D
Deutsche Gopher Fan
Guest
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
ah, Mitch is mad. Vote will be this week.
I hope that backfires
ah, Mitch is mad. Vote will be this week.
I hope that backfires
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
- Thread starter joecct
- Start date
- Status
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
Heavy drinkers/alcoholics/addicts lie very well. My old college roommate was high/drunk most of the day; a functioning addict, if you will. Held down a job, all that jazz.
Heavy drinkers/alcoholics/addicts lie very well. My old college roommate was high/drunk most of the day; a functioning addict, if you will. Held down a job, all that jazz.
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
It is a separate part in the way you describe, but if he lied on that basic question, his credibility on the assault itself is definitely suspect. Especially given her apparent credibility. If he lied about his drinking habits, why accept his denial of the assault?
It is a separate part in the way you describe, but if he lied on that basic question, his credibility on the assault itself is definitely suspect. Especially given her apparent credibility. If he lied about his drinking habits, why accept his denial of the assault?
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
That's the million dollar question. I 100% believe she was assaulted. Right now, I just can't say cut-n-dry who assaulted her.
That's the million dollar question. I 100% believe she was assaulted. Right now, I just can't say cut-n-dry who assaulted her.
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
That's a fair question, Sic, but his own friends seem to be coming out to challenge his testimony on that issue.
That's a fair question, Sic, but his own friends seem to be coming out to challenge his testimony on that issue.
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
You believe that based on her credible testimony? She also said she is 100% positive it was him.
You believe that based on her credible testimony? She also said she is 100% positive it was him.
D
Deutsche Gopher Fan
Guest
Flagg Admitted he’s scared to fly, so we would have had a delay
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
Amusingly, it comes back to the definition of "is." He can truthfully answer "no, I'm not a heavy drinker" even if he got blacked out every day of high school and college....
It also depends on the timing - maybe he really did give up that type of drinking in college. Background checks usually only seek out character references going back 5 or 10 years, so most of these allegations would be well off the radar for any recent checks. My speculation is that several of these famous 6 background checks are relatively recent as he's moved to positions of higher and higher authority, so it would really only be the first 1 or 2 checks that "failed" to pick up this potential issue.
Amusingly, it comes back to the definition of "is." He can truthfully answer "no, I'm not a heavy drinker" even if he got blacked out every day of high school and college....
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
Memory is funny that way. After reading all the articles (I was at work, so didn't see the live coverage) with the quotes and such...yes, that is my opinion as of this moment. If this investigation turns up something, or something else comes out (let's face it, these other women coming forward aren't helping his case), I may change my opinion.
Right now, I can't say it WASN'T him, but I can't say it WAS him, either.
Memory is funny that way. After reading all the articles (I was at work, so didn't see the live coverage) with the quotes and such...yes, that is my opinion as of this moment. If this investigation turns up something, or something else comes out (let's face it, these other women coming forward aren't helping his case), I may change my opinion.
Right now, I can't say it WASN'T him, but I can't say it WAS him, either.
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
True. And they would have to inspect every closet and dark corner on the Hill checking for globalists, islamists, and mexicans.
True. And they would have to inspect every closet and dark corner on the Hill checking for globalists, islamists, and mexicans.
Wisko McBadgerton
Teaching you how to Bucky.
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
Personally, I'd ditch Timmy's as it's too confining as to date and time. Certainly PJ, Judge, K and Squi were friends and could have been together at any number of events, especially small ones like this. Especially if it's at Squi's house, as you state, K and Squi were clearly close friends and spent a lot of time together.
I think Kavanaugh admits he and Ford may possibly have crossed paths and he generally knows who she is. He says something similar about Leland Keyser. It occurred to me that Ford testified that she knew K and Judge because they moved in some of the same social circles, and she had seen him at several party's and events, etc. She says at one point she and Judge had been on friendly terms when they saw each other "over the previous two years". This does help to establish credibility regarding her positively identifying K as her attacker. (Because, of course she knew him.) But apparently these common social circles, parties, etc. all took place by the time she was 15 and never take place again after, despite K and Ford remaining in HS and around the same people for at least another year and some summers after, and despite Ford testifying her and Squi remained friends after they dated. ( In fact they are still connected on Ford's linked-in page.) Yet Ford testifies she never sees K again, and Judge only one time at the grocery store 6-8 weeks later while with her Mom. (But she is careful to point out that she separated from her Mom outside so she wasn't seen to be at the store with her Mom by friends. Which is just a really weird thing to say now, to me, but it does removed Mom as another possible witness.) Never seeing K or Judge again though is somewhat surprising, given Ford remains friends with Squi, "moves in the same social circles" as K, and is at Columbia CC daily where the Blasely's and Kavanaugh's are both very active.
That might strengthen K's testimony that he didn't really know her, and call into question her insistence she did. Perhaps weakening her positive id claim, among other things. Or perhaps it strengthens the idea that the only way they were actually connected was through Squi. In the latter case, that Squi was at the house in question would then seem apparent. If Squi is not there, why are they all there together? Thus, if Squi was in fact there, and it's in fact likely the house is Squi's house -- How is it possible she remembers PJ, whom she hardly knew, but not Squi, whom she knew very well and has remained in at least some type of loose contact with even now, 35 years later? One answer is she just wants to keep Squi out of it. Yet we note she doesn't want to keep her lifelong friend Leland Keyser out of it. It's a bit of a conundrum.
Personally, I'd ditch Timmy's as it's too confining as to date and time. Certainly PJ, Judge, K and Squi were friends and could have been together at any number of events, especially small ones like this. Especially if it's at Squi's house, as you state, K and Squi were clearly close friends and spent a lot of time together.
I think Kavanaugh admits he and Ford may possibly have crossed paths and he generally knows who she is. He says something similar about Leland Keyser. It occurred to me that Ford testified that she knew K and Judge because they moved in some of the same social circles, and she had seen him at several party's and events, etc. She says at one point she and Judge had been on friendly terms when they saw each other "over the previous two years". This does help to establish credibility regarding her positively identifying K as her attacker. (Because, of course she knew him.) But apparently these common social circles, parties, etc. all took place by the time she was 15 and never take place again after, despite K and Ford remaining in HS and around the same people for at least another year and some summers after, and despite Ford testifying her and Squi remained friends after they dated. ( In fact they are still connected on Ford's linked-in page.) Yet Ford testifies she never sees K again, and Judge only one time at the grocery store 6-8 weeks later while with her Mom. (But she is careful to point out that she separated from her Mom outside so she wasn't seen to be at the store with her Mom by friends. Which is just a really weird thing to say now, to me, but it does removed Mom as another possible witness.) Never seeing K or Judge again though is somewhat surprising, given Ford remains friends with Squi, "moves in the same social circles" as K, and is at Columbia CC daily where the Blasely's and Kavanaugh's are both very active.
That might strengthen K's testimony that he didn't really know her, and call into question her insistence she did. Perhaps weakening her positive id claim, among other things. Or perhaps it strengthens the idea that the only way they were actually connected was through Squi. In the latter case, that Squi was at the house in question would then seem apparent. If Squi is not there, why are they all there together? Thus, if Squi was in fact there, and it's in fact likely the house is Squi's house -- How is it possible she remembers PJ, whom she hardly knew, but not Squi, whom she knew very well and has remained in at least some type of loose contact with even now, 35 years later? One answer is she just wants to keep Squi out of it. Yet we note she doesn't want to keep her lifelong friend Leland Keyser out of it. It's a bit of a conundrum.
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
Back to pretending you know how background checks work?
Back to pretending you know how background checks work?
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
Oh no, you've done it. You've given him an excuse to talk about himself.
Oh no, you've done it. You've given him an excuse to talk about himself.
Wisko McBadgerton
Teaching you how to Bucky.
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
He said he "sometimes had too many" and somtimes drank "in excess" when he was in HS or college. He doesn't categorically deny it that I can see. He denies blacking out. I haven't kept up with everything, but anyone said they ever saw him passed out from drinking for example? I believe one former classmate speculates he must have had memory losses, but... I don't know, I must have drank about one billion beers between the ages of 15-30. Could put away a case in a long evening, easy with no problem. Today I'm neither an alcoholic, (probably just lucky there) nor do I believe I've ever blacked out.
Of course that question... have you ever blacked out? It's really asking, do you ever remember what you don't remember? Kind of hard to nail somebody to the wall on.
He said he "sometimes had too many" and somtimes drank "in excess" when he was in HS or college. He doesn't categorically deny it that I can see. He denies blacking out. I haven't kept up with everything, but anyone said they ever saw him passed out from drinking for example? I believe one former classmate speculates he must have had memory losses, but... I don't know, I must have drank about one billion beers between the ages of 15-30. Could put away a case in a long evening, easy with no problem. Today I'm neither an alcoholic, (probably just lucky there) nor do I believe I've ever blacked out.
Of course that question... have you ever blacked out? It's really asking, do you ever remember what you don't remember? Kind of hard to nail somebody to the wall on.
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
People don't recall what happened while they were blacked out, but they definitely recall having blacked out. I had one evening as a college student when I woke up not knowing how or when I got home. I had driven, which scares me still, and apparently I was functioning pretty well. I don't remember what happened late that night, but I most definitely know I was blackout level drunk. Strunk.
That was a rare experience for me, which is even more reason to remember it.
People don't recall what happened while they were blacked out, but they definitely recall having blacked out. I had one evening as a college student when I woke up not knowing how or when I got home. I had driven, which scares me still, and apparently I was functioning pretty well. I don't remember what happened late that night, but I most definitely know I was blackout level drunk. Strunk.
That was a rare experience for me, which is even more reason to remember it.
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
He served in the GWB WH. That's say 15 years ago and they would've done a check to work in the WH especially in that role; so, push say 10 before that. That's 25 years ago. He's early 50s now. That'd come ... close ... to his end of law school years. What's all that prove. Not much. Interesting thought exercise, but it doesn't prove much.
He served in the GWB WH. That's say 15 years ago and they would've done a check to work in the WH especially in that role; so, push say 10 before that. That's 25 years ago. He's early 50s now. That'd come ... close ... to his end of law school years. What's all that prove. Not much. Interesting thought exercise, but it doesn't prove much.
The Sicatoka
Kicizapi Cetan
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
I've only been through security clearances.
I've only been through security clearances.
Re: SCOTUS 13: Confirmation consternation contemplation
Now, here's a question: do they remember blacking out only because they don't remember what happened the night before? Or do they just realize, "Oh, hey, I must have blacked out, because I don't remember a thing?" (note: this is more philosophical of a take than anything)
Now, here's a question: do they remember blacking out only because they don't remember what happened the night before? Or do they just realize, "Oh, hey, I must have blacked out, because I don't remember a thing?"
(note: this is more philosophical of a take than anything)- Status