Kennedy to retire - USSC will swing even further right

Democrats treatment of Al Franken v. GOP treatment of Brett Kavanaugh

 

How does knowing the house helps? I'm confused. You think the memory of participants will be reanimated by reminding them the specific place/house they were at 36 years ago? I guess it will make it harder for denials to be such blanket statements "completely false" by the accused.

The important part is that this is corroborating evidence that is of equal counter weight as the denials by the named participants. As none are under oath.

 

[Premium Post]
Significant evidence against Franken, including photos. No evidence against Kavanaugh -- in fact, the accuser can't even remember the YEAR in which the alleged offense occurred, much less the location and who was present, and there are no contemporaneous accounts of anything.

You are supposedly a lawyer? Very weak grasp of the law and basic legal principles. Unless you are being purposefully misleading and deceitful to advance your political objectives, which is par for the course for your team.

GOOD DAY

 

Yes I think if the exact location is known then it helps to corroborate the story.

 

Here is debunking article to people who think FBI investigation request is unfounded because it is not their jurisdiction:

link
"When the FBI conducts a background investigation of a presidential nominee, it vacuums up all kinds of information about the nominee, including claims from people interviewed by agents, and dumps it into the file. It does not, however, investigate whether or not derogatory information is true — unless it's asked to follow up by the White House. Several current and former Justice Department and FBI officials say this has always been the practice, and there is actually a longstanding formal memorandum of understanding between DOJ and the White House that specifies these limits."

 

Ok let her go to all the houses owned by people involved and then she could remember which one it was. I don't see this as damning in any way one way or the other. Just a tiny non-consequential detail.

 

i notice you have avoided commenting on

Judge's book on the elite boys high school in the DC suburb during BK's time---"drowning in alcohol"---
w reference to Bart Kavanaugh​

 

The people present are named and Christine King corroborates the story.

 

Cool. It didn’t have anything to do with the specific incident. Did it? I know his friend wrote an entire book about being a drunk. I’ve been around those rich kids who went to religious schools and they were ****ing insane.

 

[Educational Post]
Cristina King Miranda deleted the tweet and at noon disavowed the content, saying "I do not have first hand knowledge of the incident that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford mentions".

How can people be "present" at an event that has no time, place, day, even YEAR, of occurring? Your argument is so terrible, and you have less than half of my intellect.


OWNED

 

I feel like you are treating this as some sort of gotcha line I’m putting out there.

I don’t understand why you think knowing the location of an assault is not important. If someone made this assault claim against you but they couldn’t state where it happened then what would you think? You don’t think this helps bring other people out who can attest to what happened? This is a significant piece of information in the story.

Not that it matters I remember the exact spot where I got metoo’ed in a gay bar in Houston lol. I’m waiting on a girl to come out of the bathroom and I have her beer in one hand and my beer in the other. This guy walks up to me and I thought he was just going to talk to me but instead like a **** ninja he nonchalantly grabs the head of my dick and just walks on by. I felt like a piece of meat and I went thru the range of emotions from shock to anger after it happened lol. Either way that’s my random story for the day.

....back to discussion of things that we have no influence over....

 

Not to ignore your personal experience....

But if I was accused, I sure would like to know the location of the party. Some pretty basic facts could then be checked. Was there ever a high school party at that house (I assume the person who was the kid living at the house would know). From there, you could figure out who else was there and maybe pience together if you were even there or in town when the party happened.

Having no recall of any details makes it very difficult to defend yourself other than to just say I didn't do it.

 

Hate to break it to you, but if the actions are welcome, it's not sexual assault. I understand the concept of sexual advances being welcomed by a member of the opposite sex might be a foreign concept to you, but I can assure you it's a thing that happens.

As to Trump being a liar.....well yeah. You seem to think that I'm a Trump supporter when I'm not and haven't ever been. Hopefully your Trump Derangement Syndrome portion of this conversation is done.

Citation needed. I'm not aware of an allegation in the #MeToo nonsense where they couldn't tell you when something happened, where it happened, how they got there, how they got home, and can't even list the 6 people there.

LOL there's nothing to investigate, that's my point. When you can't say when or where something happened, can't come up with a full roster of the 6 people allegedly there, can't explain how you got there or got home....I mean what is to be investigated? Such a baseless claim would never be investigated by any level of law enforcement. There's no hope for any physical evidence whatsoever, especially since you can't say when and where something happened, and thus far everyone publicly mentioned has denied the allegation....what else is there to be "investigated"?

When you also factor in that she doesn't even want to tell her story when given the opportunity to do so, it makes it pretty obvious that this is nothing but a cynical political ploy and that the woman, even if she does have false memories of some attack, is being used by the DNC.

 

Not disputing that it should be investigated, but I don't think a statement from a person refuting Ford's statement is good support for that position. I also don't think we want to encourage subsequent 11th hour "revelations" to game the system by either Repubs or Dems.

So, I agree -- let's get BK and Ford (subpoenaed?) to testify. If there is no supporting evidence that comes forward, drop it. If she won't testify, drop it. If folks do come forward with substantiating evidence, including their own testimony, continue with the investigation.

 

It’s more of a funny experience to me than anything else.

Every time I think about this accusation I just have more and more questions. Like these medical records that are supposed to be out there they could establish some kind of timeline. I don’t know if Ford’s parents are still alive but I’d assume they would remember some details surrounding this.

Hopefully they will do some type of investigation for the sake of all the parties involved.

 

I'm very sorry you went through that... That's not a situation I'd want anyone to be in.

I think previously I just pointed out that location would be an easy piece of a puzzle to figure out and that it would provide little to corroborate this story imho except to make people who are afraid of being metoo'd more at peace in some weird way.

 

Funny that in the reply to my point-by-point comparison of the two cases you want me to provide a citation. So now I need a citation to a citation to convince you of something? What?

A republican judiciary committee thought the evidence was compelling enough to look into it and have lawyers come in and interview the people involved and senators have a session over it. That's a bad argument as far as you are concerned, since you deem yourself smarter than all, but for general public that will be good enough. And based on al franken treatment (over hovering hands pic and unwanted staged kiss) a democratic judiciary committee would've done much more. Just because you and the Trump following senators choose to deny that this is a serious allegation (no matter that where it was and how she got there hasn't been established yet) and brushing it off is not a big deal for a deeply partisan scotus nominee of obviously shady character, it doesn't change the fact that #metoo is a thing and people will look at it and be like "are those old white men for real?"

I understand that you have no empathy in you what so ever (not something self-proclaimed "alpha" people value). But do you not think that Kavanaugh (the least supported SCOTUS nominee in the history) SEEMS to be a shady individual based on his testimony, deep state circles he runs in, apparent lying under oath, etc? And until that seeming shadiness is taken care of, he is a black eye for the Republicans and the SCOTUS in the eye of the public?

I guess, I'm basically wondering what principles do you actually hold dear? if any