Kav. I'm not trashing the accusers. Why? Because I don't have all the info (and I wouldn't trash the accusers anyway; that's pretty low). You seem to be decided on the issue already (and correct me if I'm wrong). I think that is a bad stance to have. Why not wait and see what all comes out? Is there any harm in that?

 

[The Rube]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

And apparently Kav had enough credibility to make it to a nomination......

 

[Wisko McBadgerton]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Yes, I’m sure random women are making stuff up because they can’t wait to get death threats from the republican base

We have had crackpots shoot congress people in recent years over quazi-political beliefs on the left and right. You don't think it's possible any crackpots ever call anonymous tip lines?

The RI one I referenced as seeming a little crackpot-ish was from a man, btw.

 

[burd]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

How about whatever facts/info that are out there? The guy prosecuting the Duke players had credibility, until he didn't. Rolling Stone had a ton of credibility, until they didn't.

Listen, I'm NOT defending Kav. I'm not trashing the accusers. Why? Because I don't have all the info (and I wouldn't trash the accusers anyway; that's pretty low). You seem to be decided on the issue already (and correct me if I'm wrong). I think that is a bad stance to have. Why not wait and see what all comes out? Is there any harm in that?

Nothing said in this thread has been any more partial that what we have consistently heard from the chairman of the committee running the investigation, the leader of the body that will render the verdict, and the President himself. We don't count: they do.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

And apparently Kav had enough credibility to make it to a nomination......

Yes he did. But that is the purpose of the public nomination so he can be vetted. The vetting has brought about enough questions that such credibility is in doubt. There were questions beforehand about whether he might have other issues because of prior acts (most notably lying under oath) and this just adds to that.

And look, you are right it is always possible this is all BS (I personally know someone who faked being raped cause she cheated on her BF and knew she would get caught) but as we always tell you each of us has our own standard of proof. All we can all go on is what each person said and decide who we feel is likely telling the truth. In the end we may be wrong but if enough people can honestly say they dont trust him to hold this post he shouldnt.

The ultimate problem isnt that the Dems are tearing this guy a new one, it is that the GOP made sure he wouldnt have enough time to mount a defense. If they werent in such a hurry he could fight back. If he is innocent he should be begging for as much time as possible to refute these claims and clear his name. He isnt getting that because the GOP wants this done fast. Any credibility he has is shot because the GOP wont even let us see who Kavanaugh really is. They sealed his record, they blocked all witnesses...they just put him up and left him out to dry. He looks shady from the word jump because we know very little about him outside of his time investigating Billy and working for Dubya. We have 7% of the total story and it doesnt make him look good. The GOP made it look like he has something to hide which now is corroborated it would seem as these stories come out. He should sue them for malpractice...

Of course, I think he is a pig who did everything he is accused of but I acknowledge I could be wrong.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

We have had crackpots shoot congress people in recent years over quazi-political beliefs on the left and right. You don't think it's possible any crackpots ever call anonymous tip lines?

The RI one I referenced as seeming a little crackpot-ish was from a man, btw.

I could see a couple of crackpots sure...Ford doesnt strike me as one nor do the other two. I dont see them destroying their careers and making themselves a spectacle just to destroy Kavanaugh. Especially Ford why would she have lied 6 years ago (and 4 years ago, and 3...etc) to take down a judge? Better question if she was going to do so why wouldnt she blackmail him or leak it to the press? Why only tell your shrink (who cant say anything) and friends/confidants? There had to have been an endgame if she is going to do this...it just doesnt make any logical sense. As long as that is true then it doesnt matter if all the rest are wrong...one is too many.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Yes he did. But that is the purpose of the public nomination so he can be vetted. The vetting has brought about enough questions that such credibility is in doubt. There were questions beforehand about whether he might have other issues because of prior acts (most notably lying under oath) and this just adds to that.

And look, you are right it is always possible this is all BS (I personally know someone who faked being raped cause she cheated on her BF and knew she would get caught) but as we always tell you each of us has our own standard of proof. All we can all go on is what each person said and decide who we feel is likely telling the truth. In the end we may be wrong but if enough people can honestly say they dont trust him to hold this post he shouldnt.

The ultimate problem isnt that the Dems are tearing this guy a new one, it is that the GOP made sure he wouldnt have enough time to mount a defense. If they werent in such a hurry he could fight back. If he is innocent he should be begging for as much time as possible to refute these claims and clear his name. He isnt getting that because the GOP wants this done fast. Any credibility he has is shot because the GOP wont even let us see who Kavanaugh really is. They sealed his record, they blocked all witnesses...they just put him up and left him out to dry. He looks shady from the word jump because we know very little about him outside of his time investigating Billy and working for Dubya. We have 7% of the total story and it doesnt make him look good. The GOP made it look like he has something to hide which now is corroborated it would seem as these stories come out. He should sue them for malpractice...

Of course, I think he is a pig who did everything he is accused of but I acknowledge I could be wrong.

This is a well thought out post, and I agree his credibility is in doubt. My point to DX was, that credibility isn't equal to auto-belief, because of this very reason. Kav was believable, until he wasn't. Don't hang your hat on that. I'm in agreement that I'm leaning towards believing the accusers, not because of their credibility, but because of all the similarities in their info/MO/etc. And like you (Handy) I could very well be wrong.

 

[leswp1]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

And we are still talking about someone's life, career, etc. People who have been falsely accused? Guess what? Lives ruined.

Don't need a court ruling for that.

True. There have been false accusations. There have also been credible ones. The issue is the Men on the committee who are whining about someone ruining their narrative and giving NO consideration to staying impartial or even considering the evidence. How many of them have already said they have no intention of changing what they want while saying they will 'let her' talk? The default when anyone comes forward is to deny it could be credible until they can't deny it any more and then they change the argument to something else like why it shouldn't matter.

If these women are being truthful they were not only traumatized the first time but these men are now blindly rejecting any evidence in the name of politics.

I can't say 'for sure' but I can say in at least 2 of the stories they fit what I would hear when I was caring for survivors. Beyond the political is the message women and young folk are getting. No one is 'keeping an open mind'. No one wants to hear evidence or weigh the evidence. GO hang out with some teens and see what they get out of this. If he makes the court the message is horribly damaging- it is proof to perps that no one needs to be held accountable. Why would they? They are allowing him to skate and making excuses for why no one should attempt to figure out if he should be held accountable. Anyone who tries to be a voice of reason (counting the 3 Profs from Yale who previously endorsed but are now saying an investigation is necessary to make sure he gets on the Court in a legit way) is accused of partisanship.

The optics are bad. If the system weren't broken then they would not need to rush this thru and would be doing due diligence.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

True. There have been false accusations. There have also been credible ones. The issue is the Men on the committee who are whining about someone ruining their narrative and giving NO consideration to staying impartial or even considering the evidence. How many of them have already said they have no intention of changing what they want while saying they will 'let her' talk? The default when anyone comes forward is to deny it could be credible until they can't deny it any more and then they change the argument to something else like why it shouldn't matter.

If these women are being truthful they were not only traumatized the first time but these men are now blindly rejecting any evidence in the name of politics.

I can't say 'for sure' but I can say in at least 2 of the stories they fit what I would hear when I was caring for survivors. Beyond the political is the message women and young folk are getting. No one is 'keeping an open mind. No one wants to hear evidence or even weigh the evidence. GO hang out with some teens and see what they get out of this. If he makes the court the message is horribly damaging- it is proof to perps that no one needs to be held accountable because they are allowing him to skate and making excuses for why no one should attempt to figure out if he should be held accountable.

The Bold/Underline is potentially damaging. Why? What if he is innocent? Then why would that be damaging?

 

[Handyman]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Ford matches my personal experience with survivors...it is why she seems the most credible.

 

[leswp1]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

The Bold/Underline is potentially damaging. Why? What if he is innocent? Then why would that be damaging?

Because they are refusing to look at the evidence. The message is very clear. If you are rich, well connected, know the right people or can be used to forward an agenda (politics, business, social) then there is always a reason not to investigate or brush it under the rug. If this were a regular person then there would be investigations that either would clear or implicate the person. They are refusing to acknowledge the accusations. Think about that message. Tell but only if the pesron is not powerful and doesn't have people to spin the situation.

I amended my last post.

 

[Handyman]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

The Bold/Underline is potentially damaging. Why? What if he is innocent? Then why would that be damaging?

I think you can assume that les is speaking about if it cant be proven all these women are lying. If even one of them is telling the truth than for all intent and purposes the GOP just told every woman rape/assault is not a big deal and men can do what they please. It is why a lot of people hate the NFL because guys like Big Ben and Jameis Winston make millions despite assaulting/raping women. The only time they actually cared was when Ray Rice did it on video. (and even then it took the video being leaked to TMZ for anything to really be done)

There is a reason this is a big deal. He will have the power to shape legal precedent for decades. If even one of these women is deemed credible in their accusations he is not worthy to serve. It would be one thing if he admitted he made mistakes acting that way and showed real contrition over the course of time but he denies it ever happened and his defenders are saying it isnt a big deal anyways. He cannot be trusted to make these decisions if any of these womens stories (especially Fords) are believable.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

I think you can assume that les is speaking about if it cant be proven all these women are lying. If even one of them is telling the truth than for all intent and purposes the GOP just told every woman rape/assault is not a big deal and men can do what they please. It is why a lot of people hate the NFL because guys like Big Ben and Jameis Winston make millions despite assaulting/raping women. The only time they actually cared was when Ray Rice did it on video. (and even then it took the video being leaked to TMZ for anything to really be done)

There is a reason this is a big deal. He will have the power to shape legal precedent for decades. If even one of these women is deemed credible in their accusations he is not worthy to serve. It would be one thing if he admitted he made mistakes acting that way and showed real contrition over the course of time but he denies it ever happened and his defenders are saying it isnt a big deal anyways. He cannot be trusted to make these decisions if any of these womens stories (especially Fords) are believable.

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.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

And again, people wonder why women hesitate to share.

 

[The Rube]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

And again, people wonder why women hesitate to share.

It is a bit different when involving a national figure. I can't even imagine the stress. I encourage anyone to share their stories. I know it's hard, but I also don't know the true level of anguish it takes to share.

 

[Wisko McBadgerton]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

I could see a couple of crackpots sure...Ford doesnt strike me as one nor do the other two. I dont see them destroying their careers and making themselves a spectacle just to destroy Kavanaugh. Especially Ford why would she have lied 6 years ago (and 4 years ago, and 3...etc) to take down a judge? Better question if she was going to do so why wouldnt she blackmail him or leak it to the press? Why only tell your shrink (who cant say anything) and friends/confidants? There had to have been an endgame if she is going to do this...it just doesnt make any logical sense. As long as that is true then it doesnt matter if all the rest are wrong...one is too many.

I wan't referring to the three women with allegations already out. I agree it is very, very difficult to reconcile Ford's allegation with Kavanaugh's outright denial.

The Ramirez allegations in the New Yorker have a problem of appearing as though perhaps Ramirez isn't entirely sure about her own allegations. That's not her fault, she was loaded and it's obviously not entirely clear to her. But that does make it hard to for her to say clearly what happened, and she has no corroboration from people that were there. Again it's not her fault, but it would be much harder for her to rise to "the preponderance of the evidence" I think.

Avennatti's client... well I guess I'd say one really needs to read the sworn statement very carefully and critically because it was written very carefully and critically. In part to produce an effect. Kavanaugh isn't actually accused of doing anything at all to Swetnick, I don't think. Swetnick makes charged allegations as to Kavanaugh's motivations for things she claims she saw him do. I don't know... I have to read that one again.

But I do think Ford is the one that has the best chance of sinking Kavanaugh's ship. If it can be sunk. And she is the one testifying, so that seems good.

 

[jerphisch]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

Avennatti's client... well I guess I'd say one really needs to read the sworn statement very carefully and critically because it was written very carefully and critically. In part to produce an effect. Kavanaugh isn't actually accused of doing anything at all to Swetnick, I don't think. Swetnick makes charged allegations as to Kavanaugh's motivations for things she claims she saw him do. I don't know... I have to read that one again.

It's funny how when you get girls drunk and drug them their memory isn't the best...

 

[The Rube]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

It's funny how when you get girls drunk and drug them their memory isn't the best...

That is really the sad part, for real. Sickening when that happens. Yes, I'm being serious. I can't even imagine THINKING of doing that to a woman. It's f*ing sick.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: Scotus 11: Will Thomas Ever Speak Again?

The Bold/Underline is potentially damaging. Why? What if he is innocent? Then why would that be damaging?

It's 100% irrelevant whether the charges are true or not. The Republicans are choosing not to investigate, so the message to *actual* perps has been sent: there's a pretty good chance you'll skate, because men in power don't believe accusers.