Here is all of the evidence against Judge Kavanaugh

[Darth Omar]

I'm skeptical about both Ford and Kavanaugh. That's as it should be.



She would have to be completely stupid not to hire a lawyer when she decided to come forward with this. She was messing with the plans of some of the richest and most powerful people in America. That's dangerous work. She needed protection. As for scrubbing her online profile, wouldn't you do so? I know I would. If I knew teams of partisans would dig through my every tweet and Facebook post to try to find something to use against me, and all my friends and family would be exposed to their wrath, you better believe I'd give them as little to work with as possible. As for testifying, she has consistently offered to do so. She simply said she wanted an FBI investigation, first, the same as was done with Anita Hill's accusations. For some reason, that frightens the Republicans. Yet, still, she has offered to testify later next week.

I see no grounds whatsoever to be skeptical of Kavanaugh. If other women come forward, my opinion could change.

That’s not a good reason to take bleach bit to the social media. If she’s a Trump hater that doesn’t help her credibility. If she’s a vocal abortion advocate—that’s even worse.

I don’t care about the FBI investigation because it will be a waste of time. But I care about time—and so do democrats. They want to drag this out as long as possible.

[reagansghost]

I see no grounds whatsoever to be skeptical of Kavanaugh. If other women come forward, my opinion could change.

That’s not a good reason to take bleach bit to the social media. If she’s a Trump hater that doesn’t help her credibility. If she’s a vocal abortion advocate—that’s even worse.

I don’t care about the FBI investigation because it will be a waste of time. But I care about time—and so do democrats. They want to drag this out as long as possible.

bunch of shit, no wonder you voted for Trump

[Eagle_Eye]

If you'd prefer, I could refer to him pinning her on a bed, covering her mouth to stop her from screaming, and trying to tear her clothes off, making her think maybe he'd kill her. That's what they described. Calling that an "attack" seems like a good summary, though.



I've decided nothing of the sort. Unlike most of the right-wingers here, who are unwaveringly convinced that the attack never happened, I admit that I don't know whether it did. I'm hoping that Kavanaugh, his friend, and his accuser all testify, and that the FBI looks into it, so we can get a better feeling for who is more credible.

>>"I could refer to him pinning her on a bed, covering her mouth to stop her from screaming, and trying to tear her clothes off, making her think maybe he'd kill her."
++ Her words only not verified by a witness.
Anita Hill claimed sexual harassment that was found to be untrue.
>>"I've decided nothing of the sort."
++ But yet you insist on using inflammatory words like "attack" to describe an incident you have no personal knowledge of! And only go by what is being reported!


I suspect that the real story is more like Ford and Kavanaugh had been drinking at the party went to a bedroom to make out, Kavanaugh's buddy walked in and she got embarrassed and ran out.

That makes more sense than her story of two guys forcing her into a bedroom and one standing around laughing while the other fought to rape her.

Every scenario I have ever heard of where more that one guy was involved in a rape or attempted rape was the guys worked together to pin the woman down.

[ThatOwlWoman]

You have to be at least slightly determined to be ‘unskeptical’ of Ford and her account even thus far.

Hiring a lawyer; scrubbing her online stuff before coming out; balking at testifying etc. These aren’t attributes of a credible person with a simple story tell—which she has already told, btw.

Why did she scrub her online stuff, for example? What was that all about? And should they be allowed to ask her about that?

OF course they can ask. If I were her, I would have done exactly the same thing. She's been receiving death threats from ardent Reichwingers. Removing her social media profiles protects her family/friends from that craziness. You see it as some sign of dishonesty; the rest of us see it as prudence. Your guys' problem is that you desperately want to believe she's lying so you can get Kavanaugh in there. There is nothing that Dr. Ford could say or prove with evidence that will convince you that she's not making it all up for some political bullshit.

Put on your rational hat for a second and think about it from her POV. Would *you* risk your career, reputation as a professor with a doctorate, even your life -- just to get 15 mins of fame for some political party's benefit?

[Micawber]

I see no grounds whatsoever to be skeptical of Kavanaugh.

Ford said that one summer in the early 1980s, Kavanaugh and a friend — both “stumbling drunk,” Ford alleges — corralled her into a bedroom during a gathering of teenagers at a house in Montgomery County.


While his friend watched, she said, Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed on her back and groped her over her clothes, grinding his body against hers and clumsily attempting to pull off her one-piece bathing suit and the clothing she wore over it. When she tried to scream, she said, he put his hand over her mouth.

“I thought he might inadvertently kill me,” said Ford, now a 51-year-old research psychologist in northern California. “He was trying to attack me and remove my clothing.”


This statement and your response is why there is a metoo movement.

You disgust every decent human on earth, pig.

[Darth Omar]

Ford said that one summer in the early 1980s, Kavanaugh and a friend — both “stumbling drunk,” Ford alleges — corralled her into a bedroom during a gathering of teenagers at a house in Montgomery County.


While his friend watched, she said, Kavanaugh pinned her to a bed on her back and groped her over her clothes, grinding his body against hers and clumsily attempting to pull off her one-piece bathing suit and the clothing she wore over it. When she tried to scream, she said, he put his hand over her mouth.

“I thought he might inadvertently kill me,” said Ford, now a 51-year-old research psychologist in northern California. “He was trying to attack me and remove my clothing.”


This statement and your response is why there is a metoo movement.

You disgust every decent human on earth, pig.

And you’re a demented hack.

[Oneuli]

I see no grounds whatsoever to be skeptical of Kavanaugh.

Of course not. He's a Republican. But I try to come at these things with robust skepticism regardless of the parties.

That’s not a good reason to take bleach bit to the social media.

It's a very good reason. You know as well as I do what would happen if she had a deep social media presence from which the wingnuts could work. First, they'd pore over everything she'd ever said to find anything that, at least out of context, could sound bad, and they'd trumpet that. Then they'd branch off to her social contacts and do the same for them. Meanwhile, the death threats that she's currently getting would expand out to those she was friendly with. It would be foolish for her not to delete that presence.

If she’s a Trump hater that doesn’t help her credibility.

I think you could argue that if she WASN'T a Trump hater, that would hurt her credibility. After all, Trump is a man who --according to two women's sworn statements-- is a child rapist. He is also a man who raped his wife, if you believe her sworn testimony. He's someone who, according to his own bragging, abused his power as the organizer of events to go back stage and ogle women while they were changing. He's a sexual predator. If she liked him, despite that, it would cast some doubt on the idea that she'd suffered a sexual attack herself. Her hating Trump is entirely consistent with her claimed backstory.

If she’s a vocal abortion advocate—that’s even worse.

Do you mean she's an opponent of criminalizing the choice to end an unwanted pregnancy? If so, that's obviously very different from advocating for abortion.

I don’t care about the FBI investigation because it will be a waste of time.

Based on the Anita Hill precedent, if Trump had ordered the FBI investigation right away, the way Bush did when Hill made her accusations, the investigation would over already. It only took three days last time. I don't think this is about time. It's about a fear something will be found.

[Darth Omar]

Of course not. He's a Republican. But I try to come at these things with robust skepticism regardless of the parties.



It's a very good reason. You know as well as I do what would happen if she had a deep social media presence from which the wingnuts could work. First, they'd pore over everything she'd ever said to find anything that, at least out of context, could sound bad, and they'd trumpet that. Then they'd branch off to her social contacts and do the same for them. Meanwhile, the death threats that she's currently getting would expand out to those she was friendly with. It would be foolish for her not to delete that presence.



I think you could argue that if she WASN'T a Trump hater, that would hurt her credibility. After all, Trump is a man who --according to two women's sworn statements-- is a child rapist. He is also a man who raped his wife, if you believe her sworn testimony. He's someone who, according to his own bragging, abused his power as the organizer of events to go back stage and ogle women while they were changing. He's a sexual predator. If she liked him, despite that, it would cast some doubt on the idea that she'd suffered a sexual attack herself. Her hating Trump is entirely consistent with her claimed backstory.



Do you mean she's an opponent of criminalizing the choice to end an unwanted pregnancy? If so, that's obviously very different from advocating for abortion.



Based on the Anita Hill precedent, if Trump had ordered the FBI investigation right away, the way Bush did when Hill made her accusations, the investigation would over already. It only took three days last time. I don't think this is about time. It's about a fear something will be found.

I’ve seen your baseless robust skepticism of Kavanaugh lol.

But I’ve yet to see your robust skepticism of Ford. Just a predictable rant about Trump and some excuses for Ford deleting her online foot prints.

Let’s see it.

[Oneuli]

>>"I could refer to him pinning her on a bed, covering her mouth to stop her from screaming, and trying to tear her clothes off, making her think maybe he'd kill her."
++ Her words only not verified by a witness.

Yes, at this point that's true. It'll be interesting to see what happens once it's investigated more closely.

Anita Hill claimed sexual harassment that was found to be untrue.

What makes you think it was found to be untrue?

>>"I've decided nothing of the sort."
++ But yet you insist on using inflammatory words like "attack" to describe an incident you have no personal knowledge of! And only go by what is being reported!

It's an alleged attack. I'm not saying it definitely happened. I consider it more likely than not that it did, but I'm keeping an open mind until all the evidence is in.

I suspect that the real story is more like Ford and Kavanaugh had been drinking at the party went to a bedroom to make out, Kavanaugh's buddy walked in and she got embarrassed and ran out.

Would that story explain the matter traumatizing her so much that she was talking about it with a psychologist many years later? Would it explain her willingness to disrupt her life to put herself in the crosshairs this way? I think we've all had make-out sessions interrupted, and that doesn't become a big psychological issue.

Your version of events just doesn't line up with what we know. Let's look at the possibilities:

(1) She made this up completely, in response to the nomination, and got both her psychologist and her husband to lie about it, to make it sound like the claims long predated the nomination. That seems impossible to me, since if she had gotten the psychologist to lie, they'd have gotten their stories exactly straight -- the fact the psychologist's notes differ somewhat from her account is consistent with the idea they're genuine contemporaneous notes, rather than something fabricated later to back-date her story.

(2) She made this up completely long before the nomination, because she hates Kavanaugh enough, for some unidentified reason, to have invented a story against him years ago that she shared with her shrink and husband, but only recently decided to use against Kavanaugh. This seems at least remotely possible, though I haven't heard any plausible theory for why she'd hate Kavanaugh that much other than for the alleged attack. It's hard to picture someone inventing a story of a sexual attack many years later just for a psychologist and a husband.

(3) Some sort of sexual attack really did occur, serious enough to cause her psychological turmoil decades later, but it wasn't Kavanaugh, and some trick of memory has caused her to misattribute it to him. This is also remotely possible, though she hasn't suggested any lack of certainty about his involvement. It's not like someone falsely identifying a stranger -- she would have known him, so she would have been clear as to who he was.

(4) Kavanaugh really did sexually attack her in some way serious enough to cause her psychological turmoil decades later.

If it's choice four, the exact details of the attack need not be clear for it to be enough that it should sink the guy's nomination. If he did something bad enough to her that it's still eating at her all these years later, he did something bad enough that he shouldn't be on the Supreme Court.

[Frank Apisa]

Nope. I never posted the same post on 3 different threads.

Oh, okay.

But considering your posts, I am amazed you post one post anywhere.

Ball in your court.

[Frank Apisa]

Like you and the puppy picture posts?

If you are a woman...you are not much of a woman, TOP.

Wake up.

Really.

It won't hurt.

[Frank Apisa]

My objection to the dragging the FBI into this [shouldnt they be busy hunting down terrorists?] is that democrats will win either way. The most likely result is their findings will be inconclusive—but they will file the report in January, months after the midterms.

It’s too transparent a ploy, Frank.

It’s not a question of hiding anything: it’s a question of allowing democrats to use the FBI, again, for their perverse political purposes.

As stated previously, since the witnesses who were allegedly present at the Mystery Party don’t agree with what happened, or didn’t happen, all that remains is hearsay by individuals who weren’t there.

Kudos to the FBI for declining to get involved.

The FBI has not declined to get involved.

If Grassley or Trump asked them to re-open the investigation...THEY WOULD DO IT IMMEDIATELY.

[Frank Apisa]

According to what Ford has said, there were ONLY four people present at the gathering/party whatever you want to call it. That is what we have been told

So back to my point

Yes, it had to be SOMEONE'S house, but the question is WHO?

It wasn't Kavanaugh's house
It wasn't Ford's house
It wasn't Judge's house

Was it the fourth person's house?

I thought the point would be fairly obvious. How many party's do you attend where the owner of the house isn't in attendance? One would presume that this gathering was held at the home of one of the people attending the party. Isn't that a fair assumption? Otherwise we are talking about breaking and entering.

I mean it was fairly common for teenagers to say "Hey my parents aren't home, let's go back to my house......."

So that brings me back to my original question. If only four people were present according to Ford, then it could only have been the fourth person's house right?

There is a reason that Ford will never say WHERE or WHEN this allegedly happened. If she does, then she runs the risk of Kavanaugh having an air tight alibi. For example if she says it happened on July 16, 1985 and Kavanaugh happened to be on vacation with his parents in Europe then Ford is fucked.

If she says it was XYZ address, then it would be easier to investigate.

Ford is actually making it more difficult to investigate and get to the bottom of this.

For the record. I want this fully investigated, but I want it done the right way. This is not the right way. I will have more to say about this in a very thoughtful thread I will be putting in APP shortly. Check it out

Let the FBI investigate. It is amazing what an FBI investigation can come up with.

What is the rush.

Oneuli has hit the nail squarely on its head on this question.

Think about it.

[Oneuli]

I’ve seen your baseless robust skepticism of Kavanaugh lol.

But I’ve yet to see your robust skepticism of Ford. Just a predictable rant about Trump and some excuses for Ford deleting her online foot prints.

Let’s see it.

The most damning case against Ford, at this point, is that nobody else has come forward alleging other incidents like that. Usually if a guy is accused once, you then get several other accounts of similar behavior, since leopards don't usually change their spots. Kavanaugh has been around for a long time, so if he tends towards sexually predatory behavior, it seems unlikely he'd only have done it once.

Meanwhile, the most damning case against Kavanaugh is that the simplest and most consistent explanation for her claim against him is that the attack actually occurred. It's hard to come up with some other explanation that fits the known facts as well.

[Phantasmal]

The most damning case against Ford, at this point, is that nobody else has come forward alleging other incidents like that. Usually if a guy is accused once, you then get several other accounts of similar behavior, since leopards don't usually change their spots. Kavanaugh has been around for a long time, so if he tends towards sexually predatory behavior, it seems unlikely he'd only have done it once.

Meanwhile, the most damning case against Kavanaugh is that the simplest and most consistent explanation for her claim against him is that the attack actually occurred. It's hard to come up with some other explanation that fits the known facts as well.

The reason why many women don’t come forward is because they are exposed to threatening behavior, look at the women who accused Trump, Cosby, Moore, etc. There are some of these women who were harassed to the point they feared for their lives. Ford herself has had to leave her home because of these threats. It is not an easy thing to do.