• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Kavanaugh SCOTUS Senate Judicial Hearing

Page 60 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
compuwiz1 said:
I'm not permissive of sexual assault. I'm saying prove it, not declare guilty, when you don't know for sure. I can and do have kids. We did just fine raising them and they are healthy, happy and successful.
Click to expand...
Standards for this are going to be closer to civil court preponderance of the evidence. That evidence will likely be the testimony of anyone who was involved or has knowledge of accused event. Also if it is shown Kavanaugh is likely to have lied it is disqualifying.
 
compuwiz1 said:
Right....to a liberal, anyone who is a constitutionalist is a radical. It might just be the left that is radical. There are extremists on both sides of the aisle, but think the vast collection of them, on the radical left, are right here, while the extreme right is on some shit llke stormfront. lol
Click to expand...

He's not a constitutionalist. Lol, far from it. He, like other federalist society members, pick and choose when precedents matter, they hide behind strict definitions of words except when those definitions don't help them each the conclusion they want. Things are settled law until they aren't.

Your willful ignorance on just how partisan this guy is, is a testimony to your own partisanship. If you look back at the gorsuch threads you won't find this kind of disapproval that Kavanagh has received and it has nothing to do with partisan politics (gorsuch was opposed simply on principal, btw).
 
ivwshane said:
So you were cool with your daughter being sexually assaulted or you were cool with your son sexually assaulting girls?

I don't think you did as well as you think you did, pervert.
Click to expand...

Jesus, you have some sick, twisted thoughts. I don't know how old you are, but I went to high school in the 70's. There were plenty of times, when there was attraction and we began making out, which turned to some heavy petting, then the girl put on the brakes. Did that constitute sexual assault, on my part? I can remember a few times, where they were groping me, and when I assumed consent to go further, based on her actions, she still put on the brakes. Is it possible that kind of a thing ever happened to anyone here? No, you are all saints, I get it. lol
 
compuwiz1 said:
Jesus, you have some sick, twisted thoughts. I don't know how old you are, but I went to high school in the 70's. There were plenty of times, when there was attraction and we began making out, which turned to some heavy petting, then the girl put on the brakes. Did that constitute sexual assault, on my part? I can remember a few times, where they were groping me, and when I assumed consent to go further, based on her actions, she still put on the brakes. Is it possible that kind of a thing ever happened to anyone here? No, you are all saints, I get it. lol
Click to expand...
You are conflating your experiences with those Ford recounted. Did you read her letter?
 
It's perfectly obvious that Ford will not testify because no investigation will ever take place. So McConnell will either just ram it in right to the short hairs or find some other way to go. If Flake or any GOP member of the Judiciary committee goes with the Dems the nomination will never make it out of committee. That might be the best way for the GOP to salvage a bad situation.
 
ivwshane said:
Why not? Most criminals young and old get marked for life. Is there a reason sexual assault gets a pass?
Click to expand...

I look at the accusation, and if true, I see a minor committing a crime while drunk. I hear of drunks doing stupid !@#$ all the time. That's alcohol. Sex assault? That's a teenage boy on alcohol. To me, the bigger violation (today) is the denial.

Time should ease things. I recall a few cases of those 90 year old Germans we deport back for their roles in WW2. We should leave them alone, but our people too often seek to harm others and not accept or appreciate the difference a lifetime can make. If an elementary school kid puts their hands on another kid, is that a mark that society should hang around their neck for the rest of their lives? Do we not make exceptions to forgive minors? Of course we do, or at least some of us try. Others simply want to contribute to a cycle of violence and/or vengeance. Looking for any transgression, any opportunity to do harm no matter how old or what circumstance.

Now... this one would be serious if she had actually been raped. But that's not the accusation. Somewhere along the line, in a drunken lust to pressure a girl, Kavanaugh had the sense to listen to her. Or maybe he was so impaired as to pass out. Suppose at that point he might be telling the truth, of not remembering it. But no, due to political opportunity he must be guilty until proven innocent. And a minor's violation 35+ years ago is the most important topic of his life. In context I think it's BS. In general I don't credit a mere accusation that cannot be substantiated.

In all, what Kavanaugh may have done as a drunk teenage boy does not move me. The context matters.

Somewhere along the line Democrats hold a position regarding the criminal justice system. That it should be of rehab and rehabilitation. Not life sentences, not vengeance. That people should not be marked for life. Felons, criminal background checks for employment, etc. The things that keep minorities down. But here we are, a political opportunity rises and that concept doesn't exist. Context doesn't exist. Innocent until proven guilty does not exist. Hypocrisy, or maybe I'm just too damn liberal for your taste.
 
Jhhnn said:
It's perfectly obvious that Ford will not testify because no investigation will ever take place. So McConnell will either just ram it in right to the short hairs or find some other way to go. If Flake or any GOP member of the Judiciary committee goes with the Dems the nomination will never make it out of committee. That might be the best way for the GOP to salvage a bad situation.
Click to expand...
Sen. Flake called for Cook to be allowed to tell her story. The Senate allowed her the chance to speak in public or in private as she asked. I doubt if Sen. Flake will backtrack on what he said.
 
Jaskalas said:
I look at the accusation, and if true, I see a minor committing a crime while drunk. I hear of drunks doing stupid !@#$ all the time. That's alcohol. Sex assault? That's a teenage boy on alcohol. To me, the bigger violation (today) is the denial.

Time should ease things. I recall a few cases of those 90 year old Germans we deport back for their roles in WW2. We should leave them alone, but our people too often seek to harm others and not accept or appreciate the difference a lifetime can make. If an elementary school kid puts their hands on another kid, is that a mark that society should hang around their neck for the rest of their lives? Do we not make exceptions to forgive minors? Of course we do, or at least some of us try. Others simply want to contribute to a cycle of violence and/or vengeance. Looking for any transgression, any opportunity to do harm no matter how old or what circumstance.

Now... this one would be serious if she had actually been raped. But that's not the accusation. Somewhere along the line, in a drunken lust to pressure a girl, Kavanaugh had the sense to listen to her. Or maybe he was so impaired as to pass out. Suppose at that point he might be telling the truth, of not remembering it. But no, due to political opportunity he must be guilty until proven innocent. And a minor's violation 35+ years ago is the most important topic of his life. In context I think it's BS. In general I don't credit a mere accusation that cannot be substantiated.

In all, what Kavanaugh may have done as a drunk teenage boy does not move me. The context matters.

Somewhere along the line Democrats hold a position regarding the criminal justice system. That it should be of rehab and rehabilitation. Not life sentences, not vengeance. That people should not be marked for life. Felons, criminal background checks for employment, etc. The things that keep minorities down. But here we are, a political opportunity rises and that concept doesn't exist. Context doesn't exist. Innocent until proven guilty does not exist. Hypocrisy, or maybe I'm just too damn liberal for your taste.
Click to expand...
If nothing else you might take away from this situation, time doesn't ease things for the victims.
 
imported_tajmahal said:
He's the head of YOUR Democratic National Committee that you know and love and support.
Click to expand...

No. That's Tom Perez & it's immaterial to the discussion at hand. Which one of the right wing touchstones of distraction haven't you brought up, anyway? If you could figure out how to introduce the evil Hillary to the conversation you'd really be rockin', huh?
 
Jaskalas said:
I look at the accusation, and if true, I see a minor committing a crime while drunk. I hear of drunks doing stupid !@#$ all the time. That's alcohol. Sex assault? That's a teenage boy on alcohol. To me, the bigger violation (today) is the denial.

Time should ease things. I recall a few cases of those 90 year old Germans we deport back for their roles in WW2. We should leave them alone, but our people too often seek to harm others and not accept or appreciate the difference a lifetime can make. If an elementary school kid puts their hands on another kid, is that a mark that society should hang around their neck for the rest of their lives? Do we not make exceptions to forgive minors? Of course we do, or at least some of us try. Others simply want to contribute to a cycle of violence and/or vengeance. Looking for any transgression, any opportunity to do harm no matter how old or what circumstance.

Now... this one would be serious if she had actually been raped. But that's not the accusation. Somewhere along the line, in a drunken lust to pressure a girl, Kavanaugh had the sense to listen to her. Or maybe he was so impaired as to pass out. Suppose at that point he might be telling the truth, of not remembering it. But no, due to political opportunity he must be guilty until proven innocent. And a minor's violation 35+ years ago is the most important topic of his life. In context I think it's BS. In general I don't credit a mere accusation that cannot be substantiated.

In all, what Kavanaugh may have done as a drunk teenage boy does not move me. The context matters.

Somewhere along the line Democrats hold a position regarding the criminal justice system. That it should be of rehab and rehabilitation. Not life sentences, not vengeance. That people should not be marked for life. Felons, criminal background checks for employment, etc. The things that keep minorities down. But here we are, a political opportunity rises and that concept doesn't exist. Context doesn't exist. Innocent until proven guilty does not exist. Hypocrisy, or maybe I'm just too damn liberal for your taste.
Click to expand...

What rehab did Kavanagh go through? What rehab do sexual assault assailants get? If you want to change the system that's great but that's not the reality we live in.

I don't care what you politics are, your argument amounts to excuses. You would think that after this president you'd be tired of excuses but I guess not.

You are also conflating things when you talk about minorities being kept down because of their criminal record, one being the unequal application of the law.

Your view on this is disgusting and I hope you never have to deal with your child/sister/wife being sexually assaulted or raped.

Btw, your camp includes taj. Let that sink in.
 
ivwshane said:
What rehab did Kavanagh go through? What rehab do sexual assault assailants get? If you want to change the system that's great but that's not the reality we live in.

I don't care what you politics are, your argument amounts to excuses. You would think that after this president you'd be tired of excuses but I guess not.

You are also conflating things when you talk about minorities being kept down because of their criminal record, one being the unequal application of the law.

Your view on this is disgusting and I hope you never have to deal with your child/sister/wife being sexually assaulted or raped.

Btw, your camp includes taj. Let that sink in.
Click to expand...
Kavanaugh has categorically denied any and all of Ford's accusations against him. Why would he got to rehab when it never happened?
 
imported_tajmahal said:
Kavanaugh has categorically denied any and all of Ford's accusations against him. Why would he got to rehab when it never happened?
Click to expand...

I'm sorry you aren't smart enough to follow the conversation. Maybe if you didn't spend all your time doing your "whataboutism" bit, you'd be able to follow along.
 
imported_tajmahal said:
Sen. Flake called for Cook to be allowed to tell her story. The Senate allowed her the chance to speak in public or in private as she asked. I doubt if Sen. Flake will backtrack on what he said.
Click to expand...

You're putting words in Flake's mouth. He didn't say what he'd do if there was no testimony. He's the perfect guy to take the hit & take the heat off the GOP in the run up to the election. They can all go on about how the dirty Democrats smeared a good man & yada, yada, yada.

The Democrats won't blink first, bet on that. It would seem unwise for McConnell not to. The unintended consequences are incalculable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top