Time To Smear Kavanaugh's Good Name...

[Starlight]

So how many allegations does it take before people begin to consider the possibility that there may be an issue here...?

There's also the claims that Kavanaugh was not innocent with regard to his friend/mentor Judge Alex Kozinski's sexual harrassment within their workplace, and the claim that Judge Kavanaugh made his own female clerk hiring decisions on the basis of their looks.

[lilpixieofterror]

So how many allegations does it take before people begin to consider the possibility that there may be an issue here...?

[Starlight]

All it takes is one credible, independently corroborated accusation. Let me know when that happens.

The three main accusations have all had various levels of independent corroboration provided from other sources.

If your level of required corroboration is eyewitness testimony from a person in the room at the time, perhaps the standard you're setting is too high? This is a job interview process not a law court. The standard isn't "proof beyond reasonably doubt" it's "is there anything shady about this guy that means we shouldn't hire him and should instead go to the next person on our list?"

[Mountain Man]

Number four:

Senate probing new allegation of misconduct against Kavanaugh

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/sup...anaugh-n913581

This latest one is just as sketchy as the rest, with an anonymous accuser, unnamed witnesses, and no specific details like a date or location. Do liberals really believe this crap?

[lilpixieofterror]

All it takes is one credible, independently corroborated accusation. Let me know when that happens.

[Terraceth]

So how many allegations does it take before people begin to consider the possibility that there may be an issue here...?

The number of allegations is not particularly relevant, what is relevant is how credible they are. And the proper way to figure that out is through actual testimony of the accusers and anyone who might have been a witness or had some other kind of insight into that. That has not happened yet (although Ford is giving hers shortly), so the credibility has yet to be determined.

[Mountain Man]

The three main accusations have all had various levels of independent corroboration provided from other sources.

If your level of required corroboration is eyewitness testimony from a person in the room at the time, perhaps the standard you're setting is too high? This is a job interview process not a law court. The standard isn't "proof beyond reasonably doubt" it's "is there anything shady about this guy that means we shouldn't hire him and should instead go to the next person on our list?"

I have to assume you're trolling again. When the accusers' own named witnesses deny the charges, that's pretty much an open and shut "not guilty" verdict.

[Cow Poke]

There's also the claims that Kavanaugh was not innocent with regard to his friend/mentor Judge Alex Kozinski's sexual harrassment within their workplace, and the claim that Judge Kavanaugh made his own female clerk hiring decisions on the basis of their looks.

There's also the charge that you're nuttier than Post Toasties a fruitcake, but there's actually lots of evidence on this board for that.




(don't know if Post Toasties are nutty or nice)

[Cow Poke]

This latest one is just as sketchy as the rest, with an anonymous accuser, unnamed witnesses, and no specific details like a date or location. Do liberals really believe this crap?

They don't care, as long as their followers do.

[Mountain Man]

The number of allegations is not particularly relevant, what is relevant is how credible they are. And the proper way to figure that out is through actual testimony of the accusers and anyone who might have been a witness or had some other kind of insight into that. That has not happened yet (although Ford is giving hers shortly), so the credibility has yet to be determined.

As I understand it, the witnesses that Ford herself named have already signed legal affidavits saying that the incident as described by Ford never happened. Ford has literally nothing to substantiate her accusation other than hazy and contradictory recollections over three-decades later. Under any other circumstance, this case would be dismissed before even going to trial.

[Mountain Man]

They don't care, as long as their followers do.

What would they be saying if it was their own loved one?

"Sorry, Dad, I know there is no reason to believe the accusations and every reason to doubt them, but I assume you're guilty anyway. Better luck next time! "

[RumTumTugger]

So how many allegations does it take before people begin to consider the possibility that there may be an issue here...?

you should be asking yourself this, Carpe. How many unsubstantiated allegations does it take till people begin to consider the possibility that the there is something fishy about this coming out now?

[carpedm9587]

All it takes is one credible, independently corroborated accusation. Let me know when that happens.

I suspect no allegation will be seen as credible or independently corroborated by the right - and they will all be seen as credible and independently corroborated by the left...

...and so it goes...

[carpedm9587]

From where I sit - both sides seem to have an axe to grind...

[carpedm9587]

The number of allegations is not particularly relevant, what is relevant is how credible they are. And the proper way to figure that out is through actual testimony of the accusers and anyone who might have been a witness or had some other kind of insight into that. That has not happened yet (although Ford is giving hers shortly), so the credibility has yet to be determined.

That's about as neutral a response as I've seen thus far. So kudos to you for making it.