Tisme
Apathetic at Best
- Joined
- 27 August 2014
- Posts
- 8,954
- Reactions
- 1,152
You suggesting people might actually tell lies. or is that only the domain of males?
Defending Brett Kavanaugh
- Thread starter basilio
- Start date
-
- Tags
- brett kavanaugh
You suggesting people might actually tell lies. or is that only the domain of males?
Tisme
Apathetic at Best
- Joined
- 27 August 2014
- Posts
- 8,954
- Reactions
- 1,152
Anyone who has had children would recognise crocodile tears and the whimpy voice to draw sympathy. Fortunately most parents stop that kind of manipulative nonsense ..... where were the adults with the fly swatter when Ford was croaking her voice like a guilty child would.
Darc Knight
Investor not Trader
- Joined
- 28 February 2015
- Posts
- 1,211
- Reactions
- 607
I wasn't convinced by Brett Kav. He's spent his entire life learning how to BS convincingly under oath. Which leads me to believe that if he has the hide to lie with that much conviction he must be a special kind of sleaze.
4 Republicans and 3 Democrats on the Committee, I guess he'll get through.
4 Republicans and 3 Democrats on the Committee, I guess he'll get through.
Kav was ready day one of the accusation. Ford suddenly had a fear of flying. In reality her lawyers and dems wanted to delay as long as possible. If she testified monday or last week an fbi investigation would be over by now.
She had zero corroboration from witnesses that could back the story.
And now dems (if kav is sunk) will delay till 2020 a gop pick.
Hit job.
- Joined
- 2 June 2011
- Posts
- 5,341
- Reactions
- 242
Politicise the judiciary then complain that its politicised. Muppets.
I would have thought the Clarence Thomas saga was already evidence of that.
- Joined
- 2 June 2011
- Posts
- 5,341
- Reactions
- 242
A seven seat, unelected body interprets an ancient, poorly written document composed by a handful of rural tax-evaders, and then delivers binding opinions that dictate the supposed morality of the country. That's why its politicised.
Darc Knight
Investor not Trader
- Joined
- 28 February 2015
- Posts
- 1,211
- Reactions
- 607
If you listen to Brett Kav 's testimony it's all about the Democrats, the Left etc are scum, are Crooks and liars. This is not an impartial person who should be aiming to sit on the Supreme Court Bench and make judgements of Law between the Republicans and Democrats.
Sounds like he's running for office as a Republican and slinging mud at the opposition the Democrats.
Sounds like he's running for office as a Republican and slinging mud at the opposition the Democrats.
- Joined
- 21 April 2014
- Posts
- 7,956
- Reactions
- 1,072
Yea but that's him with a suit on.
Once the sacred robe is worn and he's in the Supreme Court, he will rule for every single American - all 1% of them.
He will uphold the sacred law written by a bunch of White landed slave owning gentry who wishes for nothing but the freedom and liberty of all free men.
- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 15,594
- Reactions
- 7,472
They really were two totally contrasting testomonies weren't they ?
Christine was anxious to understand every question. You could see her searching her memory. Brett hardly gave a straight answer to any question. What kind of flippant answer to an extremely relevant inquiry about his drinking is 'I like beer, how about you'?
What struck me more than his belligerence was when Kavanagh was getting all emotional about things like having kept diaries while Ford was coherently and without tears recounting her ordeal. If anyone was bunging on the false tears it was Brett.
Anyway this is just Round 1. The critical interviews will be with Julie Swetnick. She is a different sort of fish here.
Christine came from an upper class conservative Republician family. It was why she went to the school she did and mixed in the same circles. Julie went to a local high school. She doesn't seem to share that political background. Her testimony will be confronting in a far more sinister way than Christines because she has alleged Brett was complict in getting girls drunk and faciliating gang rapes. And she says there are others who will back her up.
The most significant comment on the whole exercise came from Donald Trump. He was rapt that Brett went full ballastic on the accusations. That was his boy.. What else do we need to know ?
Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
Judge Kavanaugh showed America exactly why I nominated him. His testimony was powerful, honest, and riveting. Democrats’ search and destroy strategy is disgraceful and this process has been a total sham and effort to delay, obstruct, and resist. The Senate must vote!
Christine was anxious to understand every question. You could see her searching her memory. Brett hardly gave a straight answer to any question. What kind of flippant answer to an extremely relevant inquiry about his drinking is 'I like beer, how about you'?
What struck me more than his belligerence was when Kavanagh was getting all emotional about things like having kept diaries while Ford was coherently and without tears recounting her ordeal. If anyone was bunging on the false tears it was Brett.
Anyway this is just Round 1. The critical interviews will be with Julie Swetnick. She is a different sort of fish here.
Christine came from an upper class conservative Republician family. It was why she went to the school she did and mixed in the same circles. Julie went to a local high school. She doesn't seem to share that political background. Her testimony will be confronting in a far more sinister way than Christines because she has alleged Brett was complict in getting girls drunk and faciliating gang rapes. And she says there are others who will back her up.
The most significant comment on the whole exercise came from Donald Trump. He was rapt that Brett went full ballastic on the accusations. That was his boy.. What else do we need to know ?
Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
Judge Kavanaugh showed America exactly why I nominated him. His testimony was powerful, honest, and riveting. Democrats’ search and destroy strategy is disgraceful and this process has been a total sham and effort to delay, obstruct, and resist. The Senate must vote!
- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 15,594
- Reactions
- 7,472
Fallout from Dr Christine Blasey Fords testimony.
“This brings back so much pain”: why so many women saw themselves in Christine Blasey Ford’s story of sexual assault
As she told her story, women across the country responded with their own stories.
...Even Fox News’s Chris Wallace was stirred by Ford’s testimony, sharing a personal story about how two of his daughters came forward amid the debate over the Kavanaugh allegations to tell him about things that happened to them during their high school years.
“I had never heard before about things that happened to them in high school — and hadn’t told their parents,” Wallace said on the air Thursday morning. “I don’t know if they told their friends. Certainly they never reported it to the police.”
Ford’s testimony in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee was a remarkable moment in history. But her story was not unique — it is one that millions of women have experienced at some point in their lives.
https://www.vox.com/2018/9/27/17910...h-sexual-assault-allegations-senate-testimony
“This brings back so much pain”: why so many women saw themselves in Christine Blasey Ford’s story of sexual assault
As she told her story, women across the country responded with their own stories.
...Even Fox News’s Chris Wallace was stirred by Ford’s testimony, sharing a personal story about how two of his daughters came forward amid the debate over the Kavanaugh allegations to tell him about things that happened to them during their high school years.
“I had never heard before about things that happened to them in high school — and hadn’t told their parents,” Wallace said on the air Thursday morning. “I don’t know if they told their friends. Certainly they never reported it to the police.”
Ford’s testimony in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee was a remarkable moment in history. But her story was not unique — it is one that millions of women have experienced at some point in their lives.
https://www.vox.com/2018/9/27/17910...h-sexual-assault-allegations-senate-testimony
- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 15,594
- Reactions
- 7,472
5 key questions the Ford-Kavanaugh hearings left unanswered
The biggest things we don’t know call Brett Kavanaugh’s credibility into serious question.
By Zack Beauchamp@zackbeauchampzack@vox.com Sep 27, 2018, 7:31pm EDT
Share
Andrew Harnik/Pool/Getty Images
By the end of an emotionally brutal day of Senate hearings on Christine Blasey Ford’s sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, there were still a lot of questions left outstanding — many of which are vital to understanding what really happened in in 1982. It served to highlight just how nakedly the Republicans running the committee had set up the hearing to grandstand, not to get at the truth of the matter.
There were a number of holes in Kavanaugh’s testimony: places where he dodged simple yes-or-no questions, or gave answers that seemed inconsistent with facts in the public record or simple common sense. These include critical issues, like whether he ever drank so much that he became aggressive and/or blacked out — ones that could seriously damage his credibility as a witness.
Ford’s testimony was much more straightforward. There were still some issues, like why her friend Leland Ingham Keyser couldn’t remember the party, but they were much less central and varied than the ones that arose from Kavanaugh’s.
What follows is a guide to where there’s still unclarity, and why these issues are so important. Put together, the gravity of what’s still not known suggests that — at the very least — it’s hard to justify giving Kavanaugh a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court without getting some more answers.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-poli...naugh-christine-ford-senate-yearbook-calendar
The biggest things we don’t know call Brett Kavanaugh’s credibility into serious question.
By Zack Beauchamp@zackbeauchampzack@vox.com Sep 27, 2018, 7:31pm EDT
Share
By the end of an emotionally brutal day of Senate hearings on Christine Blasey Ford’s sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, there were still a lot of questions left outstanding — many of which are vital to understanding what really happened in in 1982. It served to highlight just how nakedly the Republicans running the committee had set up the hearing to grandstand, not to get at the truth of the matter.
There were a number of holes in Kavanaugh’s testimony: places where he dodged simple yes-or-no questions, or gave answers that seemed inconsistent with facts in the public record or simple common sense. These include critical issues, like whether he ever drank so much that he became aggressive and/or blacked out — ones that could seriously damage his credibility as a witness.
Ford’s testimony was much more straightforward. There were still some issues, like why her friend Leland Ingham Keyser couldn’t remember the party, but they were much less central and varied than the ones that arose from Kavanaugh’s.
What follows is a guide to where there’s still unclarity, and why these issues are so important. Put together, the gravity of what’s still not known suggests that — at the very least — it’s hard to justify giving Kavanaugh a lifetime seat on the Supreme Court without getting some more answers.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-poli...naugh-christine-ford-senate-yearbook-calendar
- Joined
- 21 April 2014
- Posts
- 7,956
- Reactions
- 1,072
I take it you never have much experience recalling an attempted rape when you were 15. Doing it in front of cameras, wrinkled old men, and a nice lady lawyer representing them.
Why can't they all be like Brett. Confident, manly, flippant, likes beer and alcohol so much he blacks out a fair few time... what? doesn't everybody?
but of course not too manly as he kept a diary and goes teary... praying for Dr. Ford
Darc Knight
Investor not Trader
- Joined
- 28 February 2015
- Posts
- 1,211
- Reactions
- 607
Dear Bas, will the next thread you start be one defending Men's Rights? We like equality. Please restore my faith in you. Thank you
- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 15,594
- Reactions
- 7,472
Dear Bas, will the next thread you start be one defending Men's Rights? We like equality. Please restore my faith in you. Thank you
Thanks for the thought Darc. However I believe you will find other posters on ASF with far more righteousness and determination to defend the rights of men.
But back to the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh as Supreme Court judge for life.
It seems that the Senate Committee is not going to wait to hear any further allegations (particularly ones that could prove awkward) and wants to vote for Brett Kavanaugh tomorrow. Great due diligence there.
20:27
Senate committee to vote Friday morning
Republican senators have now said the Senate judiciary committee plans to vote Friday morning on Kavanaugh’s nomination, the AP reports:
John Cornyn of Texas, the second ranking-Republican, had said Thursday that the GOP conference would meet and “see where we are”. After meeting, Republican senator Lindsey Graham said, “There will be a vote tomorrow morning.”
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...ve-news-updates-hearing-sexual-assault-claims
- Joined
- 21 April 2014
- Posts
- 7,956
- Reactions
- 1,072
American democracy is fast becoming a farce.
There's the Russian, and now the Chinese, rigging its elections. There's the complete disdain for what the majority of the people want or care about; there's the appointed "Justices" who are anything but fair and just... all they need now is a clownish buffoon who like gold plated stuff.
- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 15,594
- Reactions
- 7,472
Mens Rights
The Senate hearing on the accusations against Brett Kavanaugh gives the picture of (Republicians) Mens Rights
Whom do we believe, and when
The day played out like a set piece. In the morning, Ford showed how high the bar was to even have a chance of being believed. Her story is specific, credible, serious. She’s told it to multiple people over the years. She tried to tell it to Congress before Kavanaugh was nominated. She places Kavanaugh in the town he lived, at the house of a person he knew, in a room with one of his best friends. She tried her best to be polite to the senators, to avoid offense, to show gratitude to the committee for listening to her. She took a polygraph, begged for an FBI investigation. She says she’s 100 percent sure it was Kavanaugh who attacked her.
In the afternoon, Kavanaugh simply denied all charges. He denied ever being blackout drunk. He denied ever forgetting anything of importance. He denied the possibility he was wrong, that it might be useful for his alleged accomplice Mark Judge to testify or for the FBI to investigate. He said Ford’s memory had failed her but was incredulous at the idea that his recall could deliver a similar error.
And he fought back. He slammed his accusers; he made clear his pain, his rage. If Ford was grateful for the opportunity to be heard, Kavanaugh was incredulous that she was being given that opportunity, that it was taking this long, that it could possibly take longer.
Asked why the committee couldn’t take another week to investigate the claims more thoroughly, he shot back, “Every day has been a lifetime.” His suffering was immense, unfair, unforgivable. “I’m never going to get my reputation back,” he said. “My life is totally and permanently altered.”
The suffering of his accusers, women who say they’ve been living with the trauma of what he did for decades? They were mistaken, and their claims could be, should be, for the good of the county had to be, dismissed. “This grotesque character assassination will dissuade competent and good people of all political persuasions from serving our country,” he said.
The feminist philosopher Kate Manne coined the term “himpathy” to describe the “tendency to dismiss the female perspective altogether, to empathize with the powerful man over his less powerful alleged female victim.” What Kavanaugh did today was activate the Republican Party’s powerful sense of himpathy: His suffering was the question, and Ford’s suffering, to say nothing of any further search for the truth, slipped soundlessly beneath the water.
We ended the day in much the same place we started: his word against hers. But even as everyone agreed Ford’s word was credible, it didn’t matter. There was still Kavanaugh’s word. And it appeared, for Republicans on the Judiciary Committee, that that was enough. She was 100 percent sure and he was 100 percent sure, but it was his 100 percent sure that mattered.
On this, Trump was right. What Kavanaugh had needed to do was go on the offensive. He needed to remind the all-male Republican panel that he was the victim here, that any of them could be victims, that moving his nomination forward would be a show of strength, a message sent to the Democrats and their allies, a statement that these tactics end here and they end now. This is how you fight #MeToo: by focusing on the pain it’s causing men, by centering their suffering.
All of this was, perhaps, predictable. On Wednesday, a new NPR/Marist poll found that while large majorities of Democrats and independents believed Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination should be rejected if Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations are true, a majority of Republicans believed Kavanaugh should be confirmed even if Ford’s allegations are true. If Thursday’s hearing didn’t ultimately seem to be about the truth at all, well, perhaps that’s why: The truth was never really what Senate Republicans were after.
By the end of the day, Trump was thrilled. “Judge Kavanaugh showed America exactly why I nominated him,” he tweeted shortly after the hearing ended. “The Senate must vote!”
https://www.vox.com/explainers/2018...supreme-court-senate-sexual-assault-testimony
The Senate hearing on the accusations against Brett Kavanaugh gives the picture of (Republicians) Mens Rights
Whom do we believe, and when
The day played out like a set piece. In the morning, Ford showed how high the bar was to even have a chance of being believed. Her story is specific, credible, serious. She’s told it to multiple people over the years. She tried to tell it to Congress before Kavanaugh was nominated. She places Kavanaugh in the town he lived, at the house of a person he knew, in a room with one of his best friends. She tried her best to be polite to the senators, to avoid offense, to show gratitude to the committee for listening to her. She took a polygraph, begged for an FBI investigation. She says she’s 100 percent sure it was Kavanaugh who attacked her.
In the afternoon, Kavanaugh simply denied all charges. He denied ever being blackout drunk. He denied ever forgetting anything of importance. He denied the possibility he was wrong, that it might be useful for his alleged accomplice Mark Judge to testify or for the FBI to investigate. He said Ford’s memory had failed her but was incredulous at the idea that his recall could deliver a similar error.
And he fought back. He slammed his accusers; he made clear his pain, his rage. If Ford was grateful for the opportunity to be heard, Kavanaugh was incredulous that she was being given that opportunity, that it was taking this long, that it could possibly take longer.
Asked why the committee couldn’t take another week to investigate the claims more thoroughly, he shot back, “Every day has been a lifetime.” His suffering was immense, unfair, unforgivable. “I’m never going to get my reputation back,” he said. “My life is totally and permanently altered.”
The suffering of his accusers, women who say they’ve been living with the trauma of what he did for decades? They were mistaken, and their claims could be, should be, for the good of the county had to be, dismissed. “This grotesque character assassination will dissuade competent and good people of all political persuasions from serving our country,” he said.
The feminist philosopher Kate Manne coined the term “himpathy” to describe the “tendency to dismiss the female perspective altogether, to empathize with the powerful man over his less powerful alleged female victim.” What Kavanaugh did today was activate the Republican Party’s powerful sense of himpathy: His suffering was the question, and Ford’s suffering, to say nothing of any further search for the truth, slipped soundlessly beneath the water.
We ended the day in much the same place we started: his word against hers. But even as everyone agreed Ford’s word was credible, it didn’t matter. There was still Kavanaugh’s word. And it appeared, for Republicans on the Judiciary Committee, that that was enough. She was 100 percent sure and he was 100 percent sure, but it was his 100 percent sure that mattered.
On this, Trump was right. What Kavanaugh had needed to do was go on the offensive. He needed to remind the all-male Republican panel that he was the victim here, that any of them could be victims, that moving his nomination forward would be a show of strength, a message sent to the Democrats and their allies, a statement that these tactics end here and they end now. This is how you fight #MeToo: by focusing on the pain it’s causing men, by centering their suffering.
All of this was, perhaps, predictable. On Wednesday, a new NPR/Marist poll found that while large majorities of Democrats and independents believed Brett Kavanaugh’s Supreme Court nomination should be rejected if Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations are true, a majority of Republicans believed Kavanaugh should be confirmed even if Ford’s allegations are true. If Thursday’s hearing didn’t ultimately seem to be about the truth at all, well, perhaps that’s why: The truth was never really what Senate Republicans were after.
By the end of the day, Trump was thrilled. “Judge Kavanaugh showed America exactly why I nominated him,” he tweeted shortly after the hearing ended. “The Senate must vote!”
https://www.vox.com/explainers/2018...supreme-court-senate-sexual-assault-testimony
- Joined
- 30 June 2008
- Posts
- 15,594
- Reactions
- 7,472
Kavanaugh nomination in a nutshell
Imagine you’re on the committee to hire the next CEO of a Fortune 500 company. You’ve got a stack of impressive resumes, but one is a standout.
Then you hear this:
- A woman says your top pick tried to sexually assault her, pinning her down on a bed at a party when they were in high school, a story she told a therapist years ago.
-A second woman says he exposed himself to her as a student at Yale. Classmates gossiped about it for decades.
-A third woman says your applicant was a bystander when she was, in her words, “gang raped” at a high school party. She says that she saw him once in a line of boys preparing to gang rape another student.
-She also said that he and his friends spiked drinks with drugs and alcohol to make women unable fight off unwanted sexual advances.
-In response to all of this, your top pick presents himself as a virgin choirboy. Half a dozen of his old friends gasp, telling the Washington Post that, in fact, he was an aggressive “sloppy drunk” for years.
Do you hire him, anyway?
Imagine you’re on the committee to hire the next CEO of a Fortune 500 company. You’ve got a stack of impressive resumes, but one is a standout.
Then you hear this:
- A woman says your top pick tried to sexually assault her, pinning her down on a bed at a party when they were in high school, a story she told a therapist years ago.
-A second woman says he exposed himself to her as a student at Yale. Classmates gossiped about it for decades.
-A third woman says your applicant was a bystander when she was, in her words, “gang raped” at a high school party. She says that she saw him once in a line of boys preparing to gang rape another student.
-She also said that he and his friends spiked drinks with drugs and alcohol to make women unable fight off unwanted sexual advances.
-In response to all of this, your top pick presents himself as a virgin choirboy. Half a dozen of his old friends gasp, telling the Washington Post that, in fact, he was an aggressive “sloppy drunk” for years.
Do you hire him, anyway?
wayneL
VIVA LA LIBERTAD, CARAJO!
- Joined
- 9 July 2004
- Posts
- 25,951
- Reactions
- 13,244
No, but here's what *really concerns me - One of the basic tenets of our system is the principle of the assumption of innocence unless proven guilty.
I don't know whether Kav did these these things, and neither do y'all. But it seems that if one's political affiliations are of the left, you are happy to assume his guilt. (with the exception of Lindsey Stewart... Bravo, that man)
That is wrong, disgusting, and profoundly ####ing stupid. Yes, you clowns truly disgust me and you have no idea if the can of worms you have opened.
If he is guilty, fine, let those cards fall where they will. If he is proved innocent, then you deserve the shame... that you probably don't have the sociological capacity of feeling.
explod
explod
- Joined
- 4 March 2007
- Posts
- 7,341
- Reactions
- 1,197
Goodness, she's reading her script, using a croaky voice to intimate mental impacts. From my professional experience appears to be lying through her teeth. I'm no right winger but can see the Clinton Illuminati all over this.
And when it happened they were kids and no real evidence that Kavanaugh was even there.
US absolutely corrupt and stuffed. Just party and save somer silver coins.
And when it happened they were kids and no real evidence that Kavanaugh was even there.
US absolutely corrupt and stuffed. Just party and save somer silver coins.
