Believe Accusers!

[JiveTheTurkey]

If only people threw accusations and investigations to stuff like idk... Bengazi? Illegal Servers quietly active since before 9/11?- btw deleted. 'But what difference at this point does it make.'

 

[Tigran]

If only people threw accusations and investigations to stuff like idk... Bengazi? Illegal Servers quietly active since before 9/11?- btw deleted. 'But what difference at this point does it make.'

Private email servers? You mean like the ones -everyone- used? Yes.. lets not forget one of Bush's best friends Colin Powell used one too.

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/colin-powell-defends-personal-email-227889

But hey, you want to start going into private emails, how about this guys?

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/24/jared-kushner-private-email-white-house-243071

Oh... Also lets not forget the private cell phone no one is allowed to see:

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-personal-cellphone-call-canada-justin-trudeau-2018-7

As for Bengazi, there have been numerous, NUMEROUS investigations into that. And the she was able to remain calm during 8 hours of trial while Kavenough literally broke down and started ranting like a madman.

Lets be honest, if he was a democratic nominee, the Republicans would have been looking at his actions going "He's just a crybaby snowflake!" *and I would have agreed with them, as his actions were not of someone who should be sitting on the bench&

 

[dpad_5678]

DAILY REMINDER: The burden of proof is on the one making the statement, and everyone is innocent until proven guilty.

cough

Also, Trump wants to fuck his daughter so I doubt sexual assault is something that we should be putting above him.

 

[Deleted User]

That's not at all relevant to what my statement was, nor is it relevant to the topic. The topic is about believing accusers (or rather disbelieving), and I'm presenting the notion that most accusers in this specific scenario are not lying or making things up. Witnesses are generally the only acceptable remaining form of evidence left from these kinds of crime, which is why witness testimony can make or break a case. I shouldn't need to repeat myself, but it's hard to muster up physical evidence of sexual assault, period. Unless it's garnered fairly immediately, at the scene, it's unlikely to exist... especially in cases not involving intercourse. We can't just pretend all assault victims are liars because they don't have physical evidence because a significant portion of sexual assault crimes do not produce physical evidence. This is a fact. You have to hear both sides of a story, as well as witness testimony, and determine who you most believe is telling the truth. And yes, that includes breaking down body language and emotional cues, as well.

To ramble a bit, I was part of a jury selection for this type of crime a few years ago and they made this clear to us. Also, they made it clear that intoxication of either party at the time of the event by no means excuses the actions of the aggressor, if indeed they were committed, as we have laws (in Michigan, where I was at the time, at least) that protect those under the influence. Intoxication could be a factor but is not considered consent.

The key to a decision of guilty or not guilty is the jury's belief beyond the shadow of a doubt that the defendant is guilty or not guilty. Nothing else.

Ah. Sorry if I wasnt making my point clear. I was saying that the human element is the faultiest element.

Let me make somthing clear. I don't like kavanaugh. At all. Just sayin.

 

[Viri]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3256157/Student-17-hanged-falsely-accused-rape.html

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-hampshire-37696222
The mother deserved it for raising a rapist!
Believe accusers!

 

[sarkwalvein]

Even though American society still haven't reached the point of going mob-style to lynch people based on their "jury of the peoples", it's steps away from it (and the world follows). I don't see the day people go literally witch hunting and burning on the stake too far. And anyway, isn't this social assassination we see right now just a modern way of witch hunting and burning on the stake. The reference made by the OP is spot on.

It is a pity, but as I wrote earlier, the world is fucked up between disguised dogmatic totalitarianism and populist nationalistic fanaticism. No place for dialogue. That's what we are living on. The "rift" is producing more extremists on both sides, and those extremists drive people that were rational into extremism after feeling pushed by them (this sadly I believe is happening to the OP, he is being driven to an opposing extreme by extremists... though I hope I am wrong, but many other people here on this thread are extremists already, even though they seem to think they are "on the side of justice" or something, they don't stop rewriting and bending reality, pretty much 1984 style, doublethinking much?).

- too much of a sensationalist statement?
- ... nope.

 

[JiveTheTurkey]

Private email servers? You mean like the ones -everyone- used? Yes.. lets not forget one of Bush's best friends Colin Powell used one too.

https://www.politico.com/story/2016/09/colin-powell-defends-personal-email-227889

But hey, you want to start going into private emails, how about this guys?

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/24/jared-kushner-private-email-white-house-243071

Oh... Also lets not forget the private cell phone no one is allowed to see:

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-personal-cellphone-call-canada-justin-trudeau-2018-7

As for Bengazi, there have been numerous, NUMEROUS investigations into that. And the she was able to remain calm during 8 hours of trial while Kavenough literally broke down and started ranting like a madman.

Lets be honest, if he was a democratic nominee, the Republicans would have been looking at his actions going "He's just a crybaby snowflake!" *and I would have agreed with them, as his actions were not of someone who should be sitting on the bench&

I don't see how any of those are illegal or have broken laws. One of your articles says "There is no indication that Kushner has shared any sensitive or classified material on his private account,... Still". Well, Clinton did... and they did plenty of run arounds to get away from prosecutions. Although I don't trust these news sources because bias has been skewed to support these people, I gave the benefit of the doubt and read them. Still not convinced what the illegal side of this refers to.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

I don't see the day people go literally witch hunting and burning on the stake too far.

I see that coming soon. After seeing the German people rallied up in outrage over the migrant crisis, I have a feeling we won't be in Kansas anymore.

 

[Xzi]

I don't see the day people go literally witch hunting and burning on the stake too far.

Oh give me a break. This never had to be a circus, Republicans could've conceded to an FBI investigation from the start and then we wouldn't have needed the "he said she said" senate panel to happen in public.

As has been stated multiple times, this isn't a criminal trial. There are zero repercussions for Kavanaugh even if he's guilty of all the accusations. Being denied the highest judgeship in the country is not comparable to being burnt at the stake. Kavanaugh keeps living his super-wealthy cushy lifestyle regardless.

I really have a hard time believing Republicans couldn't find anybody else with the exact same judicial opinions who would be able to get through a senate hearing without looking like an overly-emotional partisan hack. IIRC Trump picked Kavanaugh at random from a list of 25 names given to him by the Federalist Society. At this point attempting to force him through is just one big 'fuck you' to Democrats and women. It's a bold strategy Cotton, let's see how it plays for them during midterms.

 

[Hanafuda]

There are zero repercussions for Kavanaugh even if he's guilty of all the accusations. ...

zero repercussions. right.

 

[Xzi]

zero repercussions. right.

It's all past the statute of limitations AFAIK. The guy went to a high school that had a full nine-hole golf course on it. I think he'll survive.

The only repercussions he can face now would come from lying to the FBI, but given the way this investigation has been forced to limit its scope, he probably won't have to.

 

[Hanafuda]

It's all past the statute of limitations AFAIK. The guy went to a high school that had a full nine-hole golf course on it. I think he'll survive.

He'll survive. Is that your litmus test on the permissibility of destroying someone's personal and professional reputation for life with perversion smears that have no evidence to back them up other than the accusation itself, so long as it's good for your side? That would make you a small, low, evil person if so.

 

[Xzi]

He'll survive. Is that your litmus test on the permissibility of destroying someone's personal and professional reputation for life with perversion smears that have no evidence to back them up other than the accusation itself, so long as it's good for your side? That would make you a small, low, evil person if so.

He destroyed his own reputation by failing to categorically deny any of the accusations. Instead he cried, screamed, and dodged questions. He might've convinced more people he was guilty, but I don't think anybody was convinced of his innocence through that performance. If he had stayed calm and answered questions directly and without hesitation, we'd be having an entirely different discussion. I doubt any member of the GOP would've felt the need for an FBI investigation to follow up at that point.

 

[Hanafuda]

He destroyed his own reputation by failing to categorically deny any of the accusations. Instead he cried, screamed, and dodged questions. He might've convinced more people he was guilty, but I don't think anybody was convinced of his innocence through that performance. If he had stayed calm and answered questions directly and without hesitation, we'd be having an entirely different discussion. I doubt any member of the GOP would've felt the need for an FBI investigation to follow up at that point.

You're living on a different planet or something. There isn't a thing I agree with in what you just wrote. Live long and prosper.

 

[WeedZ]

He'll survive. Is that your litmus test on the permissibility of destroying someone's personal and professional reputation for life with perversion smears that have no evidence to back them up other than the accusation itself, so long as it's good for your side? That would make you a small, low, evil person if so.

"No evidence" isnt that what an investigation is for?

And what happens if hes found guilty. No jail, no fines, still rich, still has career, does not get the job he wants. Who cares?

And I just read that trump is 'calling for an investigation' into kavanaugh being traumatized. This government is run by a bunch of fucking clowns.

 

[Xzi]

You're living on a different planet or something. There isn't a thing I agree with in what you just wrote. Live long and prosper.

It doesn't matter whether you agree with it or not, that's the reality. Gorsuch is on the supreme court right now because he acted like an adult throughout the confirmation process.

And though I shouldn't have to remind you since I said it only a couple posts ago, Kavanaugh's reputation would've stayed intact with a quiet FBI investigation initiated after the accusations surfaced. Instead Republicans chose a public hearing and only called two witnesses, literally turning it into a "she said he said" despite their supposed objections to that format.

Lastly, Trump attempting to micromanage the investigation into these matters doesn't do Kavanaugh any favors in terms of presumed innocence. You don't interfere with investigations unless you have something to hide.

 

[Hanafuda]

Kavanaugh's reputation would've stayed intact with a quiet FBI investigation initiated after the accusations surfaced.

Wrong. Democrats or Ford's lawyers leaked the story to the press, who ran with it publicly, before Senate Republicans were ever informed. The only real opportunity for a discrete investigation into Ford's accusation was if Feinstein had brought it confidentially to the Committee's attention when she received it in July. Instead, she sat on it to use it as a weapon of last resort, waiting even until the confirmation hearings were actually over. Last I read, they STILL have not even provided the Republican members of the committee with an unredacted copy of Ford's letter to Feinstein, nor other relevant discovery. There's no point in 'investigating for truth' when the side asking for it is obstructing it at the same time.

Lastly, Trump attempting to micromanage the investigation into these matters doesn't do Kavanaugh any favors in terms of presumed innocence. You don't interfere with investigations unless you have something to hide.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/30/us/politics/fbi-kavanaugh-investigation-scope-democrats.html

 

[sarkwalvein]

It doesn't matter whether you agree with it or not, that's the reality.

Whose reality?
You're speaking with emotions and not facts.
You're giving monologues not engaging into dialogue.
Is that thing you call reality some kind of perception bending official narrative.
Does controlling language give you the power to decide and enforce some "reality"?

And that said, which is this authority that decided what the official "reality" narrative is?

 

[Xzi]

Wrong. Democrats or Ford's lawyers leaked the story to the press, who ran with it, before Senate Republicans were ever informed.

Speculative. We don't know who leaked it to the press, even Chuck Grassley's office had the information at the time of the leak.

Yeah, let's take something Trump says at face value even though earlier parts of the article contradict this.

Instead, the F.B.I. was directed by the White House and Senate Republicans to interview just four people: Mark Judge and P.J. Smyth, high school friends of Judge Kavanaugh’s; Leland Keyser, a high school friend of one of Judge Kavanaugh’s accusers, Christine Blasey Ford; and Deborah Ramirez, another of the judge’s accusers.

If they're only allowed to interview four people, that's not "whoever they deem appropriate," and it's not at their discretion. There are several more sources stating that the investigation is being limited by the white house beyond a reasonable degree.

Whose reality?

The reality we all live in. The one where SCOTUS justices are expected to be calm, rational, and non-partisan. These are not new expectations. Enough playing Calvinball with ethical and political rules.

Late edit, but here's Kavanaugh himself agreeing with me from 2015. He's referring to being a judge at any level, too, not only the supreme court:

'Kavanaugh in 2015: A Judge Must Keep “Emotions in Check” and Not Be a “Political Partisan”'

https://www.motherjones.com/politic...ons-in-check-and-not-be-a-political-partisan/

 

[sarkwalvein]

Even though American society still haven't reached the point of going mob-style to lynch people based on their "jury of the peoples", it's steps away from it (and the world follows). I don't see the day people go literally witch hunting and burning on the stake too far. And anyway, isn't this social assassination we see right now just a modern way of witch hunting and burning on the stake. The reference made by the OP is spot on.

It is a pity, but as I wrote earlier, the world is fucked up between disguised dogmatic totalitarianism and populist nationalistic fanaticism. No place for dialogue. That's what we are living on. The "breach" is producing more extremists on both sides, and those extremists drive people that were rational into extremism after feeling pushed by them (this sadly I believe is happening to the OP, he is being driven to an opposing extreme by extremists... though I hope I am wrong, but many other people here on this thread are extremists already, even though they seem to think they are "on the side of justice" or something, they don't stop rewriting and bending reality, pretty much 1984 style, doublethinking much?).

- too much of a sensationalist statement?
- ... nope.

Even though American society still haven't reached the point of going mob-style to lynch people based on their "jury of the peoples", it's steps away from it (and the world follows). I don't see the day people go literally witch hunting and burning on the stake too far. And anyway, isn't this social assassination we see right now just a modern way of witch hunting and burning on the stake. The reference made by the OP is spot on.

It is a pity, but as I wrote earlier, the world is fucked up between disguised dogmatic totalitarianism and populist nationalistic fanaticism. No place for dialogue. That's what we are living on. The "rift" is producing more extremists on both sides, and those extremists drive people that were rational into extremism after feeling pushed by them (this sadly I believe is happening to the OP, he is being driven to an opposing extreme by extremists... though I hope I am wrong, but many other people here on this thread are extremists already, even though they seem to think they are "on the side of justice" or something, they don't stop rewriting and bending reality, pretty much 1984 style, doublethinking much?).

- too much of a sensationalist statement?
- ... nope.

Just quoting myself here because what is going on right now is exactly what I was taking about. This degree of fanaticism.

 

[Xzi]

Just quoting myself here because what is going on right now is exactly what I was taking about. This degree of fanaticism.

Holy shit man, how is suggesting they nominate a different person for the position in any way being fanatical? It's literally the most rational thing Trump could do right now, and it's what any other president would do in this situation. I don't want some anti-abortion, pro-presidential immunity nutjob on the supreme court, but that doesn't mean they can't get one through easily if they just pick a guy who can act normal for a few hours during confirmation hearings.

I get the feeling you didn't watch the hearing or pay attention to the public's reaction at large. Here's a great recap for anyone in that position:



Coverage of Kavanaugh starts at about 2:00, though the bit about 'Gritty' the hockey mascot at the beginning is pretty funny too.