Kennedy to retire - USSC will swing even further right

Do you not see the correlation? Baseless accusation by Trump (and other tin hats) gets people talking and forces Administration to release Obama's birth certificate and then makes Trump a freaking president to boot! Ford's allegation is way less baseless, so she gets a Senate hearing.

No one cares if YOU think the accusation to be baseless. This is the current reality. You proved it yourself with your example, so stop playing/being dumb.

 

No, it makes sense if you believe that a person is innocent until proven guilty. There is nothing in the allegation that can be proven at all, thus it must be dismissed. You want the story to be true, so you are presuming guilt and that's just a backwards way of thinking.

I had a completely open mind to start with....and then I heard the story and the fact that literally no one she said was there say that there was a party like that. When thing after thing continued to show that her story was baseless, I eventually had to conclude that her story wasn't credible. Allegations have to be proven in order to be believed. Just because a woman says something happened doesn't mean you automatically believe her on the basis of her sex.

 

Oh, don't get it twisted, I completely see that these baseless allegations and the "birther" BS are fundamentally the same thing....I didn't support the birther BS, I don't support these baseless allegations, can you say the same?

Also, when I say that the allegations are baseless, that's not an opinion, that's fact. They are based on nothing.

 

They thought they were doing a good Christian thing? It is because they were children and teenagers that had a traumatic experience... which is consistent with what and why victims do not report assaults until many years later if at all.

No, the information Major cited is relevant for two reasons. Often victims do not report sexual assaults for many years and second, skepticism and judgment is a big reason victims never report it. That is why he was as angry in his response as he was.

Also as far as I know she intends to testify... even though she is going to be facing questions from a prosecutor.

This is politics to the Democrats and Republican in Washington and partisans ... but most likely this isn’t politics to her. She clearly thinks she was assaulted and has had treatment for it years ago.

 

Again, who cares what you or I think about either topic. I already explained clearly to you how #metoo stuff works. Tweeter and popular opinion apparently have a lot of sway on politics. I hate it. It doesn't change the fact. Or are you saying that you are triggered and speak on emotions these days?

 

So if she testifies under oath, will you return to this thread and apologize?

 

Why? Cause he's creepy. He's a lawyer. And he represents p*rn stars. CPL

 

The therapy wasn't for the "attack" it was couple's therapy and the "attack" was brought up to explain why she kept cheating on her husband. It was also used as an excuse for why a woman who regularly flies to the East coast to visit family and who flew to Hawaii for some post grad work when trying to get her PHD....couldn't fly to Washington DC to testify on Monday.

It may not be "politics" to her, but she's clearly willing to use the "attack" as an excuse when convenient and we know that she's a politically active left winger who attends anti-Trump rallies....I dunno, sounds like the idea of it being "politics" to her is on the table.

 

Exactly, you can't say the same because you support this version of "birther" BS because politics. It's okay, I don't blame you, not many of our friends on the left are capable of doing much thinking these days.

 

Apologize for what?

 

No. The diocese paid out on behalf of some priests that had never been convicted of any crimes. If anything one could raise the specter that some claiming assault years later did so for financial gain. I don’t believe that to be the case but I did hear that accusation.

I see no reason to believe she made it up or made it up for political reasons. She grew up around BK, was in similar circles and has received therapy for it. She believes BK attempted to rape her. Are others politically profiting off of it? Absolutely.

Did BK attempt to rape her? I don’t know, but the depiction BK gave on Fox about his past is objectively false.

So I respect your position but I don’t agree with it when it comes to her making it up or being politically motivated.

 

She is not proposing Kavanaugh to be charged. She is telling her story. She doesn't want to feel like she is on trial.. That's her prerogative. Committee is on record saying that they want to hear from her. Combining two and two together I feel like she gets to make a few reasonable demands of which not feeling like she is on trial can be one of them.

Also, I don't believe the optics will be all that bad if Senators actually expose her. People who tune in to CSPAN are more reasonable than your average liberal and will see it for what it is. And reputable media is still objective no matter what Trump says.

Senators are just cowards - it is pretty obvious:
“The central point is that there is no precedent for this Committee to bring in outside counsel for the sole purpose of shielding the members of the Committee from performing their responsibility to question witnesses,” Bromwich said.

 

No, she didn't receive therapy for it, she received therapy due to marital problems with her current husband and that's when she brought up the "attack" for the first time as an excuse for their marital problems.

When you say that "I see no reason to believe she made it up", you are assuming her allegation is true which is the exact opposite of what you should be doing. All allegations are to be assumed false until they can be proven true. I see no reason to believe her allegation because there's literally no evidence or corroboration of it.

I'm not certain if she's making it up for political purposes or if she's just mistaken as to what happened, but I'm certain that the claim is baseless according to everything we know about it. That alone is sufficient to discard it.

I think if one looks at this from a position of not assuming the claims are true from the start and instead needing to have them proven, there's just no way that they could come to the conclusion that the claims are credible.

 

'He said' will be 'Me said' when he gets appointed.

 

You have no integrity, do you, which doesn't surprise me at all. Get caught in a lie and you will either ignore someone pointing that out, or respond like you just did. No personal integrity. I hope you are proud of yourself. It would be a pity if you didn't get any personal satisfaction out of telling and repeating lies without any hint of personal responsibility for what you are doing. You've done that here for years.

 

ROTFLMFAO!

 

and yet you have repeatedly stated it like a fact that it was

 

At least the evangelicals have found a real martyr to believe in and an excuse to admit to voting for Trump again.

 

Well said. I'm surprised cml750 doesn't understand that. Maybe he needs to expand his news sources.

 

Innocent until proven guilty is for a trial. This isn't a trial. I'm not saying Kavanaugh is guilty of anything. I don't really know at this point. But there is a reason to investigate and try to get at the truth whatever it is. No matter what it is a sad incident. If it is true it is incredibly sad. If it is false, then it is also sad. Whatever the case, I just want to get to the truth.