Kavanaugh SCOTUS Senate Judicial Hearing

Page 133 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Jul 9, 2009
10,758
2,086
136
No I called you a bitch. The fact that you think woman = a bitch says a lot about you though.

I'm glad you admit that you could lose such a bet, it just illustrates that your claim was bullshit.
No, it means that although it's my considered opinion that the smears will continue, that i'm not willing to be silenced in a bet. I would honor the agreement, but I'm almost positive you wouldn't. It's who you are.
Hate to tell you, but bitch = female
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,592
6,715
126
I expected a better answer from you Moonie. It's not a Federal crime, so the FBI doesn't investigate it. However Senate staff are funded to investigate issues and the police where the allegations occurred could investigate. It's as if the Democrats are struggling to avoid any and all responsibility for doing a job that should be done. They've now delayed for over 2 months by withholding information from Republicans and are now trying to blame the Republicans because Diane Feinstein and other Democrats withheld the critical information.
Well, had I relied on my expectations, I would not have answered. But I decided to give you the benefit of the doubt. My reply, if I may say so was profoundly cogent, but there are qualifications that must be in place to see that.
 
Jul 9, 2009
10,758
2,086
136
Well, had I relied on my expectations, I would not have answered. But I decided to give you the benefit of the doubt. My reply, if I may say so was profoundly cogent, but there are qualifications that must be in place to see that.
OK, thanks Mr. Moonie.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
33,408
16,798
136
No, it means that although it's my considered opinion that the smears will continue, that i'm not willing to be silenced in a bet. I would honor the agreement, but I'm almost positive you wouldn't. It's who you are.
Hate to tell you, but bitch = female

Actually it means female dog. As in you are tucking your tail and running away.

Toodles bitch!
 

UberNeuman

Lifer
Nov 4, 1999
16,937
3,087
126
Well, had I relied on my expectations, I would not have answered. But I decided to give you the benefit of the doubt. My reply, if I may say so was profoundly cogent, but there are qualifications that must be in place to see that.


One might think the person you speak to had some honesty and decency. It ain't in the cards, bro.
 

sportage

Lifer
Feb 1, 2008
11,492
3,163
136
Has this been posted yet?
The transcript from what Christine Ford will tell the committee tomorrow?
VERY DISTURBING and you can feel the panic Ford endured in her voice.
Absolutely shocking.

Written Testimony of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford

United States Senate Judiciary Committee
September 26, 2018
Chairman Grassley, Ranking Member Feinstein, Members of the Committee. My name is Christine Blasey Ford. I am a Professor of Psychology at Palo Alto University and a Research Psychologist at the Stanford University School of Medicine.
I was an undergraduate at the University of North Carolina and earned my degree in Experimental Psychology in 1988. I received a Master's degree in 1991 in Clinical Psychology from Pepperdine University. In 1996, I received a PhD in Educational Psychology from the University of Southern California. I earned a Master's degree in Epidemiology from the Stanford University School of Medicine in 2009.

I have been married to Russell Ford since 2002 and we have two children.
I am here today not because I want to be. I am terrified. I am here because I believe it is my civic duty to tell you what happened to me while Brett Kavanaugh and I were in high school. I have described the events publicly before. I summarized them in my letter to Ranking Member Feinstein, and again in my letter to Chairman Grassley. I understand and appreciate the importance of your hearing from me directly about what happened to me and the impact it has had on my life and on my family.

I grew up in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. I attended the Holton-Arms School in Bethesda, Maryland, from 1980 to 1984. Holton-Arms is an all-girls school that opened in 1901. During my time at the school, girls at Holton-Arms frequently met and became friendly with boys from all-boys schools in the area, including Landon School, Georgetown Prep, Gonzaga High
School, country clubs, and other places where kids and their families socialized. This is how I met Brett Kavanaugh, the boy who sexually assaulted me.
In my freshman and sophomore school years, when I was 14 and 15 years old, my group of friends intersected with Brett and his friends for a short period of time. I had been friendly with a classmate of Brett's for a short time during my freshman year, and it was through that connection that I attended a number of parties that Brett also attended. We did not know each other well, but I knew him and he knew me. In the summer of 1982, like most summers, I spent almost every day at the Columbia Country Club in Chevy Chase, Maryland swimming and practicing diving.

One evening that summer, after a day of swimming at the club, I attended a small gathering at a house in the Chevy Chase/Bethesda area. There were four boys I remember being there: Brett Kavanaugh, Mark Judge, P.J. Smyth, and one other boy whose name I cannot recall. I remember my friend Leland Ingham attending. I do not remember all of the details of how that gathering came together, but like many that summer, it was almost surely a spur of the moment gathering. I truly wish I could provide detailed answers to all of the questions that have been and will be asked about how I got to the party, where it took place, and so forth. I don't have all the answers, and I don't remember as much as I would like to. But the details about that night that bring me here today are ones I will never forget. They have been seared into my memory and have haunted me episodically as an adult.

When I got to the small gathering, people were drinking beer in a small living room on the first floor of the house. I drank one beer that evening. Brett and Mark were visibly drunk. Early in the evening, I went up a narrow set of stairs leading from the living room to a second floor to use the bathroom. When I got to the top of the stairs, I was pushed from behind into a bedroom. I couldn't see who pushed me. Brett and Mark came into the bedroom and locked the door behind them. There was music already playing in the bedroom. It was turned up louder by either Brett or Mark once we were in the room. I was pushed onto the bed and Brett got on top of me. He began running his hands over my body and grinding his hips into me. I yelled, hoping someone downstairs might hear me, and tried to get away from him, but his weight was heavy. Brett groped me and tried to take off my clothes. He had a hard time because he was so drunk, and because I was wearing a one-piece bathing suit under my clothes. I believed he was going to rape me. I tried to yell for help. When I did, Brett put his hand over my mouth to stop me from screaming. This was what terrified me the most, and has had the most lasting impact on my life. It was hard for me to breathe, and I thought that Brett was accidentally going to kill me. Both Brett and Mark were drunkenly laughing during the attack. They both seemed to be having a good time. Mark was urging Brett on, although at times he told Brett to stop. A couple of times I made eye contact with Mark and thought he might try to help me, but he did not.

During this assault, Mark came over and jumped on the bed twice while Brett was on top of me. The last time he did this, we toppled over and Brett was no longer on top of me. I was able to get up and run out of the room. Directly across from the bedroom was a small bathroom. I ran inside the bathroom and locked the door. I heard Brett and Mark leave the bedroom laughing and loudly walk down the narrow stairs, pin-balling off the walls on the way down. I waited and when I did not hear them come back up the stairs, I left the bathroom, ran down the stairs, through the living room, and left the house. I remember being on the street and feeling an enormous sense of relief that I had escaped from the house and that Brett and Mark were not coming after me.

Brett's assault on me drastically altered my life. For a very long time, I was too afraid and ashamed to tell anyone the details. I did not want to tell my parents that I, at age 15, was in a house without any parents present, drinking beer with boys. I tried to convince myself that because Brett did not rape me, I should be able to move on and just pretend that it had never happened. Over the years, I told very few friends that I had this traumatic experience. I told my husband before we were married that I had experienced a sexual assault. I had never told the details to anyone until May 2012, during a couples counseling session. The reason this came up in counseling is that my husband and I had completed an extensive remodel of our home, and I insisted on a second front door, an idea that he and others disagreed with and could not understand. In explaining why I wanted to have a second front door, I described the assault in detail. I recall saying that the boy who assaulted me could someday be on the U.S. Supreme Court and spoke a bit about his background. My husband recalls that I named my attacker as Brett Kavanaugh.

After that May 2012 therapy session, I did my best to suppress memories of the assault because recounting the details caused me to relive the experience, and caused panic attacks and anxiety. Occasionally I would discuss the assault in individual therapy, but talking about it caused me to relive the trauma, so I tried not to think about it or discuss it. But over the years, I went through periods where I thought about Brett's attack. I confided in some close friends that I had an experience with sexual assault. Occasionally I stated that my assailant was a prominent lawyer or judge but I did not use his name. I do not recall each person I spoke to about Brett's assault, and some friends have reminded me of these conversations since the publication of The Washington Post story on September 16, 2018. But until July 2018, I had never named Mr. Kavanaugh as my attacker outside of therapy.
This all changed in early July 2018. I saw press reports stating that Brett Kavanaugh was on the "short list" of potential Supreme Court nominees. I thought it was my civic duty to relay the information I had about Mr. Kavanaugh's conduct so that those considering his potential nomination would know about the assault.

On July 6, 2018, I had a sense of urgency to relay the information to the Senate and the President as soon as possible before a nominee was selected. I called my congressional representative and let her receptionist know that someone on the President's shortlist had attacked me. I also sent a message to The Washington Post's confidential tip line. I did not use my name, but I provided the names of Brett Kavanaugh and Mark Judge. I stated that Mr. Kavanaugh had assaulted me in the 1980s in Maryland. This was an extremely hard thing for me to do, but I felt I couldn't NOT do it. Over the next two days, I told a couple of close friends on the beach in California that Mr.Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted me. I was conflicted about whether to speak out.

On July 9, 2018, I received a call from the office of Congresswoman Anna Eshoo after Mr. Kavanaugh had become the nominee. I met with her staff on July 11 and with her on July 13, describing the assault and discussing my fear about coming forward. Later, we discussed the possibility of sending a letter to Ranking Member Feinstein, who is one of my state's Senators, describing what occurred. My understanding is that Representative Eshoo's office delivered a copy of my letter to Senator Feinstein's office on July 30, 2018. The letter included my name, but requested that the letter be kept confidential.
My hope was that providing the information confidentially would be sufficient to allow the Senate to consider Mr. Kavanaugh's serious misconduct without having to make myself, my family, or anyone's family vulnerable to the personal attacks and invasions of privacy we have faced since my name became public. In a letter on August 31, 2018, Senator Feinstein wrote that she would not share the letter without my consent. I greatly appreciated this commitment. All sexual assault victims should be able to decide for themselves whether their private experience is made public.

As the hearing date got closer, I struggled with a terrible choice: Do I share the facts with the Senate and put myself and my family in the public spotlight? Or do I preserve our privacy and allow the Senate to make its decision on Mr. Kavanaugh's nomination without knowing the full truth about his past behavior?
I agonized daily with this decision throughout August and early September 2018. The sense of duty that motivated me to reach out confidentially to The Washington Post, Representative Eshoo's office, and Senator Feinstein's office was always there, but my fears of the consequences of speaking out started to increase.
During August 2018, the press reported that Mr. Kavanaugh's confirmation was virtually certain. His allies painted him as a champion of women's rights and empowerment. I believed that if I came forward, my voice would be drowned out by a chorus of powerful supporters. By the time of the confirmation hearings, I had resigned myself to remaining quiet and letting the Committee and the Senate make their decision without knowing what Mr. Kavanaugh had done to me.

Once the press started reporting on the existence of the letter I had sent to Senator Feinstein, I faced mounting pressure. Reporters appeared at my home and at my job demanding information about this letter, including in the presence of my graduate students. They called my boss and co- workers and left me many messages, making it clear that my name would inevitably be released to the media. I decided to speak out publicly to a journalist who had responded to the tip I had sent to The Washington Post and who had gained my trust. It was important to me to describe the details of the assault in my own words.

Since September 16, the date of The Washington Post story, I have experienced an outpouring of support from people in every state of this country. Thousands of people who have had their lives dramatically altered by sexual violence have reached out to share their own experiences with me and have thanked me for coming forward. We have received tremendous support from friends and our community.

At the same time, my greatest fears have been realized -- and the reality has been far worse than what I expected. My family and I have been the target of constant harassment and death threats. I have been called the most vile and hateful names imaginable. These messages, while far fewer than the expressions of support, have been terrifying to receive and have rocked me to my core. People have posted my personal information on the internet. This has resulted in additional emails, calls, and threats. My family and I were forced to move out of our home. Since September 16, my family and I have been living in various secure locales, with guards. This past Tuesday evening, my work email account was hacked and messages were sent out supposedly recanting my description of the sexual assault.

Apart from the assault itself, these last couple of weeks have been the hardest of my life. I have had to relive my trauma in front of the entire world, and have seen my life picked apart by people on television, in the media, and in this body who have never met me or spoken with me. I have been accused of acting out of partisan political motives. Those who say that do not know me. I am a fiercely independent person and I am no one's pawn. My motivation in coming forward was to provide the facts about how Mr. Kavanaugh's actions have damaged my life, so that you can take that into serious consideration as you make your decision about how to proceed. It is not my responsibility to determine whether Mr. Kavanaugh deserves to sit on the Supreme Court. My responsibility is to tell the truth.

I understand that the Majority has hired a professional prosecutor to ask me some questions, and I am committed to doing my very best to answer them. At the same time, because the Committee Members will be judging my credibility, I hope to be able to engage directly with each of you.
At this point, I will do my best to answer your questions.
 
Nov 25, 2013
32,083
11,718
136
You called me a woman. Ohh i'm so not offended. Not willing to make a bet i don't want to lose.

A little bitch

female-chihuahua.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: cytg111

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,592
6,715
126
One might think the person you speak to had some honesty and decency. It ain't in the cards, bro.
I distinguish two types of indecency, one genuinely malevolent, gone over to the dark side, folk without soul, and people who believe in the good but what they believe is the good is garbage that was inculcated by force. What you call not in the cards I would refe (F...). I lost the rest of this post and I won’t fix ones that happens to. Bores me to repeat myself. Sorry
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,592
6,715
126
OK, thanks Mr. Moonie.
I try to go more than half way if I can.

When new information arises in a confirmation hearing it is obviously logical and has always been past practice to have the FBI investigate. I believe in this I am completely right and your notion that the investigation is done be the senate and staffers is utter bull shit. You may wish away the truth for yourself but I am not obliged to go along. Sorry, but you won’t die just because you are wrong. It’s those sacred cows that cause the truth to hurt. I know all about that, believe me.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
Exactly how are you an expert in this information? Watching Law and Order too much?

Sugar NF, Fine DN, Eckert LO. Physical injury after sexual assault: findings of a large case series. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004 Jan;190(1):71-6.

Of victims assaulted by more than one assailant, 38.9% did not have any evidence of bodily trauma (includes both genital and non-genital injuries).

If intellectual honesty truly matters to you, I suggest you revise your post.
Revised my original post as you requested, but there is also this study and article which places the prevalence of injury in cases of sexual assault at 90%.

Here is the conclusion of the study:

“As technology and examination techniques have improved, the literature reflects a growing ability by examiners to detect genital injury following rape and sexual assault. In particular, the combination of colposcopy with digital image capture and staining with contrast media such as toluidine blue, Gentian violet, fluorescein, and/or Lugol’s solution has led to reports of genital injury prevalence approaching 90% following nonconsensual sexual intercourse. Several replication studies demonstrated the same four locations that are the most common sites for genital injury: posterior fourchette, labia minora, hymen, and fossa navicularis“

DEFINING PATTERNS OF GENITAL INJURY FROM SEXUAL ASSAULT
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3142744/
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: imported_tajmahal

echo4747

Golden Member
Jun 22, 2005
1,979
156
106
Has this been posted yet?
The transcript from what Christine Ford will tell the committee tomorrow?
VERY DISTURBING and you can feel the panic Ford endured in her voice.
Absolutely shocking.
Sure, it is possible that the event she scribes could have happened, she goes into fairly good detail , but what I find strange is, except for the physical things such as dates or location which could be verified or debunked? She ONLY forgot the actual evidence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: imported_tajmahal

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
12,837
2,622
136
Should be interesting, watching the GOP senators on the committee doing their best to act like they are concerned and interesting all the while hiding behind their mouthpiece whose major selection criteria was having ovaries. Now they are coming up with unsworn anonymous rebuttal evidence-something that would never be allowed in a court of law for very valid reasons and something I bet will play a major part in the GOP questioning.

The big question is whether the voting public will be fooled by this sham dog and pony show. Vote the bums out or face the consequences of the accelerating decline of this country.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Homerboy
Jan 25, 2011
17,026
9,478
146
Should be interesting, watching the GOP senators on the committee doing their best to act like they are concerned and interesting all the while hiding behind their mouthpiece whose major selection criteria was having ovaries. Now they are coming up with unsworn anonymous rebuttal evidence-something that would never be allowed in a court of law for very valid reasons and something I bet will play a major part in the GOP questioning.

The big question is whether the voting public will be fooled by this sham dog and pony show. Vote the bums out or face the consequences of the accelerating decline of this country.
They are cowards for sure but I won't be dismissive of Mitchell. She's a well respected prosecutor and victim advocate. From everything I've read she is known for being able to cut through to the truth. No histrionics or gotchas. Just a kind of death of a thousand cuts kind of prosecutor.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
38,906
32,014
136
Well coached, should be interesting tomorrow.
vs a poorly coached Kavanaugh. Telling the truth has the tendency to come off smoother. That's why Trump's speech is a bunch of rambling, repeating non-sequiturs. Trying to convince yourself lies are the truth while talking can be difficult.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
38,906
32,014
136
Should be interesting, watching the GOP senators on the committee doing their best to act like they are concerned and interesting all the while hiding behind their mouthpiece whose major selection criteria was having ovaries. Now they are coming up with unsworn anonymous rebuttal evidence-something that would never be allowed in a court of law for very valid reasons and something I bet will play a major part in the GOP questioning.

The big question is whether the voting public will be fooled by this sham dog and pony show. Vote the bums out or face the consequences of the accelerating decline of this country.
GOP is not there to get to the truth they are there to get Kavanaugh confirmed. It's all up to Ford.

I wouldn't want that kind of pressure. No matter how this turns out I give Ford props for stepping up to the plate for what's right. Very few people have those kinds of stones.
 

abj13

Golden Member
Jan 27, 2005
1,071
902
136
Revised my original post as you requested, but there is also this study and article which places the prevalence of injury in cases of sexual assault at 90%.

Here is the conclusion of the study:

“As technology and examination techniques have improved, the literature reflects a growing ability by examiners to detect genital injury following rape and sexual assault. In particular, the combination of colposcopy with digital image capture and staining with contrast media such as toluidine blue, Gentian violet, fluorescein, and/or Lugol’s solution has led to reports of genital injury prevalence approaching 90% following nonconsensual sexual intercourse. Several replication studies demonstrated the same four locations that are the most common sites for genital injury: posterior fourchette, labia minora, hymen, and fossa navicularis“

DEFINING PATTERNS OF GENITAL INJURY FROM SEXUAL ASSAULT
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3142744/

If you are going to cite something, please actually read it before posting it. Why?

1) It is not a study. Your link is a review of other studies.
2) The majority of the studies it cites finds that 50-60% of women have visualized injuries (see section Injury Prevalence With Visual Inspection or Table 1)
3) The 90% value is derived from a single study and is not reflective of the other 51 studies cited in this review
4) In the study that found injury prevalence of 90%, it required Colposcopy, an invasive procedure that is not always completed when examining women of sexual assault
5) In another study cited by the review, 36% of adult women had no injuries visualized by colposcopy
6) The 90% value does not reflect injuries sustained with "gang rape" as you were specifically citing.
7) The single study had 87% of women examined within 48 hours of the assault, a higher value than some of the other studies cited in the review

Next time please carefully read and review a link before you post it, especially when you've demonstrated that you are no expert on this topic at all.
 

Perknose

Forum Director & Omnipotent Overlord
Forum Director
Oct 9, 1999
46,839
10,591
147
I do outreach work for Moms Demand Action, which advocates for better gun control legislation, among other things. That's right, I'm an honorary Mom! :)) The first meeting I ever went to, there were about 40 hot suburban moms and one other guy. :p

We're part of a larger group called Everytown For Gun Safety.

We just put out a call for folks to contact their Senators and tell them to vote "NO!"

Here it is. Join in and let your voice be heard.

Btw, the main "activist" group I give my time and energy to is Power Bucks County. We try to make our communities a better place for all.
Sideshow to the Kavanaugh confirmation controversy, Sane and Basic Gun Control Edition: Local advocacy works! Got this e-mail from my state rep just today:


Marguerite Quinn <Mquinn@pahousegop.com>
8:32 AM (20 minutes ago)
cleardot.gif

cleardot.gif

to David
cleardot.gif


David as my constituent, I hope you have read with interest all the updates I have sent you over the summer on HB2060 as well as other legislation I’ve continued to work on this summer. As you are aware, I am the prime sponsor of HB2060. I worked closely with the Senate to be sure to craft my legislation very close to theirs to help ensure speedy passage. But I was thrown a curveball in late June. I quickly shook it off started my summer with a press conference with DA Weintraub, Moms demand Action, Bucks Women’s Advocacy all calling for this bill to get a vote. My “restful” summer included meetings and conference calls with all sorts of groups to figure out a strategy to get this common-sense measure passed. With a lot of support from many people, especially the “Moms,” this bill passed the House today with a vote of 131 -62.
The bill now goes to the Senate. I am confident that it will be taken up for consideration and passed in that Chamber without amendments, so that it can go straight to the Governor’s desk for his signature.


I hope you will watch with interest and subscribe to all my updates to keep informed.

Regards,

Marguerite

Marguerite C. Quinn


State Representative, 143rd Legislative District
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HB2060:

An Act amending Titles 18 (Crimes and Offenses) and 23 (Domestic Relations) of the Pennsylvania Consolidated Statutes, in firearms and other dangerous articles, further providing for persons not to possess, use, manufacture, control, sell or transfer firearms and providing for relinquishment of firearms and firearm licenses by convicted persons and for abandonment of firearms, weapons or ammunition; and, in protection from abuse, further providing for definitions, for commencement of proceedings, for hearings, for relief, for return of relinquished firearms, other weapons and ammunition and additional relief, for relinquishment for consignment sale, lawful transfer or safekeeping and for relinquishment to third party for safekeeping, imposing a penalty and providing for order to seal record from public view.

^^^ Basically, if you've been convicted of domestic abuse (you know, beating on your S.O.), you don't get to have to firearms, or traffic in them.

Get involved, folks. Informed citizen participation is that backbone of any truly functioning democracy.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
If you are going to cite something, please actually read it before posting it. Why?

1) It is not a study. Your link is a review of other studies.
It’s a review of studies from which the author draws a fact based conclusion, posted to a .gov site I would consider reputable. Are you challenging its validity?

2) The majority of the studies it cites finds that 50-60% of women have visualized injuries (see section Injury Prevalence With Visual Inspection or Table 1)
Visual inspection of visualized injuries, hence the recommendation for more extensive use of other methods, especially for non visual internal injuries. The article makes the case that visual inspection is insufficient and that the prevelance of injury is under reported as a result.

3) The 90% value is derived from a single study and is not reflective of the other 51 studies cited in this review
It was the conclusion of the author, not me, based on those studies. I don’t believe the author has an agenda to inflate the number.


4) In the study that found injury prevalence of 90%, it required colopscopy an invasive procedure that is not always completed when examining women of sexual assault
Yes the author used that as the rarionale for expanding detection tools, because her argument is that injury prevalence is far higher than what is visually detectable.

6) The 90% value does not reflect injuries sustained with "gang rape" as you were specifically citing.
Semantics. The article was for sexual assault. Gang rape is obviously a more severe form of sexual assault for which common sense would suggest that injuries would be even higher.

7) The single study had 87% of women examined within 48 hours of the assault, a higher value than some of the other studies cited in the review
which would make the data more timely to the crime

Next time please carefully read and review a link before you post it, especially when you've demonstrated that you are no expert on this topic at all.
I never claimed to be an expert. The article I posted was relevant and I’ve addressed your points. Something about intellectual honesty.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: imported_tajmahal

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
Got the DVR ready to roll. It's interesting that we have a woman doing the questioning and yeah he's a republican but not a defense attorney, but a prosecutor with a genuinely respectable record and remember that Mueller too is a Rep. Seems like a good choice to get at whatever truth can be had. I hear that some Dems didn't want this but this is where I part company with them. This is a fact-finding mission and one thing Senators aren't interested as a whole is the truth but what can be spun as a replacement for it.

Let's see how it goes.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,698
1,909
126
Got the DVR ready to roll. It's interesting that we have a woman doing the questioning and yeah he's a republican but not a defense attorney, but a prosecutor with a genuinely respectable record and remember that Mueller too is a Rep. Seems like a good choice to get at whatever truth can be had. I hear that some Dems didn't want this but this is where I part company with them. This is a fact-finding mission and one thing Senators aren't interested as a whole is the truth but what can be spun as a replacement for it.

Let's see how it goes.
Agreed. A prosecutor asking the questions is not exactly home court advantage. I suspect today is going to play out in unexpected ways.

My hope is that Kavanaugh withdraws out of respect for the dignity of the seat but demands an investigation to clear his name.
 

abj13

Golden Member
Jan 27, 2005
1,071
902
136
It’s a review of studies from which the author draws a fact based conclusion, posted to a .gov site I would consider reputable. Are you challenging its validity?

.gov site? Do you even know what NCBI is and how a manuscript from the Journal Trauma Violence Abuse gets posted into the Pubmed system?

Its statements like that which reflect how little of the subject and scientific literature. I question your ability to read and understand scientific literature, hence your mischaracterization of a review by calling it a study (even the author calls it a review in her text). Anybody who reads scientific literature would understand the powerful tool of NCBI and not just call it just another ".gov site." And all of this also reflects that you should read something before posting.

Visual inspection, hence the recommendation for more extensive use of other methods. The article makes the case that visual inspection is insufficient and that the prevelance of injury is under reported as a result.

It was the conclusion of the author, not me, based on those studies. I don’t believe the author has an agenda to inflate the number.

Yes the author used that as the rarionale for expanding detection tools, because her argument is that injury prevalence is far higher than what is visually detectable.

Further evidence you didn't actually read the review or understand the literature on sexual assault. The author cites four studies using colposcopy. What is the incidence of no injury in those four studies?

36%
32%
22%
11%


You and the author make the same mistake. You focus on one study and ignore the other studies that don't fit your preconceived conclusions. Or do you also believe that vaccines cause Autism because a single study made that conclusion also?

Semantics. The article was for sexual assault. Gang rape is obviously a more severe form of sexual assault for which common sense would suggest that injuries would be even higher.

Oh yes, what was your false statement you made?

"Gang rape almost always leaves the victim with genital injuries and extensive bruising."

Don't claim semantics when you made that very statement.


I never claimed to be an expert. The article I posted was relevant and I’ve addressed your points. Something about intellectual honesty.

What was that you said?

"Have you ever encountered a woman who was the victim of a gang rape? I have. The Serbs gang raped thousands of Bosnian Muslim women. The ones they didn’t execute were left with emotional trauma and physical scars that left many incapable of bearing children or even physically enjoying sex due to long lasting physical injuries. Gang rape tends to leave an unavoidable evidence trail."

And now you want to cite scientific literature that you haven't even read.

So in the study that found that only 11% have no injuries, have you read it?