Time To Smear Kavanaugh's Good Name...

[One Bad Pig]

So all of a sudden you believe anonymous sources? If the guy took her off the joint credit card, then how did she use it a year later?

If her card hadn't expired yet, it's pretty easy to do. I use a credit card all the time, and nobody ever checks to see if it's mine or not.

Also, the source isn't technically anonymous; it's a signed statement which has been redacted to hide who signed it. That said, I understand that Ms. McLean denies the coaching ever took place.

[Sparko]

Who cares if they are true

in this country it is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In this case they have no evidence beyond an accusation. It wouldn't even be credible enough for an arrest much less a conviction if it were up before the justice system.

[Mountain Man]

Not true. I did respond to this question when you asked it the first time. And I'll respond again.

1) Being falsely accused is a nightmare. It would be very hard to defend oneself against it unless one had a clear alibi or some sort of corroborating evidence. In that sort of a circumstance, one can only rely on ones reputation and friends and hope they believe you.

but this is a very one sided question:

2) Being assaulted by someone with no corroborating evidence other than your word and your own sketchy memories is ALSO a nightmare. Likewise, in that sort of a circumstance, one can only rely on ones reputation and friends and hope they believe you.

The measure of a man is not if he can have compassion for his friends. It is if he can have compassion for his enemies.



There is potential here for BOTH these people to be suffering, to be in great despair. Our discussions are NOT reflecting that fact. Only one of these persons is being given grace here, being shown mercy by those that name the name of Christ.

We - NONE OF US - has enough evidence to know what really happened. And that should be sufficient to restrain the derogatory comments aimed at either of them.

But it is not.



Jim

Spare us your self-righteous moralizing. You still haven't answered the question. How would YOU respond if you were falsely accused, and the allegations against you were as sketchy as Ford's? Liberals seem to think that Kavanaugh should have calmly and dispassionately rolled over while his name was drug though the mud. Is that really how you would respond under similar circumstances?

[Sparko]

What page of what study are you getting this from?



How do you expect rape victims to "establish their case"? Why do you think most rape accusations do not meet "evidence burden"?

usually by reporting it to the police when it happens so they can take a rape kit and investigate it, not keeping it secret for 30 years then making an accusation when nothing can be proved.

in America you can't just accuse someone of a crime without proof. That's how it works.

[Mountain Man]

If her card hadn't expired yet, it's pretty easy to do. I use a credit card all the time, and nobody ever checks to see if it's mine or not.

Also, the source isn't technically anonymous; it's a signed statement which has been redacted to hide who signed it. That said, I understand that Ms. McLean denies the coaching ever took place.

She denied it on CNN, not as a sworn statement. The letter, on the other hand, is a sworn statement submitted to the committee.

[Cow Poke]

It's not? You must have been quite the lawman, CP. To whom they speak and what they say is evidence, CP. That's how the courts work.

This is not a court proceeding, Jim. And the FBI was doing a supplemental background check, not a criminal investigation. And, yes, I was quite the lawman, with numerous citations and commendations.

[JimL]

This is not a court proceeding, Jim. And the FBI was doing a supplemental background check, not a criminal investigation. And, yes, I was quite the lawman, with numerous citations and commendations.

No one suggested that it was a court proceeding, CP. The point is that in order to get evidence of an accusation, an investigation has to be done, which means that an investigation makes a difference and is different than a "he said she said" case.

[oxmixmudd]

Spare us your self-righteous moralizing. You still haven't answered the question. How would YOU respond if you were falsely accused, and the allegations against you were as sketchy as Ford's? Liberals seem to think that Kavanaugh should have calmly and dispassionately rolled over while his name was drug though the mud. Is that really how you would respond under similar circumstances?

Once again I answered you, and once again you rejected the answer. I would hope my reputation would speak for ne and that my friends would believe me.

And no. I will not wait until I personally have attained perfection before I call out obvious evil. If we all did that, evil would prevail. So repent your evil deeds you sinner even if it is an ass that calls them out.

Jim

[Cow Poke]

No one suggested that it was a court proceeding, CP.

You said....

That's how the courts work.

This has nothing to do with the courts, or how they work.

[oxmixmudd]

Once again I answered you, and once again you rejected the answer. I would hope my reputation would speak for ne and that my friends would believe me.

And no. I will not wait until I personally have attained perfection before I call out obvious evil. If we all did that, evil would prevail. So repent your evil deeds you sinner even if it is an ass that calls them out.

Jim

I realize most will freak over my last line there. Just 'doubling down' as it were. And recognizing it applies as much to myself as anyone.

Jim

[JimL]

You said....



This has nothing to do with the courts, or how they work.

What I implied was that the courts depend upon evidence and though this is not a court/criminal proceeding, evidence is still necessary in order reach reasonable conclusions. In other words there is a difference between "he said, she said" testimony and corroborating evidence.

[Cow Poke]

What I implied was that the courts depend upon evidence and though this is not a court/criminal proceeding,

And the same rules do not apply.

evidence is still necessary in order reach reasonable conclusions.

Something Ford was seriously lacking, and she was allowed to make her case in full, followed by "nothing more to add", with her lawyers present.

[JimL]

And the same rules do not apply.



Something Ford was seriously lacking, and she was allowed to make her case in full, followed by "nothing more to add", with her lawyers present.

Ford can't corroborate her own testimony, CP, thats not how it works. There are a whole slew of people who want to speak to the FBI concerning both Dr. Ford and Judge Kavanaugh, not to mention D. Ramirez. The White House has apparently prevented the FBI from interviewing any of these people. That, if true, and it seems to be true, would make the investigation a political sham!

[One Bad Pig]

I realize most will freak over my last line there. Just 'doubling down' as it were. And recognizing it applies as much to myself as anyone.

Jim

The irony is thick, but you're being pretty consistent in that. Not freaking out any more, just disappointed.

[rogue06]

2) Being assaulted by someone with no corroborating evidence other than your word and your own sketchy memories is ALSO a nightmare. Likewise, in that sort of a circumstance, one can only rely on ones reputation and friends and hope they believe you.

It should not be overlooked that the lack of corroborating evidence could have easily been remedied multiple times in multiple ways.