Official Brett Kavanaugh confirmation thread

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Your view is losing at the moment, it even looks like Kavanaugh will receive more than one Democratic vote on confirmation.

my view? the out-of-court statements without cross-examination opportunity are definitively hearsay. They wouldn't be admitted in court. what in the world are you talking about

That’s not accurate wrote:

rojo wrote:

While I don't agree with you, I love the thoughts behind your post. Pretty brilliant.

I don't agree because if you are innocent and know there are 4 people who say it didnt' happen all you'd think you'd have to do is figure out a way to remind people of that fact.

This is factually wrong. 4 people have not said that it didn’t happen.

One person says it happened. Ford.

One person says it didn’t happen. Kavanaugh

Everyone else says they have no memory of it. They don’t say “it didn’t happen”.

And to be clear, even Kavanaugh says it could have happened, just that it wasn’t him.

Have any of you even been to a party? Can you account for what every guest is doing every minute of the party?

Even if you’ve never left your basement lair, do you know everything your mommy is doing upstairs?

Take a breather wrote:

SJWHippie wrote:

Let's not get nutty here people.

Hold yourselves above the fray.

The political climate in the states has reached unbelievable levels of ugliness. The hatred is awful to watch. Americans hate Americans. I think everyone needs to take a step back and just take some time to relax and calm down.

I don’t know why there is so much anger and hatred going on but I can’t imagine this is how you all actually want to be as people. You need to find some unity.

I concur. Either find some unity, or at least have a good old civil war. I have never come across such a divisive country...

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Your view is losing at the moment ...

Mike Davis, a Republican committee staffer demanded, shortly after the New Yorker published her allegations Sunday, Ramirez’s that attorneys hand over all evidence and asked whether she was willing to testify to the committee’s investigators.

Her attorneys said Ramirez did have additional witnesses and other evidence, and they said she was willing to testify but wanted to know the terms and conditions of the inquiry.

Davis again demanded the evidence before he would consider a phone call. Ramirez’s attorneys continued trying to set up a bipartisan call with Democratic staffers — who were baffled by the GOP majority’s actions.

#metoo wrote:

Have any of you even been to a party? Can you account for what every guest is doing every minute of the party?

The specific party has not been identified.

at this point she's already had her platform. Further interviews would best be done in private. If this is a smear, wouldn't it be nice to have the evidence to prove that to swing voters?

3hr-marathoner wrote:

at this point she's already had her platform. Further interviews would best be done in private. If this is a smear, wouldn't it be nice to have the evidence to prove that to swing voters?

Her best option, and that of the other accusers, is to file official charges against Kavanaugh in Maryland.

3hr-marathoner wrote:

at this point she's already had her platform. Further interviews would best be done in private. If this is a smear, wouldn't it be nice to have the evidence to prove that to swing voters?

It should have been private from the beginning, but Feinstein et al. leaked the story for political reasons, which is evidence enough that this is a smear.

The testimony yesterday rests on memories from more than 30 years ago.

Dr. Ford doesn't remember how she got to the party or how she got home. She doesn't remember where it was or when it was.

Dr. Ford names others who were there, but none of them remember the party.

But if you are focusing on what people don't remember then you are focusing on the wrong thing. Nobody remembers what happened 30 years ago unless it was important. You don't remember unless it is something you have played over in your mind to refresh that memory and keep it locked away.

From Dr. Ford's testimony, the whole attack appears to have lasted less than 5 minutes.

Kavanaugh and Judge don't remember that day. It's partially because they were drunk, but mostly because it was only 5 minutes out of their lives. To them, it wasn't important.

To the others at the party, that day was even less important. None of them knew that Ford was attacked. It was just another day of sitting around and drinking beer. Nothing memorable.

But to Dr. Ford, this was the most harrowing time of her life. She testified about her vivid memories of those five minutes.

Dr. Ford remembers what happened like it was yesterday. Because to her, it might as well have been yesterday.

She remembers who was on top of her. She remembers who covered her mouth. She remembers who fondled her and laughed about it.

This was not mistaken identity.

Dr. Ford was clearly telling the truth.

fre wrote:

my view? the out-of-court statements without cross-examination opportunity are definitively hearsay. They wouldn't be admitted in court. what in the world are you talking about

It is clear that you have no idea what hearsay is. I'm surprised you manage to get yourself dressed in the morning.

The deluded Democratic partisans remain useful idiots. Doesn’t matter, in a week Kavanaugh will be on the SCOTUS.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Your view is losing at the moment, it even looks like Kavanaugh will receive more than one Democratic vote on confirmation.

Yep. Kavanaugh will be confirmed. Another Flagpole prediction goes down the drain.

M-A-G-A!!!

panem et circensis wrote:

3hr-marathoner wrote:

at this point she's already had her platform. Further interviews would best be done in private. If this is a smear, wouldn't it be nice to have the evidence to prove that to swing voters?

It should have been private from the beginning, but Feinstein et al. leaked the story for political reasons, which is evidence enough that this is a smear.

The leak came from Trump. He sent Ed Whelan out after Ford before her name became public.

moran alert wrote:

fre wrote:

my view? the out-of-court statements without cross-examination opportunity are definitively hearsay. They wouldn't be admitted in court. what in the world are you talking about

It is clear that you have no idea what hearsay is. I'm surprised you manage to get yourself dressed in the morning.

"Hearsay is a statement, other than one made by the declarant while testifying at the trial or hearing, offered in evidence to prove the truth of the matter asserted."

panem et circensis wrote:

3hr-marathoner wrote:

at this point she's already had her platform. Further interviews would best be done in private. If this is a smear, wouldn't it be nice to have the evidence to prove that to swing voters?

It should have been private from the beginning, but Feinstein et al. leaked the story for political reasons, which is evidence enough that this is a smear.

The timing certainly stinks to high heaven and I have no doubt that the Demoncrats are trying to use this to their political advantage. None of that necessarily speaks to Ford's credibility. In her testimony Ford claimed to have attempted to get this information to the senate when Kavanaugh first appeared on Trump's list -- before Kavanaugh was even nominated. If that is true (and it should be easily verifiable/falsifiable), then Ford's coming forth doesn't appear to have been politically motivated. She was simply trying to provide evidence for why Trump should nominate a different conservative justice.

Dr. Ford may remember it like it was yesterday. She just can't remember when it happened, where it happened, how she got there or who took her home - not exactly a great memory. Also, she forgot that she wasn't really afraid to fly. Right now, there is zero independent evidence that both people were actually in the same house at the same time. If there was any third party that could definitively state that yes, the party happened and they were both in the same house at the same time then I would side with Dr. Ford. Until then, the allegations simply cannot be substantiated and if you are going to ruin a person's life, you should have to at least meet a bare preponderance of the evidence standard.

At the moment, it appears the most likely explanation is that she is a political hack who is acting on the fear mongering of the democrats who have been very outspoken that Kavanaugh's confirmation will be the end of the world....but what else is new.

They are not hearsay. They are firsthand accounts that the party in question never occurred. One is alleged eyewitness testimony that the event in question never occurred (Judge). Kaiser (her best friend who was allegedly at the party in question) claimed that she never met Kavanaugh in her life. These are not hearsay.

Is too early to dust off the pink p$$y hat in closet and start marching around town tearing down monuments (of any man(conservative) bc they are all rapists) while screaming at the top of my lungs?

Four poople wrote:

#metoo wrote:

Have any of you even been to a party? Can you account for what every guest is doing every minute of the party?

The specific party has not been identified.

Do you know the date and location of every single party you’ve ever been to? Did you know every person at the party? Have you ever been to a party at a house you only went to once? Ever get drugged and raped or know anyone that has? How long do you think a rape takes?