Defending Brett Kavanaugh
- Thread starter basilio
- Start date
-
- Tags
- brett kavanaugh
- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 15,594
- Reactions
- 7,472
Why wasn't there a proper investigation for corrobarative evidence regarding Dr Fords allegations? I don't mean a four days "close my eyes and cross my fingers" Claytons look.
Prosecutors and investigators have the tools and experience to find and convict people of historical crimes and also exonerate them. It can be done. It is done all the time. Check this story out to understand what can be done. I would expect Judge Kavanaugh to order a full and complete investigation to clear his precious name....
Don’t Pretend the Kavanaugh Facts are Unknowable
Lawyers make a living figuring out, methodically, who did what, when, where, how, and to whom.
Sep 28, 2018
Caleb Mason
Litigator and former federal prosecutor
Rachel Mitchell questions Christine Blasey FordTom Williams / Reuters
The strangest thing to me about Thursday’s Judiciary Committee hearing was that the veteran prosecutor Rachel Mitchell, retained by the Republicans to cross-examine Christine Blasey Ford, didn’t already have, and seemed uninterested in obtaining, a crucial piece of evidence that Ford referred to in her testimony.
Ford does not recall precisely what date Brett Kavanaugh allegedly assaulted her, but she testified that approximately six weeks afterward she saw Mark Judge—who she claims was in the room during the assault—working at the Potomac Village Safeway. “If we could find out when he worked there, then I could provide a more detailed timeline,” Ford said. That would be an important fact, indeed.
Mitchell has been prosecuting sexual-assault cases for two decades. She knows how to use determinable contextual facts to nail down a precise chronology about a witness’s narrative. The facts surrounding Judge’s employment at Safeway are objective, documented, and readily ascertainable, and would provide a definitive date range for the assault. So why doesn’t the committee figure out those facts? The committee could easily subpoena Safeway for Judge’s employment records, or subpoena Judge himself. If Mitchell were prosecuting this case in Arizona, that’s the first thing she would do. Did she suggest to Senator Chuck Grassley that he issue a subpoena to Safeway?
I’m a trial lawyer. I used to be a federal prosecutor, and now I do civil litigation and criminal defense. I spend my time trying to use the investigative and fact-finding tools of the legal system to resolve problems for people and companies that get in disputes. Every one of those disputes involves contested versions of particular events that happened years in the past. I, and thousands of others in my profession, make our living figuring out, methodically, who did what, when, where, how, and to whom, in cases where accounts are disputed, memories have faded, records have been lost, and witnesses don’t want to cooperate. And we do it in adversarial proceedings in which each factual assertion must be sourced, cited, and proved with evidence and testimony.
There’s nothing arcane or even particularly difficult about the investigatory steps the government could take to reach a reasonable factual conclusion about the Kavanaugh allegations. I simply cannot understand why the Judiciary Committee refuses to use the resources it has—namely, subpoena power, through which the committee can compel witnesses to testify and produce documents.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/did-ford-tell-truth-committee-can-find-out/571603/
Prosecutors and investigators have the tools and experience to find and convict people of historical crimes and also exonerate them. It can be done. It is done all the time. Check this story out to understand what can be done. I would expect Judge Kavanaugh to order a full and complete investigation to clear his precious name....
Don’t Pretend the Kavanaugh Facts are Unknowable
Lawyers make a living figuring out, methodically, who did what, when, where, how, and to whom.
Sep 28, 2018
Caleb Mason
Litigator and former federal prosecutor
Rachel Mitchell questions Christine Blasey FordTom Williams / Reuters
The strangest thing to me about Thursday’s Judiciary Committee hearing was that the veteran prosecutor Rachel Mitchell, retained by the Republicans to cross-examine Christine Blasey Ford, didn’t already have, and seemed uninterested in obtaining, a crucial piece of evidence that Ford referred to in her testimony.
Ford does not recall precisely what date Brett Kavanaugh allegedly assaulted her, but she testified that approximately six weeks afterward she saw Mark Judge—who she claims was in the room during the assault—working at the Potomac Village Safeway. “If we could find out when he worked there, then I could provide a more detailed timeline,” Ford said. That would be an important fact, indeed.
Mitchell has been prosecuting sexual-assault cases for two decades. She knows how to use determinable contextual facts to nail down a precise chronology about a witness’s narrative. The facts surrounding Judge’s employment at Safeway are objective, documented, and readily ascertainable, and would provide a definitive date range for the assault. So why doesn’t the committee figure out those facts? The committee could easily subpoena Safeway for Judge’s employment records, or subpoena Judge himself. If Mitchell were prosecuting this case in Arizona, that’s the first thing she would do. Did she suggest to Senator Chuck Grassley that he issue a subpoena to Safeway?
I’m a trial lawyer. I used to be a federal prosecutor, and now I do civil litigation and criminal defense. I spend my time trying to use the investigative and fact-finding tools of the legal system to resolve problems for people and companies that get in disputes. Every one of those disputes involves contested versions of particular events that happened years in the past. I, and thousands of others in my profession, make our living figuring out, methodically, who did what, when, where, how, and to whom, in cases where accounts are disputed, memories have faded, records have been lost, and witnesses don’t want to cooperate. And we do it in adversarial proceedings in which each factual assertion must be sourced, cited, and proved with evidence and testimony.
There’s nothing arcane or even particularly difficult about the investigatory steps the government could take to reach a reasonable factual conclusion about the Kavanaugh allegations. I simply cannot understand why the Judiciary Committee refuses to use the resources it has—namely, subpoena power, through which the committee can compel witnesses to testify and produce documents.
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/did-ford-tell-truth-committee-can-find-out/571603/
wayneL
VIVA LA LIBERTAD, CARAJO!
- Joined
- 9 July 2004
- Posts
- 25,951
- Reactions
- 13,244
This reminds me of 2016 
- Joined
- 26 March 2014
- Posts
- 20,056
- Reactions
- 12,627
Even if they prove he did it, they still have to impeach him to get him out.
Won't be easy.
Won't be easy.
wayneL
VIVA LA LIBERTAD, CARAJO!
- Joined
- 9 July 2004
- Posts
- 25,951
- Reactions
- 13,244
Tisme
Apathetic at Best
- Joined
- 27 August 2014
- Posts
- 8,954
- Reactions
- 1,152
No I thought she had been made up to look haggard, but I was wrong...if you want to suggest she was too ugly to be of interest to a male that's your baggage not mine.
explod
explod
- Joined
- 4 March 2007
- Posts
- 7,341
- Reactions
- 1,197
Rest My case, nothing has changed since my post on the 28th.
Its all political maneuvering.
Those sucked into threads like this just indicate shallow understanding of life IMHO.
- Joined
- 21 April 2014
- Posts
- 7,956
- Reactions
- 1,072
How did that show Kavanaugh's name wasn't mentioned in the therapist's notes?
Which note? The one mentioned to the reporter or all notes from all therapy sessions?
Apparently, if the FBI were permitted to interview Ford by the WH/GOP, her lawyers will make available all the therapist notes.
Since they didn't get to see it, it'll have to be a she said that, her husband corroborated it but then the honorable Judge said something else. Who are we going to believe, right?
and btw, it wasn't her ex-bf that Dr Ford "coached". He accused her of coaching a friend to pass the polygraph. The friend made a statement that that is not the case.
- Joined
- 26 March 2014
- Posts
- 20,056
- Reactions
- 12,627
You sound like another bas.
All het up about something that doesn't affect us a bit.
Waste of time really.
- Joined
- 21 April 2014
- Posts
- 7,956
- Reactions
- 1,072
Yea, nice try.
We've heard one of these favourite dog whistles haven't we?
Why would a handsome, great man such as I ever rape or sexually assaulted that woman. Just look at her.
- Joined
- 21 April 2014
- Posts
- 7,956
- Reactions
- 1,072
Lots of things doesn't affect me. Lots of things doesn't affect most people.
Sometime you just have time to not take bs from anybody.
Tisme
Apathetic at Best
- Joined
- 27 August 2014
- Posts
- 8,954
- Reactions
- 1,152
Mate you're off course and being guided by your own bias. You and I are not qualified to identify, let alone apportion guilt to heresay rapists. Have you bothered to look at how she looks when outside the hearings wearing her daily work face?
For some reason you seem all too willing to be part of a lynch mob without knowing the facts ... leave that to people like Bas and hope you never end up accused of anything lest she try the case in the court of petticoats and mass hysteria.
- Joined
- 21 April 2014
- Posts
- 7,956
- Reactions
- 1,072
Depends on what you mean by understanding of "life" there.
If you mean thinking that justice could be brought against rich powerful people with richer, more powerful friends... yea, just a waste of time and not really knowing how to world works.
But I'm sure you mean being naive, not recognising it's possible for people to lie, deceive for political or personal gain... I don't think that's true at all.
Firstly, I don't remember any of us suckers saying that Kavanaugh is guilty because Dr Ford alleged it. All that was asked after a credible accusation was for the FBI to look into it.
Apparently they "looked" and talk to people after one Senator said he wouldn't vote for Kavo boy without an FBI report.
I guess he didn't specify what kind of report, and what scope of the investigation is limited to.
So now we got a report. Who gets to see it? Only wise people who definitely are not partisan or political.
----------
As to understanding life, knowing how deprave some people, and some women, could be... trust me, I have seenmu share of it and it still shock me.
I know a guy who got properly trapped, then threatened, then got booked, go to court to answer an alleged rape accusation.
He came out of it losing half of everything he ever had. And lucky he didn't also go to prison.
The guy got taken so bad he was literally penniless he couldn't afford a lawyer when his ex got her lawyer to demand half of a house he bought in his name, that he alone have been paying for ("for them"), half of his super, half of his business and both his balls.
So yea, people can be nasty pieces of work. To assume they all are, to design hearings and investigation where reports are kept hidden and secret; where it's not legally false to say there's no evidence... that's just justice. That's just politics. The kind most don't expect from an open democracy with equal justice for all and all that.
explod
explod
- Joined
- 4 March 2007
- Posts
- 7,341
- Reactions
- 1,197
Yep. been through all of that personally. Alone now with ziltch. But I'm only a pup at 73, what would I know.
- Joined
- 21 April 2014
- Posts
- 7,956
- Reactions
- 1,072
For some reason, the statistics show that about 93% of rape accusation turn out true.
So if I'm ever accused of rape, I probably did it. The only thing that would clear my name would be a thorough independent investigation where I'm interviewed, my accuser got her say, investigators take all the time they need following her evidence.
The only lynch mob in this case are those well-dressed old men representing the people.
- Joined
- 21 April 2014
- Posts
- 7,956
- Reactions
- 1,072
I'm sure that with your professional background and life experience, you can spot a lie just by looking at it.
So maybe Dr. Ford completely made it all up to get back at Kavanaugh etc.
But you can't say that Kavanaugh look and sound completely innocent either.
And I'm no detective but this FBI investigation is more a political move to provide cover than a proper investigation.
For one thing, shouldn't the people who wanted Kavanaugh's named cleared and be promoted not also be the ones designing the scope and witness list?
explod
explod
- Joined
- 4 March 2007
- Posts
- 7,341
- Reactions
- 1,197
For goodness sake they were little more than upper wild teenage kids.
Time to move on.
And the US is rotten to the core in so many directions (and all sides of politics), as a youngster witnessed their interference in an internal revolution within Vietnam and they bombed innocents with napalm. Will never forget the raw suffering. For 40 years have been underhandedly attacking Syria and many other countries to control oil, and one can go on. Lol, and under the banner of freedom and democracy and the eyes of God; FF sake
Time to move on.
And the US is rotten to the core in so many directions (and all sides of politics), as a youngster witnessed their interference in an internal revolution within Vietnam and they bombed innocents with napalm. Will never forget the raw suffering. For 40 years have been underhandedly attacking Syria and many other countries to control oil, and one can go on. Lol, and under the banner of freedom and democracy and the eyes of God; FF sake
- Joined
- 21 April 2014
- Posts
- 7,956
- Reactions
- 1,072
In that context. Yes, this just petty.
- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 15,594
- Reactions
- 7,472
I don't think this is petty.
The issues in this case are fundamental to the operation of a justice system in the US that can in any way be seen as fair and balanced.
The appointment of Judge Kavanaugh was seen as major mistake by many independent and hitherto conservative bodies . These included conservative judges, the US bar council, a major Catholic lobby body, thousands of University Law Professors. Check out the story below for details
The issues that concerned them were:
-the behaviour of Judge Kavanaugh in his defense,
-the partisianship he was demonstrating when he is looking to be an impartial Supreme Court apointee,
-the concern about his denials of teenage/college behaviour which are easily demonstrated to be false
-concern that the testimony of Dr Ford had sufficient credibilty to disqualify him from the position.
All of these issues were clear to the Senators who nonetheless decided to close their eyes, hold their nose and get a guaranteed constructivist judge as the swing guy for the next 30 years.
Earlier on I left an article from The Atlantic that went into much detail on all of these realities.
In a very short period of time the forces behind formally overturning the Wade vs Roe abortion issue will open a case. This is one of the "prizes" at stake - criminalising a womens right to make decisions on her pregnancy. And Judge Kavanaugh, with the questions on his behaviour to women, will be the decisive factor in this judgement.
https://theintercept.com/2018/10/05...ssors-and-conservatives-even-his-own-friends/
- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 15,594
- Reactions
- 7,472
What happened the last time the US Supreme Court become a constructivist body ? Check out this piece of history.
The Supreme Court Is Headed Back to the 19th Century
The justices again appear poised to pursue a purely theoretical liberty at the expense of the lives of people of color.
When the Louisiana State Militia finally arrived at the Colfax courthouse on April 15, 1873, all it could do was bury the bodies. Two days earlier, a large force of white supremacists had taken control of the courthouse from the mostly black faction protecting it. J. R. Beckwith, the U.S. attorney for New Orleans, told Congress that in the aftermath the ground was “strewn with dead negroes,” their bodies plundered by whites who had come to watch the bloodshed. The dead remained “unburied and mutilated,” Beckwith said, until federal troops arrived days later to shovel them into a mass grave.
“Not a single negro had been killed until all of them had surrendered to the whites who were fighting with them,” The New York Times reported at the time, “when over 100 of the unfortunate negroes were shot down in cold blood.” Some were killed as they tried to surrender, and others as they attempted to flee the courthouse, which had been set on fire. President Ulysses S. Grant called the Colfax massacre a “butchery” that “in bloodthirstiness and barbarity is hardly surpassed by any acts of savage warfare.”
Related Stories
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/redemption-court/566963/
The Supreme Court Is Headed Back to the 19th Century
The justices again appear poised to pursue a purely theoretical liberty at the expense of the lives of people of color.
When the Louisiana State Militia finally arrived at the Colfax courthouse on April 15, 1873, all it could do was bury the bodies. Two days earlier, a large force of white supremacists had taken control of the courthouse from the mostly black faction protecting it. J. R. Beckwith, the U.S. attorney for New Orleans, told Congress that in the aftermath the ground was “strewn with dead negroes,” their bodies plundered by whites who had come to watch the bloodshed. The dead remained “unburied and mutilated,” Beckwith said, until federal troops arrived days later to shovel them into a mass grave.
“Not a single negro had been killed until all of them had surrendered to the whites who were fighting with them,” The New York Times reported at the time, “when over 100 of the unfortunate negroes were shot down in cold blood.” Some were killed as they tried to surrender, and others as they attempted to flee the courthouse, which had been set on fire. President Ulysses S. Grant called the Colfax massacre a “butchery” that “in bloodthirstiness and barbarity is hardly surpassed by any acts of savage warfare.”
Related Stories
- Kavanaugh’s Fate Will Have a Massive Ripple Effect
- Brett Kavanaugh Discovers the Unfairness of the World
- Don’t Pretend the Kavanaugh Facts are Unknowable
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/09/redemption-court/566963/
