Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Time To Smear Kavanaugh's Good Name...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
    The FBI investigation was widely regarded as “incomplete”, i.e. it was not a thorough investigation with many of the witnesses who were willing to come forward not being interviewed. This was a disservice to both sides and will leave a cloud over Kavanaugh for the rest of his career.
    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 ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

    I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
      Even if this is true, and it’s not....
      Leave it to Tassman to dispute the blindly obvious.
      Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

      Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
      sigpic
      I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

      Comment


      • Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
        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.
        Last edited by oxmixmudd; 10-10-2018, 08:34 AM.
        My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

        If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

        This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

        Comment


        • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
          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!

          Last edited by Sparko; 10-10-2018, 09:51 AM.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
            where I have I responded to any post you made since saying you could have the last word?
            Right there!

            Comment


            • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
              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.
              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                Even if this is true, and it’s not,...,
                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.
                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by NorrinRadd View Post
                  Will it come with an ear piece?

                  They stole my idea. Now I can sue!

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                    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.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                      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.
                      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by carpedm9587 View Post
                        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.
                        That's what
                        - She

                        Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                        - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                        I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                        - Stephen R. Donaldson

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                          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.
                          That's what
                          - She

                          Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                          - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                          I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                          - Stephen R. Donaldson

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by oxmixmudd View Post
                            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.
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


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

                              Five high school 'mean girls' targeted boy with false accusations of sexual assault, lawsuit claims

                              A group of five high school “mean girls” in Pennsylvania confessed to targeting a boy with false sexual assault allegations just because they “don’t like him.”

                              The boy’s parents, Michael J. and Alicia Flood, have launched a lawsuit seeking unspecified damages, claiming the girls at Seneca Valley High School in Pittsburgh “conspired in person and via electronic communication devices to falsely accuse [their son] of sexual assault on two occasions.”

                              The parents dubbed the group “mean girls” in reference to the 2004 cult classic of a high school clique starring Lindsay Lohan. They are suing the girls' parents, the school district and the Butler County District Attorney's office.
                              ...
                              The first girl accused the boy of assaulting her in July 2017 at the swimming pool. Another girl, named as Megan Villegas, the only one named in the suit because the others are minors, said she was present during the assault.

                              But the first girl later admitted making up the allegations, saying “I just don’t like him.”

                              She allegedly justified her decision to fabricate the allegations during a recorded interview with school officials that was obtained by Fishman. “I just don’t like to hear him talk. … I don’t like to look at him.”

                              The boy was charged with indecent assault and two counts of harassment. He pleaded not guilty, but was put on probation.

                              In October 2017, the same girl who accused him of sexual assault allegedly told her fellow classmates that she would “do anything to get [the boy] expelled.” This led to a bullying campaign by other students against him. In one example provided by the lawsuit, someone taped a word “PREDATOR” on the student’s back during a choir practice.

                              The male student was hit with another accusation of sexual assault in March. A friend of the first girl told a school official that he sexually assaulted her at her home. The allegations were backed up by two other girls.

                              This led to the male teen getting charged with indecent assault, criminal trespass and simple assault in April. He was reportedly arrested at the school and spent nine days in a detention center after being deemed a threat to the community.

                              Just a month later, the three girls recanted their allegations and admitted lying about the sexual assault.
                              ...
                              “Once the allegations were proven false, they really didn't care one bit about [the boy] and there has been absolutely no repercussions against the girls,” he added.

                              https://www.foxnews.com/us/five-high...lawsuit-claims

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                                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.
                                The ultimate weakness of violence is that it is a descending spiral begetting the very thing it seeks to destroy...returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars. Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. Martin Luther King

                                I would unite with anybody to do right and with nobody to do wrong. Frederick Douglas

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                6 responses
                                45 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                42 responses
                                231 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                24 responses
                                104 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                32 responses
                                176 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                73 responses
                                299 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X