Author Topic: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings-Congrats Justice Kavanaugh  (Read 71356 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings-Congrats Justice Kavanaugh
« Reply #2190 on: September 17, 2019, 04:04:55 PM »

Offline Vermont Green

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4598
  • Tommy Points: 384
Quote
Kavanaugh at the very least lied under oath about some ugly college shenanigans.

Proof?

You read that whole post and that is what you are focused on.  Does that imply that you agree with the rest of the points made in the post?

You ask about proof.  I don't think the question is whether there is proof or not but rather is there sufficient proof or evidence.  Everyone's threshold for "sufficient" is different largely depending on your politics.

I ask anyone, do you think Kavanaugh told "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" based on the evidence that was seen and heard publicly?  I sure don't.  I wouldn't be able to win the case in criminal court but maybe civil.

 First, civil cases require a preponderance of evidence. Here, there is no evidence establishing guilt. Zero. Just a couple of stories, one where the story teller wasn’t confident that Kavanaugh  was involved, the second where the storyteller has repeatedly changed her story, and which her best friend has rejected.

Evidence, proof, corroboration, consistency. These things matter. There’s an objective truth.  When there is absolutely no evidence of something, some may choose to believe it anyway. That is called “faith”, which is generally not how decisions should be made.

I disagree that there is no evidence.  There was the Ford testimony and corroboration based on therapists notes or something like that.  Then there was Kavanaugh's testimony.  I am not a lawyer but I think if a civil case came down to believing Ford or Kavanaugh, it could certainly go either way.  You clearly believe Kavanaugh and will continue to believe him unless I assume there is additional evidence.  Based on your track record of comments here, I suspect it would take a lot of evidence before you would accept that Kavanaugh is lying.  I believe based on what I have seen, read, heard, that it is more likely than not that he is lying.  You believe he is being 100% fully truthful.  So there we are.

The therapist notes were years later, told a different story than Ford told publicly and didn’t name Kavanaugh. Ford also refused to allow anybody to actually see those notes, so we don’t know if she contradicted herself further, etc.

And, it’s not just Kavanaugh’s word versus Ford’s. Kavanaugh’s whereabouts could be verified for most of that summer. Every person allegedly at the party has denied any recollection, including  Ford’s best friend. That friend told reporters she didn’t remember, but  “challenged” Ford and stated “I don’t have any confidence in the story,”. Ford’s lawyer indicated that at least part of Ford’s motive was to discredit Kavanaugh on Roe v. Wade.

I suspect that if roles were reversed, with a liberal Justice nominated and accused by a far-right political activist who kept changing her story, your sympathies would be with the accused. That’s why due process requires evidence, rather than choosing sides based upon sympathy and ideology.

I don't believe that Kavanaugh was entirely truthful (meaning he lied some).  I believe that if the FBI had done full investigation, some evidence of his lying could have been produced.  Probably not sufficient to "convict" him though.  Apparently you fully believe Kavanaugh, every word of his testimony the truth, whole truth....

I guess my more specific question to you is based on what you have seen and heard, do you really fully believe all of his testimony or do you just believe that there is not absolute proof that he lied (two very different things).  In the case of Ford, you have to believe she made the whole thing up or is somehow confused about it or you have to believe that Kavanaugh is lying about it.  This is not black and white but it does have to be one or the other.  I don't feel that just because I believe Ford and don't fully believe Kavanaugh, that it means I am necessarily partisan.

I believed Anita Hill.  I believe Bill Clinton was a womanizer.  I don't believe anything Trump says.  I believe that sometimes the media gets some stories wrong but is accurate albeit not always complete.  You can't wait for everything to be settle in court.  You have to make judgments on many of the things that are out there.  Most Americans these days believe the narrative that suits their politics.

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings-Congrats Justice Kavanaugh
« Reply #2191 on: September 17, 2019, 04:41:21 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 39380
  • Tommy Points: -27334
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Quote
I guess my more specific question to you is based on what you have seen and heard, do you really fully believe all of his testimony or do you just believe that there is not absolute proof that he lied (two very different things).

I don’t believe Ford. I think she and her team lied, misled, or were inconsistent on a lot of small things. That, coupled with her best friend not believing her and her father supporting Kavanaugh, and the fact that neighbors and friends describe her as a political activist make me doubt her. The fact that this allegation was available for months, but wasn’t released until all testimony was closed and a vote was pending, tells me that she allowed herself to be used by the Democrat party.  Her goal in protecting Roe v. Wade, in addition to her scrubbing her social media, are all hits on her credibility.

I actually find Ramirez to be more credible. Her initial story was that she was really drunk, and wasn’t sure it was Kavanaugh. 30 years later, I can buy that. People get stories mixed up, they misremember, they exaggerate. I think the flashing / thrusting story could have happened, because I believe that Kavanaugh was a binge drinker at Yale.

I basically believe Kavanaugh, and don’t think he committed perjury. I think he deflected, and I think he downplayed things. Maybe he even blocked (or blacked) out some stuff that was inappropriate. But, I think his relevant testimony is that he drank too much, did dumb things, but didn’t sexually assault anybody.  I think that’s fair.

 But, I think that in evaluating people, I would have a hard time without some evidence. Not so much in terms of my personal feelings towards somebody. There are plenty of people I dislike just based upon hearsay, etc. But regarding, say, a politically reversed version of this case?  I feel like I would be supportive of the nomination.  (In the past 40 years of supreme court nomination’s, I can’t think of a nominee that I outright was opposed to other than Harriet Myers. That includes the nominations of RBG, Kagan , Sotomayor and Breyer. I think that Sotomayor relies too much upon identity in judging, and I don’t really respect their judicial philosophies, but they all should have been confirmed.)
Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings-Congrats Justice Kavanaugh
« Reply #2192 on: September 17, 2019, 04:42:05 PM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17891
  • Tommy Points: 1178
Quote
What are you talking about? In at least two of these cases the victim eventually elected to come forward (Ford and Ramirez, tho Ford was initially anonymous). Nobody on the democratic side "made" them do anything. And sure, guys like Avanti are scum bags but conflating his with all democrats is disingenuous at best.

The sad thing is this women did not want to be interviewed but they still weaponized her story and took advantage of her.   The journalist and his editor ought to be canned for putting this out there.  That is what I think is the worst thing about this matter.  Avanti is a democrat, the reporter who published this last bit of falsehood is trying to sell a book and a democrat working for a democrat leaning paper.   They are using these women and even put forth people who had claims that had zero evidence.  Perhaps your not aware a former Clinton Lawyer was behind this last one.    You can get on your soapbox all you want, and I should not lump all dems together.   Sorry.   But I ask you who are the folks that fell for this latest story and put it forth here basically compounding the misinformation.   That is right guys who lean left.......Checkmate.


Quote
At least the democrats aren't pretending that one guy (Bill Clinton) was 100% a pedophile and rapist while giving a pass to another guy with just as checkered a past regarding sexual assault towards women, with similar ties to Epstein.

It's terrible that Pres Trump had ties to him and if he did anything wrong he should pay for it..   But using Clinton in your argument is something I would caution because he flew on the Lolita what 27 times?

Quote
Former President Bill Clinton claimed that he took four trips, accompanied by the Secret Service, on billionaire sex offender Jeffrey Epstein's "Lolita Express" private airplane, but flight manifests reveal at least six separate journeys, two of which were without Secret Service agents.

The two trips not acknowledged by Clinton were from Miami, Florida, to Westchester, New York, in early February 2002, which appears to be the first time that Clinton joined Epstein, and a trip in Asia.

One May 2002 Asian trip, without Secret Service agents, included stops in Japan, Hong Kong, China, Thailand, and Brunei. The other, in November 2003, with Secret Service agents, included stops in Norway, Siberia, Hong Kong, and China.

Another divergence from Clinton's account is that the manifests show no Secret Service agents were present for one of the former president's Africa trips with Epstein.

The discrepancies between Clinton's claims and the flight manifests draw the former president deeper into the Epstein scandal. Epstein has also been associated with Prince Andrew and President Trump, a fellow resident of Palm Beach, Florida. Trump reportedly flew with Epstein and in 2002 described him as a "terrific guy," adding: "He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side."

But a Washington Examiner review of flight manifest records contradicts these claims. It shows Clinton took 27 flights on Epstein’s private jet during at least six different trips.

If you want to read the logs there are here and this is where the qoute is from.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/flight-manifests-reveal-bill-clinton-traveled-with-epstein-six-times-not-the-four-times-he-admitted

Now let's be brutally honest the media did not report this Clinton stuff, they possibly did not want to end with dead  JK  But more likely that they have a narrative they want to feed to people craving anything negative on Pres. Trump.

At the end of the day it is disgraceful either of these men had anything to do with Epstein who was a known pedophile

Quote
I don’t believe Ford. I think she and her team lied, misled, or were inconsistent on a lot of small things

She changed her story quite a bit.


https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/10/03/christine-blasey-ford-changing-memories-not-credible-kavanaugh-column/1497661002/


Quote
    "Dr. Ford has not offered a consistent account of when the alleged assault happened," describing how it has varied from "mid 1980s" to "early 1980s" to the summer of 1982. Mitchell also notes, "Her August 7 statement to the polygrapher said that it happened one 'high school summer in early 80’s,' but she crossed out the word “early” for reasons she did not explain."
    "Dr. Ford has struggled to identify Judge Kavanaugh as the assailant by name"
— noting that it took over 30 years, at best, if true that she told her husband his name several years ago.
    "Dr. Ford has no memory of key details of the night in question — details that could help corroborate her account." Mitchell notes that she doesn't know the time or place of the incident; she doesn't remember how she got to the party or how she got home. The latter point is significant, given that by Ford's account she was driven home and that the country club that was apparently near the house is a 20 minute drive away. "Given that this all took place before cell phones, arranging a ride home would not have been easy," Mitchell wrote. "Indeed, she stated that she ran out of the house after coming downstairs and did not state that she made a phone call from the house before she did, or that she called anyone else thereafter."
    "Dr. Ford’s account of the alleged assault has not been corroborated by anyone she identified as having attended — including her lifelong friend."
    "Dr. Ford has not offered a consistent account of the alleged assault" — among other things, her accounts about the number of people at the party and whether she could hear conversations varied.
    "Dr. Ford has struggled to recall important recent events relating to her allegations, and her testimony regarding recent events raises further questions about her memory." This is, perhaps, the most [dang]ing of all. Her patchy memory from 36 years ago could be chalked up to the odd way that trauma affects individuals, allowing her to recall certain details with confidence while forgetting others. But her failure to recall significant details of interactions that happened over the past few weeks or months is [dang]ing. For instance, "Dr. Ford could not remember if she showed a full or partial set of therapy notes to the Washington Post reporter." She also "does not remember if she actually had a copy of the notes" when she texted the Washington Post. The notes, which are touted as the single piece of documentary evidence of her previously describing the assault, were not turned over to the committee. She also could not recall whether the polygraph occurred on the day of her grandmother's funeral.
    In addition, "She claimed originally that she wished for her story to remain confidential, but the person operating the tipline at the Washington Post was the first person other than her therapist or husband to whom she disclosed the identity of her alleged attacker. She testified that she had a 'sense of urgency to relay the information to the Senate and the president.' She did not contact the Senate, however, because she claims she 'did not know how to do that.' She does not explain why she knew how to contact her congresswoman but not her senator."
    Mitchell also provides a detailed timeline of how she made the allegations, displaying that

( AND WAIT FOR IT)
"The activities of congressional Democrats and Dr. Ford’s attorneys likely affected Dr. Ford’s account."

But she dropped her case and got  some gofund me to the tune of about $650,000 .  There was also one for an endowment in her name that was over 120K

https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-christine-blasey-ford

Now she had over 800k in the one I linked above so she had spent some of that money

And from today from Dr. Fprd's friend:

Quote
A high school friend of Brett Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford said she’s skeptical of Ford’s accusing the Supreme Court justice of sexually assaulting her during a party in the 1980s.

“I don’t have any confidence in the story,” Leland Keyser told two New York Times reporters in their book “The Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation.”

https://nypost.com/2019/09/17/christine-blasey-fords-friend-now-says-shes-skeptical-of-kavanaugh-accusation/
« Last Edit: September 17, 2019, 05:08:50 PM by Celtics4ever »

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings-Congrats Justice Kavanaugh
« Reply #2193 on: September 17, 2019, 08:24:22 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 39380
  • Tommy Points: -27334
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
To those who actually care about justice, this is how Ford's best friend / lifelong support was treated when she denied remembering the alleged party:

Quote
The authors also acknowledge what had previously been reported in “Justice on Trial,” about the efforts of mutual friends to get her to change her testimony to be more supportive of Blasey Ford. The reporters say that some of Blasey Ford’s friends “had grown frustrated with Keyser. Her comments about the alleged Kavanaugh incident had been too limited, some of them felt, and did not help their friend’s case. Surely, given what a close friend Keyser had been, she could say more to substantiate Ford’s testimony and general veracity, even if she could not corroborate Ford’s more specific memories.”

A group text was formed in which friends such as Cheryl Amitay and Lulu Gonella discussed how to get her to say something more helpful to the cause. An unnamed man on the text suggested that they defame her as an addict. Keyser has been in recovery for some time, as her friends know and as has previously been reported.

Amitay answered, “Leland is a major stumbling block.” While asserting she didn’t want her to make anything up out of whole cloth, she offered ideas for things that could sound supportive of Ford’s story, such as that she’d been in similar situations with Blasey Ford that summer.

“I was told behind the scenes that certain things could be spread about me if I didn’t comply,” Keyser told the reporters, a stunning admission of the pressure to which she was subjected to by Blasey Ford’s allies.

As previously reported in “Justice on Trial,” Keyser continues to think about the story in which she was supposed to have played a part. She has both “logistical and character-driven” problems with it. Focusing on one of the angles that many women had trouble believing, she says, “It would be impossible for me to be the only girl at a get-together with three guys, have her leave, and then not figure out how she’s going to get home.”

The authors previously note that Blasey Ford suggested that Keyser might have driven her home, which they do not note is a change from her claim that she does not know how she got home. Keyser also reflects that the get-togethers of their youth were not like the one Ford described. She adds, “I just really didn’t have confidence in the story.”

Standing up to the pressure campaign to tell the truth was difficult, the reporters acknowledge. They note she had a framed copy of a magazine that bore the headline, “Was Leland Keyser the Hero of the Kavanaugh Controversy?” A GoFundMe account set up by her son says, “Despite her lifelong friendship with Christine Blasey Ford and her opposition to Brett Kavanaugh’s nomination, Keyser resisted immense personal pressure and courageously came forward with the truth, putting everything in her life at risk. As a result, she faces great personal hardship. The harsh glare of the public eye has taken a tremendous physical, emotional, and financial toll on her.”

Or, as (left-leaning) CBS News described it:

Quote
We report tonight the real bombshell: Christine Ford’s close HS friend (who Ford says was at the party when Kavanaugh allegedly assaulted her) said Ford’s story is not believable and told the FBI Ford’s allies pressured her, threatened her with a smear campaign to say otherwise

Quote
Now, all four people that Ford identified as being at that high school party in the summer of 1982 have all said that no such party occurred. And today, both the Republican chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee and the Democratic chair of the House Judiciary Committee said they would not support impeaching Kavanaugh.

A lifelong friend is threatened and smeared because she won't fabricate corroboration.  And yet, we're supposed to believe that publicly lying is beyond the pale? 
« Last Edit: September 17, 2019, 08:31:33 PM by Roy H. »
Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings-Congrats Justice Kavanaugh
« Reply #2194 on: September 18, 2019, 12:25:33 AM »

Offline 86MaxwellSmart

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2523
  • Tommy Points: 258
if there was one shred of credible evidence I bet most in the GOP would demand he step down.   
You must be joking.  GOP would turn as much of a blind eye to it as they have for everything Trump as done, even more so than Trump since Kavanaugh gives them that precious lifetime conservative vote on the SC.

I guess we’ll never know, since there’s no actual evidence.

We do know that Democrats,the media, the National Organization Of Women, and plenty of others actively supported a probable rapist (who we now learn is also possibly a pedophile) and definite sexual harasser and perjurer, and then supported that probable rapist’s wife (and accessory after the fact) in her candidacy.

Yup.
Larry Bird was Greater than you think.

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings-Congrats Justice Kavanaugh
« Reply #2195 on: September 18, 2019, 12:32:31 AM »

Offline 86MaxwellSmart

  • Jim Loscutoff
  • **
  • Posts: 2523
  • Tommy Points: 258
dems continuing to try to railroad an innocent and falsely accused man is another major reason trump will likely win in 2020. imagine if that clown show worked, what type of methods would be employed in the future to do away with political enemies? this approach will never be popular with the american people

Too bad most of our friends on this BB forum can't see the actual truth. Blinded by hatred of a man so slandered by the Lame Stream Media.... I didn't vote for Trump in 2016...but I most certainly will in 2020....maybe even 2024...haha.  RBG is gonna be gone soon and Trump gets to nominate another SC Judge....Blood will be spilled in the streets by the left wing Lunatics when this happens.
Larry Bird was Greater than you think.

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings-Congrats Justice Kavanaugh
« Reply #2196 on: September 18, 2019, 03:07:23 AM »

Online Neurotic Guy

  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14832
  • Tommy Points: 1606
if there was one shred of credible evidence I bet most in the GOP would demand he step down.   
You must be joking.  GOP would turn as much of a blind eye to it as they have for everything Trump as done, even more so than Trump since Kavanaugh gives them that precious lifetime conservative vote on the SC.

I guess we’ll never know, since there’s no actual evidence.

We do know that Democrats,the media, the National Organization Of Women, and plenty of others actively supported a probable rapist (who we now learn is also possibly a pedophile) and definite sexual harasser and perjurer, and then supported that probable rapist’s wife (and accessory after the fact) in her candidacy.

Yup.

Bill Clinton is (should be considered) a national embarrassment to Dems and he really isn’t. But it is more than 20 years since he was elected, before I owned a computer or a cell phone or had cable TV.  It was a different world and I do hope Dems wouldn’t look past his crimes and indiscretions today (but maybe they would).  Calling Hillary an accessory after the fact may be true (your bias influences your certainty on Ford and Hillary in different directions), but I’ll be honest — as a person who voted for John Kasich in the primary and thought Hillary was a terrible choice — I still believe she is morally superior to the man in the White House today.   Many Dems embarrassingly still turn a blind eye to Bill, but they did turn quickly on Al Franken (as one example) which hopefully reflects an updated willingness to put party behind decency where it belongs. 

That said, moral high ground is owned by neither party and I think it’s folly for either side to claim it — even though the ledger may seem to lean one way or the other depending on your viewpoint or information source.  Let’s hope that moving forward that neither side will rationalize reprehensible behavior.  We can start by defeating our current national disgrace.

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings-Congrats Justice Kavanaugh
« Reply #2197 on: September 18, 2019, 03:46:27 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 39380
  • Tommy Points: -27334
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Quote
After delivering a speech on the 2018 Supreme Court term and the late former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, Ginsburg participated in a question-and-answer session with Duke Law professor Neil Siegel at an event for prospective law students held by Duke University.

Siegel at one point said "nominees for the Supreme Court are not chosen primarily anymore for independence, legal ability, [and] personal decency, and I wonder if that's a loss for all of us."

Ginsburg replied by defending Kavanaugh and her other relatively new colleague, Justice Neil Gorsuch, according to the National Review.

"My two newest colleagues are very decent, very smart individuals," Ginsburg said.

Ginsburg said the confirmation process for both of her new colleagues, who were nominated by President Donald Trump, was far too divisive. She said that despite the fact she was a "flaming feminist" when nominated to the Supreme Court in 1993, she was confirmed by a 96-3 vote and the process was much smoother.


Ginsburg expressed hope that "patriots on both sides of the aisle" step up and reject the "dysfunction" surrounding confirmations moving forward.

I agree with her. Recent confirmation votes have been way too partisan. It’s a shame that so many Senators have voted against brilliant jurists like Bork, Alito, Rehnquist and Gorsuch, and that Garland didn’t even get a vote.
Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings-Congrats Justice Kavanaugh
« Reply #2198 on: September 18, 2019, 05:37:29 PM »

Offline matteo

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1230
  • Tommy Points: 123
if there was one shred of credible evidence I bet most in the GOP would demand he step down.   
You must be joking.  GOP would turn as much of a blind eye to it as they have for everything Trump as done, even more so than Trump since Kavanaugh gives them that precious lifetime conservative vote on the SC.

I guess we’ll never know, since there’s no actual evidence.

We do know that Democrats,the media, the National Organization Of Women, and plenty of others actively supported a probable rapist (who we now learn is also possibly a pedophile) and definite sexual harasser and perjurer, and then supported that probable rapist’s wife (and accessory after the fact) in her candidacy.

Yup.

Bill Clinton is (should be considered) a national embarrassment to Dems and he really isn’t. But it is more than 20 years since he was elected, before I owned a computer or a cell phone or had cable TV.  It was a different world and I do hope Dems wouldn’t look past his crimes and indiscretions today (but maybe they would).  Calling Hillary an accessory after the fact may be true (your bias influences your certainty on Ford and Hillary in different directions), but I’ll be honest — as a person who voted for John Kasich in the primary and thought Hillary was a terrible choice — I still believe she is morally superior to the man in the White House today.   Many Dems embarrassingly still turn a blind eye to Bill, but they did turn quickly on Al Franken (as one example) which hopefully reflects an updated willingness to put party behind decency where it belongs. 

That said, moral high ground is owned by neither party and I think it’s folly for either side to claim it — even though the ledger may seem to lean one way or the other depending on your viewpoint or information source.  Let’s hope that moving forward that neither side will rationalize reprehensible behavior.  We can start by defeating our current national disgrace.



Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings-Congrats Justice Kavanaugh
« Reply #2199 on: September 19, 2019, 05:40:57 AM »

Offline Celtics4ever

  • Kevin Garnett
  • *****************
  • Posts: 17891
  • Tommy Points: 1178
Quote
That said, moral high ground is owned by neither party and I think it’s folly for either side to claim it — even though the ledger may seem to lean one way or the other depending on your viewpoint or information source.  Let’s hope that moving forward that neither side will rationalize reprehensible behavior.   

TP!

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings-Congrats Justice Kavanaugh
« Reply #2200 on: September 19, 2019, 01:38:02 PM »

Offline mmmmm

  • Antoine Walker
  • ****
  • Posts: 4181
  • Tommy Points: 697
Quote
Kavanaugh at the very least lied under oath about some ugly college shenanigans.

Proof?

You read that whole post and that is what you are focused on.  Does that imply that you agree with the rest of the points made in the post?

You ask about proof.  I don't think the question is whether there is proof or not but rather is there sufficient proof or evidence.  Everyone's threshold for "sufficient" is different largely depending on your politics.

I ask anyone, do you think Kavanaugh told "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" based on the evidence that was seen and heard publicly?  I sure don't.  I wouldn't be able to win the case in criminal court but maybe civil.

 First, civil cases require a preponderance of evidence. Here, there is no evidence establishing guilt. Zero. Just a couple of stories, one where the story teller wasn’t confident that Kavanaugh  was involved, the second where the storyteller has repeatedly changed her story, and which her best friend has rejected.

Evidence, proof, corroboration, consistency. These things matter. There’s an objective truth.  When there is absolutely no evidence of something, some may choose to believe it anyway. That is called “faith”, which is generally not how decisions should be made.

Well, if you are only going to accept as evidence the information that was allowed to be presented in the Senate testimony and discard everything else that has been reported by multiple sources, I guess you can assert that the "preponderance" level has not been met.   But you are no less relying on faith to reach your conclusion when you are putting your faith in the GOP-led committee's careful culling and refusal to allow a full investigation and vetting.

Refusal to see evidence is blind faith after all.
NBA Officiating - Corrupt?  Incompetent?  Which is worse?  Does it matter?  It sucks.

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings-Congrats Justice Kavanaugh
« Reply #2201 on: September 19, 2019, 01:47:48 PM »

Offline dannyboy35

  • Bill Walton
  • *
  • Posts: 1094
  • Tommy Points: 52
I’m a lefty on about every issue but I was disgusted the way Democrat’s acted. I met very few that didn't (in their own mind) KNOW he committed an assault. I also have no faith they’d feel very bad if Blasey-Ford came out today and admitted it was a lie. They’d blame her and take no responsibility. I don’t like Trump but ************ is so real. It’s disgusting. The same people are the ones that would refuse to serve a Sara Sanders in a restaraunt.
« Last Edit: September 19, 2019, 02:20:24 PM by nickagneta »

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings-Congrats Justice Kavanaugh
« Reply #2202 on: September 19, 2019, 02:09:08 PM »

Offline slamtheking

  • Robert Parish
  • *********************
  • Posts: 21291
  • Tommy Points: 9140
I’m a lefty on about every issue but I was disgusted the way Democrat’s acted. I met very few that didn't (in their own mind) KNOW he committed an assault. I also have no faith they’d feel very bad if Blasey-Ford came out today and admitted it was a lie. They’d blame her and take no responsibility. I don’t like Trump but ************ is so real. It’s disgusting. The same people are the ones that would refuse to serve a Sara Sanders in a restaraunt.
I actually don't have a problem with that in regards to the people in his administration.  they're not serving the country (or just serving a select group only) nor listening to or dealing with public dissent.   refusing to serve them at a restaurant is a very minor way to get their attention on this.

having said that, I'd feel completely differently about anyone serving in any prior administration being treated that way. 
« Last Edit: September 19, 2019, 02:20:01 PM by nickagneta »

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings-Congrats Justice Kavanaugh
« Reply #2203 on: September 19, 2019, 02:19:11 PM »

Online nickagneta

  • Global Moderator
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 38460
  • Tommy Points: 6212
I’m a lefty on about every issue but I was disgusted the way Democrat’s acted. I met very few that didn't (in their own mind) KNOW he committed an assault. I also have no faith they’d feel very bad if Blasey-Ford came out today and admitted it was a lie. They’d blame her and take no responsibility. I don’t like Trump but **********" is so real. It’s disgusting. The same people are the ones that would refuse to serve a Sara Sanders in a restaraunt.
Making up a medical condition to explain people's dislike of Trump is insulting to those people. Do not use that here.

Re: Justice Kennedy retiring-Kavanaugh procedings-Congrats Justice Kavanaugh
« Reply #2204 on: September 19, 2019, 03:00:25 PM »

Online Roy H.

  • Forums Manager
  • James Naismith
  • *********************************
  • Posts: 39380
  • Tommy Points: -27334
  • 33,333 posts and counting . . .
Quote
Kavanaugh at the very least lied under oath about some ugly college shenanigans.

Proof?

You read that whole post and that is what you are focused on.  Does that imply that you agree with the rest of the points made in the post?

You ask about proof.  I don't think the question is whether there is proof or not but rather is there sufficient proof or evidence.  Everyone's threshold for "sufficient" is different largely depending on your politics.

I ask anyone, do you think Kavanaugh told "the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" based on the evidence that was seen and heard publicly?  I sure don't.  I wouldn't be able to win the case in criminal court but maybe civil.

 First, civil cases require a preponderance of evidence. Here, there is no evidence establishing guilt. Zero. Just a couple of stories, one where the story teller wasn’t confident that Kavanaugh  was involved, the second where the storyteller has repeatedly changed her story, and which her best friend has rejected.

Evidence, proof, corroboration, consistency. These things matter. There’s an objective truth.  When there is absolutely no evidence of something, some may choose to believe it anyway. That is called “faith”, which is generally not how decisions should be made.

Well, if you are only going to accept as evidence the information that was allowed to be presented in the Senate testimony and discard everything else that has been reported by multiple sources, I guess you can assert that the "preponderance" level has not been met.   But you are no less relying on faith to reach your conclusion when you are putting your faith in the GOP-led committee's careful culling and refusal to allow a full investigation and vetting.

Refusal to see evidence is blind faith after all.

I have considered all of the evidence that is publicly available. What evidence are you relying upon?
Once a CrotoNat, always a CrotoNat.  CelticsBlog Draft Champions, 2009 & 2012;
DKC Draft 2015 Champions and beyond...