SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

No chance. To win a defamation/libel case, he has to prove that her statements are false - the buden of proof shifts so that SHE is the one assumed innocent in the libel suit. Good luck with that.

Theoretically, a perjury charge would handle that. I believe you'd also have to prove malicious intent. Either way, our jury system works both ways, and one SJW would be able to acquit her. That's how William Penn survived (albeit fourfold).

Plus, Axios is saying they'll go for impeachment next. https://www.axios.com/kavanaugh-vot...ord-d6ba557f-e6dc-4dc7-b560-e7536bd58129.html Same thing applies as I've been saying about the President.

 

[Wisko McBadgerton]

Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

Has there been much discussion on Ford's possible exposure for defamation and, among other things, how that might affect her credibility assessment (nothing to gain and a lot to lose)? Not thinking so much of the Committee testimony as her representations prior to that, and I'm not real clear exactly what was said and to whom.

NYT v Sullivan applies to K?

I believe Ford at this point, btw, and I realize there are lot of reasons K would not open that can of worms.

Agree with that it would be impossible to prove Ford's statement is a) False and b) was made with malice. The lack of any verifiable detail in Ford's statement works against her credibility, but also insulates her completely from it being possible to disprove. Some in the press have settled on July 1, for example. Suppose some friend of Kavanaugh produces a series of old pictures of Kavanaugh playing chess all night, with clocks and a newspaper visible, labeled on the back with "Timmy's party" July 1, 1981, thereby proving Kavanaugh's whereabouts and condition on that night? It would mean absolutely nothing.

Her statement after being semi-deposed is that she is 100% certain, Kavanaugh attacked her. She is certain Judge was there. She believes PJ was at the location. She believes Leland Keyser was at the location. The house is nondescript. The room is nondescript. The location of the house is nondescript. The month and day are nondescript. There are no other details she will commit to. There is no way possible to impeach her statement barring Judge and Kavanaugh being able to prove their whereabouts nearly every hour of the summer of 1982. It's impossible as far as I can see.

Since that is the case, I'm not sure her risk of exposure to a defamation suit by Kavanaugh is something that realistically can be weighed in on her side of the ledger.

 

[burd]

Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

Agree with that it would be impossible to prove Ford's statement is a) False and b) was made with malice. The lack of any verifiable detail in Ford's statement works against her credibility, but also insulates her completely from it being possible to disprove. Some in the press have settled on July 1, for example. Suppose some friend of Kavanaugh produces a series of old pictures of Kavanaugh playing chess all night, with clocks and a newspaper visible, labeled on the back with "Timmy's party" July 1, 1981, thereby proving Kavanaugh's whereabouts and condition on that night? It would mean absolutely nothing.

Her statement after being semi-deposed is that she is 100% certain, Kavanaugh attacked her. She is certain Judge was there. She believes PJ was at the location. She believes Leland Keyser was at the location. The house is nondescript. The room is nondescript. The location of the house is nondescript. The month and day are nondescript. There are no other details she will commit to. There is no way possible to impeach her statement barring Judge and Kavanaugh being able to prove their whereabouts nearly every hour of the summer of 1982. It's impossible as far as I can see.

Since that is the case, I'm not sure her risk of exposure to a defamation suit by Kavanaugh is something that realistically can be weighed in on her side of the ledger.

I don't disagree with any of that. The risk of being sued is not limited to going to trial and losing. The K I saw on Thursday was a guy almost unhinged who believes his professional and private lives have been ruined. Was that an act? Didn't appear to be. If he does not get this appointment, what will he do? People file lawsuits with mixed objectives all the time. Defending them can be as costly as the possible judgment.

It's true she would probably not have to worry very much about legal expenses--there would be attys lining up to do it pro bono and non lawyers willing to contribute funds. But that is now. If Thursday had gone very badly for her and others had not come forward in recent weeks, these avenues of support would be a lot less of a sure thing. That is why I put that question out there in the context of her doing the benefit/detriment analysis.

But with what we know now, I don't disagree with what your post.

Plus, burd is just plain full of shyt sometimes.

 

[rufus]

Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

Someone over at emptywheel is speculating that the circled numbers on Kavanaugh's calendar pages are the count so far of the number of kegs that Brett "100 kegs or Bust" Kavanaugh and his friends had consumed so far. See for yourself.


During Beach Week, which is probably immediately after school let out after junior year, you can see that there's a new, ascending number circled for every day of the week.

https://d3i6fh83elv35t.cloudfront.net/static/2018/09/Screen-Shot-2018-09-26-at-10.23.06-AM.png


Ends at 8. Then, the first circled number for July is a 9. On a weekend. Over July 4th weekend, you get circled numbers 9,10, and 11. At the end of the month, also the weekend, that they've gone to the beach, you get numbers 12 and 13.

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/2KJMGZxOADE_qzNDnFO4uPQhA-w=/0x0:875x600/1200x800/filters:focal(465x104:605x244)/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/61549653/Screen_Shot_2018_09_26_at_10.57.41_AM.0.png

Beginning of August, still the weekend at the beach and the following Monday, you have 14 and 15. Saturday the 14th, you get number 16.

https://shawglobalnews.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/198099181.jpg?quality=70&strip=all&w=1177

 

[rufus]

Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

I posted that yesterday in the last thread...thanks for doing it again cause it is definitely a salient point.

rufus,

You know Avenatti is chomping at the bit to give the FBI what he has

But like someone said, I kinda hope that he just limits it to that, and keeps himself and his client off the TV, for the most part. Don't make it a spectacle. Tweeting out stuff that obviously repudiates what someone has said, as he did with Red Don, though, will certainly be just fine.

 

[rufus]

Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

Now I know why Flaggy loves him:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/kavanaugh-has-become-a-hero-to-the-incel-community

That's ridiculous.

Kavanaugh is the very high school portrait of the guys that the incels are supposed to be jealous of and hate, because they get all the girls that the incels are rightfully entitled to.

I'm sure that article does explain why Flaggy worships him though.

 

[rufus]

Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

I don't disagree with any of that. The risk of being sued is not limited to going to trial and losing. The K I saw on Thursday was a guy almost unhinged who believes his professional and private lives have been ruined. Was that an act? Didn't appear to be. If he does not get this appointment, what will he do? People file lawsuits with mixed objectives all the time. Defending them can be as costly as the possible judgment.

No it wasn't an act. It was the howling rage of an over-privileged, self-absorbed, entitled white man finally being called on his ****, and not liking it.


Those people have no right to say such things about him, to judge him. They are so far beneath him. Don't they know who he is?

 

[Scarlet]

Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

I'm getting a bit ill to see women I know on Facebook getting all stressed out about their sons and how their lives could be ruined by women making fake accusations and ruining the lives. I'm trying very hard to remain quiet, but the issue here is the guy is being recommended for the Supreme Court. THE SUPREME COURT! He's part of the white, old boy network so I do not think he will suffer after all of this. At least not to the pearl clutching level I've seen comments on. If this was just a woman deciding to come forward about a man, this whole mess would be different. But, did I mention? He's being considered for the Supreme Court. He should be investigated. He should expect to be investigated. He should welcome any chance to prove the accusations wrong. He's done none of that.

I want to tell my friend who is worried about her son that she should not worry because I know the type of parent she is and she isn't raising an entitled ******* like, say, Brock Turner.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

Plus, Axios is saying they'll go for impeachment next. https://www.axios.com/kavanaugh-vot...ord-d6ba557f-e6dc-4dc7-b560-e7536bd58129.html Same thing applies as I've been saying about the President.

That will be after we take your guns and lock you up in a conservative death camp, though.

 

[joecct]

I'm getting a bit ill to see women I know on Facebook getting all stressed out about their sons and how their lives could be ruined by women making fake accusations and ruining the lives. I'm trying very hard to remain quiet, but the issue here is the guy is being recommended for the Supreme Court. THE SUPREME COURT! He's part of the white, old boy network so I do not think he will suffer after all of this. At least not to the pearl clutching level I've seen comments on. If this was just a woman deciding to come forward about a man, this whole mess would be different. But, did I mention? He's being considered for the Supreme Court. He should be investigated. He should expect to be investigated. He should welcome any chance to prove the accusations wrong. He's done none of that.

I want to tell my friend who is worried about her son that she should not worry because I know the type of parent she is and she isn't raising an entitled ******* like, say, Brock Turner.

All you need is a girl/lady/woman accusing you of sexual assault on campus and you're hauled before a kangaroo court with no due process and you're expelled/shunned/defamed before you know it.

The pollination program of the last 40 years is over. Keep it in your pants, boys.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

...women I know on Facebook getting all stressed out about their sons and how their lives could be ruined by women making fake accusations and ruining the lives.

Gaslighting works surprisingly well.

 

[Handyman]

Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

Agree with that it would be impossible to prove Ford's statement is a) False and b) was made with malice. The lack of any verifiable detail in Ford's statement works against her credibility, but also insulates her completely from it being possible to disprove. Some in the press have settled on July 1, for example. Suppose some friend of Kavanaugh produces a series of old pictures of Kavanaugh playing chess all night, with clocks and a newspaper visible, labeled on the back with "Timmy's party" July 1, 1981, thereby proving Kavanaugh's whereabouts and condition on that night? It would mean absolutely nothing.

Her statement after being semi-deposed is that she is 100% certain, Kavanaugh attacked her. She is certain Judge was there. She believes PJ was at the location. She believes Leland Keyser was at the location. The house is nondescript. The room is nondescript. The location of the house is nondescript. The month and day are nondescript. There are no other details she will commit to. There is no way possible to impeach her statement barring Judge and Kavanaugh being able to prove their whereabouts nearly every hour of the summer of 1982. It's impossible as far as I can see.

Since that is the case, I'm not sure her risk of exposure to a defamation suit by Kavanaugh is something that realistically can be weighed in on her side of the ledger.

Plus she will have the argument that originally she didnt want this public she only informed her Senator so they could look into it as part of the normal procedure. Outside of Kavanaugh's "Liberal Clinton Revenge Conspiracy" there is really no way to show she did this to truly destroy. If she had wanted to do that she would have done it years ago. The only reason she spoke at committee was because the GOP asked her too and made every effort to get her there.

The truth is if the process had gone how it was supposed to, we never would have heard about any of this. Hell if the GOP had just had normal hearings without classifying everything Kavanaugh did in his public life none of this happens. As I said a few days ago if there is anyone Kavanaugh should sue it is them because they made this whole thing look like a shady cover up from the beginning and rushing through the nomination did more to destroy his character (if he is innocent) than Ford ever could have.

BTW something I forgot but just re-confirmed...McConnell advised the president NOT to put forth Kavanaugh when the short list came out. Quoting the NYTs:

While careful not to directly make the case for any would-be justice, Mr. McConnell made clear in multiple phone calls with Mr. Trump and the White House counsel, Donald F. McGahn II, that the lengthy paper trail of another top contender, Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, would pose difficulties for his confirmation.

Mr. McConnell is concerned about the volume of the documents that Judge Kavanaugh has created in his 12 years on the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, as well as in his roles as White House staff secretary under President George W. Bush and assistant to Kenneth W. Starr, the independent counsel who investigated President Bill Clinton.

The number of pages is said to run into the millions, which Mr. McConnell fears could hand Senate Democrats an opportunity to delay the confirmation vote until after the new session of the court begins in October, with the midterm elections looming the next month. And while Judge Kavanaugh’s judicial opinions are publicly known, Mr. McConnell is uneasy about relitigating Bush-era controversies, the officials briefed on his discussions with Mr. Trump said.

Source

Their solution to the problem created all new issues...and they almost got away with it too.

 

[Handyman]

Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

I don't disagree with any of that. The risk of being sued is not limited to going to trial and losing. The K I saw on Thursday was a guy almost unhinged who believes his professional and private lives have been ruined. Was that an act? Didn't appear to be. If he does not get this appointment, what will he do? People file lawsuits with mixed objectives all the time. Defending them can be as costly as the possible judgment.

It's true she would probably not have to worry very much about legal expenses--there would be attys lining up to do it pro bono and non lawyers willing to contribute funds. But that is now. If Thursday had gone very badly for her and others had not come forward in recent weeks, these avenues of support would be a lot less of a sure thing. That is why I put that question out there in the context of her doing the benefit/detriment analysis.

But with what we know now, I don't disagree with what your post.

Plus, burd is just plain full of shyt sometimes.

He could try but he has to have proof of some kind or he will get laughed out of court. I dont see him getting far...

If he loses he will "take a step back" and probably "spend time with family" and if his wife believes Ford in any way he will end up taking a few months off to "fix his issues" in Palm Springs due to his drinking. The rehab tour will begin so that a year from now he can make the rounds talking about how much he changed and blah blah blah.

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

All you need is a girl/lady/woman accusing you of sexual assault on campus and you're hauled before a kangaroo court with no due process and you're expelled/shunned/defamed before you know it.

The pollination program of the last 40 years is over. Keep it in your pants, boys.

Do you have any idea how ridiculous and hyperbolic this sounds? But sure, Joe. You jam that crown of thorns on your head like Bob Gray used to.

 

[Handyman]

Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

But like someone said, I kinda hope that he just limits it to that, and keeps himself and his client off the TV, for the most part. Don't make it a spectacle. Tweeting out stuff that obviously repudiates what someone has said, as he did with Red Don, though, will certainly be just fine.

I dont think he will do much because they are getting their interview. If this had gone to vote on Tuesday as planned though he would have dumped everything over the weekend. Now the FBI will see it all so he doesnt have to shine a light on it.

He should continue to impeach the people attacking him and his client though. The emails between him and Davis was a brilliant move because it made it obvious Grassley was lying (or was ignorant to the truth) when he talked in committee. Stuff like that is why despite him just being a "porn star lawyer" he hasnt been ignored.

 

[mookie1995]

He could try but he has to have proof of some kind or he will get laughed out of court. I dont see him getting far...

If he loses he will "take a step back" and probably "spend time with family" and if his wife believes Ford in any way he will end up taking a few months off to "fix his issues" in Palm Springs due to his drinking. The rehab tour will begin so that a year from now he can make the rounds talking about how much he changed and blah blah blah.

Again, why?

Just go back to DC circuit and rule. Watch the Nats. Drink some brews.

Nothing to rehabilitate

 

[joecct]

Do you have any idea how ridiculous and hyperbolic this sounds? But sure, Joe. You jam that crown of thorns on your head like Bob Gray used to.

Read the newspapers recently regarding the goings on at our institutions of higher learning?

 

[FadeToBlack&Gold]

Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

Again, why?

Just go back to DC circuit and rule. Watch the Nats. Drink some brews.

Nothing to rehabilitate

He could've easily done that 2 weeks ago by withdrawing his name, but nope. Now he's gone full arrogant, angry, defensive, emotional drunk on television. He's all in.

 

[Deutsche Gopher Fan]

Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

No wonder hatch is so angry. He filed the amicus brief in gamble vs the US. And it goes to the SC early October. Trump needs to win that one so he can pardon everyone in the Russia mess.
Not having partisan operative Brett seated in time puts that in jeopardy

 

[Handyman]

Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation

Do you have any idea how ridiculous and hyperbolic this sounds? But sure, Joe. You jam that crown of thorns on your head like Bob Gray used to.

Old sports fans say that crap all the time. They dont like when their athletes get called out for raping girls. It was awful during the U of M rape case. To this day a large number of people who think they all got railroaded.

Here is an idea...dont want to get in trouble treat women with respect.