Time To Smear Kavanaugh's Good Name...

[carpedm9587]

I have not seen the FBI investigation report. All I have is what the two sides have said about the report. At this point, the positions taken by the two sides are so obviously partisan, it doesn't give me enough information to come to any conclusion. As far as I know, the report was never made public. It would be helpful if it had been.

[One Bad Pig]

Leave it to Tassman to dispute the blindly obvious.

[oxmixmudd]

Leave it to Tassman to dispute the blindly obvious.

[retracted]

Jim

ETA: retracted means I posted a response to OBP and then fairly quickly realized had missed three words of Tassman, and thus was wrong. I added this comment in case the original form of my response had already been scarfed up into a pending response by another observer.

[Sparko]

You do not appear to be able to think rationally on this issue Sparko. I know you could not maintain this attitude if it was your wife or daughter or mother that was the one telling you some well liked person had assaulted them when they were much younger but they were to afraid to report it at the time.

But given the previous few responses, there is clearly nothing that can be gained from further discussion except to drive you further into the irrational rage that currently owns your reponses on this issue.


Jim

There is no rage. Just irony.

Yes, if my niece came up to me and told me she was attacked I would believe her, because I know her very well and know she would not lie about it. If my nephew was accused of attacking some girl and he denied it, I would believe him because I know him very well and know he would never do that.

But I don't know Ford. She could have some weird personality disorder, or have been attacked by someone else, or is a partisan activist who just wants to damage Kavanaugh. I have no reason to believe her without proof. I have no reason to believe Kavanaugh, except that the accused is innocent until proven guilty and she has not met the burden of proof.

On the other hand, the liberals are saying we should believe this woman because why would she lie? I can come up with a dozen reasons why she would lie, or just be wrong about it. If an accusation is enough to ruin someone's reputation or life then me saying she is a lying lunatic feminist hack should be enough evidence to condemn her, right? Unless she can prove differently. Why should the standard be any different for me making an accusation than her?

Yet when I said what I THINK might have happened, a personal opinion of mine, I am questioned and demanded to give evidence of why I think that.

Which ironically shows that you guys do believe in requiring sources and evidence for claims before accepting that claim, except when someone you like makes such a claim against someone you don't like, such as Ford/Kavanaugh. Then evidence be damned, the woman is telling the truth!

[Sparko]

where I have I responded to any post you made since saying you could have the last word?

Right there!

[Cow Poke]

I have not seen the FBI investigation report. All I have is what the two sides have said about the report. At this point, the positions taken by the two sides are so obviously partisan, it doesn't give me enough information to come to any conclusion. As far as I know, the report was never made public. It would be helpful if it had been.

The very fact that the Democrats didn't come away from having read the report screaming "SMOKING GUN" is quite instructive.

Instead, they came away grumbling about what was NOT in the report.

[Cow Poke]

It actually is - they declared from the time Kavanaugh's name was mentioned that he wasn't going to be confirmed.

It was the classic "let's Bork him", then we can pretend to go through the legitimate process.

[Sparko]

Will it come with an ear piece?

They stole my idea. Now I can sue!

[Sparko]

I am not surprised you came down on the side of Kavanaugh. I think I could have predicted that.

under our constitution everyone should have come down on the side of Kavanaugh lacking any evidence to prove otherwise. Even in civil cases we have the standard of a preponderance of evidence.

[Cow Poke]

I am not surprised you came down on the side of Kavanaugh. I think I could have predicted that.

That's what the bedrock principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' is all about. The liberals pretend this doesn't count unless it's an actual court case.

[Bill the Cat]

I am not surprised you came down on the side of Kavanaugh. I think I could have predicted that.

Well, the evidence presented and the circumstances were what they were. Predicting I would come down on the side of where the evidence led isn't rocket science. Good job.

[Bill the Cat]

Do you know Ford's general demeanor well enough to know that isn't her normal persona?

She spoke like a psychologist. I've no doubt that is her regular persona. That she sounded like a psychologist is what is most troubling. She knew how to act convincing. She hit all the cues. Appearance? Check. Demeanor? Check. Vulnerability? Check. And that's the problem. A rape victim typically does not say something is "'Indelible in the Hippocampus" and then go on to describe brain chemistry. That's attempting to sound credible as a professional. It was rehearsed.

I personally know several very intelligent and successful women in their careers that present a very similar demeanor when stressed or sometimes just in everyday conversation. It's just who they are.

And I've known several victims of sexual assault, including myself. NONE act like she acted when describing the event. They know who, what, when, and where. in GREAT detail.

What evidence do you have other than your own disdain for her that you are correct in your assessment this aspect of her testimony was false?

I didn't have any disdain for her until I listened to her testimony. It was as fake as a $3 bill, and blatantly, obviously so.

[Cow Poke]

What evidence do you have other than your own disdain for her that you are correct in your assessment this aspect of her testimony was false?

Jim, this is really unfair. I, for one, didn't believe her, but there was no "disdain" whatsoever. I actually felt sorry for her for what she was allowing the Democrat smear machine to do to her.

[Sparko]

Yeah girls don't lie about sexual assault...

Five high school 'mean girls' targeted boy with false accusations of sexual assault, lawsuit claimshttps://www.foxnews.com/us/five-high...lawsuit-claims

[carpedm9587]

under our constitution everyone should have come down on the side of Kavanaugh lacking any evidence to prove otherwise. Even in civil cases we have the standard of a preponderance of evidence.

No. First of all, this is not a court of law or a trial. It is more of a job interview. The constitution does not protect anyone's right to have a seat on SCOTUS. If there is any cause to question the suitability of the candidate, the Senate is within its rights not to confirm. In this case, an accusation was brought, and needed to be considered as part of the process. Personally, I do not think there was enough evidence provided to determine "what happened," so I would not endorse denying Kavanaugh the seat on the basis of the accusations. But I found Kavanaugh's handling of the situation to be unsettling. Had I been in the Senate, I would have voted against confirmation solely on the basis of his response to the allegations and the other questions that came up about his character.

Second, the is a difference between "supporting the confirmation of Kavanaugh" and "coming down on the side of Kavanaugh." I can support the former without doing the latter. BTC called Ford a liar. He has no basis for that claim, and has clearly taken sides that align with his political views. It is that dynamic that I was referencing.