Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sinn Fein

​ 🏛️ ​Official Supreme Court nomination thread - Amy Coney Barrett

Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

Because it's accurate to say that innuendo is a deliberate and cowardly attempt to make people believe the worst.

I'd love to see what statement you're referring to.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Ditkaless Wonders said:

The allegations lack specificity such that one could parse between the terms "rape" and "sexual assault".

And in fact, D.C. doesn't have a law against "rape."  It's all sexual assault, varying by degree.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, Ditkaless Wonders said:

lets not rehash the Roethelisberger thing. How was Willie Colon to have known?

Whoah, whoah.  Roethlisberger never raped anyone.  "Especially not" that woman.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, HellToupee said:

:shrug:

Dolt is just such a good word . How about I don’t call her stupid and just an old bag , a shrew or better yet an old crone

I prefer harridan.  (I like Feinstein, BTW).

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Henry Ford said:
17 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

Because it's accurate to say that innuendo is a deliberate and cowardly attempt to make people believe the worst.

I'd love to see what statement you're referring to.  

He said something critical of Feinstein that's unsupported by anything he's found that she said, probably out of dislike for Feinstein I guess. He hasn't conceded that, probably because it seems like ceding ground in a political debate, I guess again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, squistion said:

Sam Stein‏Verified account @samstein 1h1 hour ago

Republicans having 65 signatories ready to go to attest to Kavanaugh’s high school conduct suggests that they too knew about the outlines of these allegations and have chosen strategically to play defense.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/09/14/gop-kavanaugh-sexual-assault-allegation-824699

An anonymous woman alleges Brett Kavanaugh tried to rape her when the two were in high school.

Republicans released a letter from 65 women, who knew him in his high school years, defending his character 

That was quick.  Seems like they already knew about it and had defense already lined up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Dinsy Ejotuz said:

Too late.  He's a scalar, not a new vector.

Trump has graduated and is now a tensor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, fatness said:

He said something critical of Feinstein that's unsupported by anything he's found that she said, probably out of dislike for Feinstein I guess. He hasn't conceded that, probably because it seems like ceding ground in a political debate, I guess again.

Well, it's no longer innuendo so the point is moot anyway.  I have nothing in particular against Feinstein otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, sn0mm1s said:

What are you expecting in November? Seriously, what are your expectations? The Dems get a slim majority in the House? Take back the Senate?

I expect the Dems to take the House easily, and to either take the Senate or remain very close, setting themselves up to take it in 2020. (The Senate is a long game.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Henry Ford said:

Jesus Christ.

Well, I guess that could be the difference, though I doubt it's admissible in a court of law.

 

1 hour ago, Henry Ford said:

Breaking news: Brett Kavanaugh knew 65 different women well enough when he was a teenager for them to testify about his character, despite going to an all-boys school.

I went to an all boys HS and I sure as heck didn't know 65 girls.  :kicksrock:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Sand said:

Well, I guess that could be the difference, though I doubt it's admissible in a court of law.

 

I went to an all boys HS and I sure as heck didn't know 65 girls.  :kicksrock:

 

 

I went to an all girls school and didn't know 65 girls.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Bruce Dickinson said:

Gosh, I wonder why women don’t feel comfortable coming forward when they are victims of sexual misconduct.

There was an intervening 35 years to initiate an accusation here.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Henry Ford said:

And in fact, D.C. doesn't have a law against "rape."  It's all sexual assault, varying by degree.

So rape isn’t a crime in D.C.?  What about collusion?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Sand said:

There was an intervening 35 years to initiate an accusation here.  

For a traumatic event, why should that matter?  Does time expired make it less valid a concern?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Polish Hammer said:

For a traumatic event, why should that matter?  Does time expired make it less valid a concern?

Human memories fade quickly.  At some point he ability to conduct a proper investigation, particularly in an area like this, gets very difficult.  So yes, time really does matter in cases like these.  This needed, if it has veracity (which obviously we have no idea), to have been initiated many years ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's how the last few pages should have gone:

"He's been accused of rape"

"No, he's been accused of attempted rape"

"Oh yeah, my bad.  Attempted rape is obviously still serious though."

"I agree"

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Putting the rape-talk aside for a minute ...

On Monday, a three judge panel of GOP appointees in the 8th circuit (including one appointed by Trump) decided an interesting abortion case - Comprehensive Health v. Hawley - in which they are essentially ignoring current Supreme Court precedent from Casey and Hellerstedt and betting that, with Kennedy gone, the SCOTUS will now allow state laws which essentially eliminate all abortion providers (using onerous regulatory requirements) without directly contradicting Roe v Wade.  The law at issue in this case would reportedly close all but one provider in Missouri, and is more restrictive in at least one important sense than the Texas law deemed unconstitutional in Hellerstedt. The author of this opinion has been openly hostile to Roe in the past. His justifications for working around Hellerstedt in this case are downright comical: 1) the restrictions don't violate Hellerstedt/Casey because the abortion provider has the opportunity under the law to petition the state for an exemption; and 2) Even though the Missouri law at issue is even more restrictive than the Texas regulations struck down in Hellerstedt, that case is distinguishable because it only applied to abortion rights in Texas, and made no findings that such laws would infringe on abortion rights in Missouri.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't you get the feeling that we will look back on this thread, with it's likely hundreds of pages, and say, well, that wasn't really worth it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Sand said:

Human memories fade quickly.  At some point he ability to conduct a proper investigation, particularly in an area like this, gets very difficult.  So yes, time really does matter in cases like these.  This needed, if it has veracity (which obviously we have no idea), to have been initiated many years ago.

How would you apply this stance to something similar, say the information that has come out about the Catholic Church recently?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Bruce Dickinson said:

So rape isn’t a crime in D.C.?  What about collusion?

Henry is making a semantic distinction - state criminal codes typically use the terms "assault" and "sexual assault" rather than "rape."  There are usually at least 3 or 4 different degrees of sexual assault, depending on the nature/extent of the acts. The term "rape" is colloquial, and isn't typically used in state criminal statutes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JohnnyU said:

Don't you get the feeling that we will look back on this thread, with it's likely hundreds of pages, and say, well, that wasn't really worth it.

Sometimes it's the journey, and not the destination.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JohnnyU said:

Don't you get the feeling that we will look back on this thread, with it's likely hundreds of pages, and say, well, that wasn't really worth it.

I want Kavanaugh to be confirmed, but I have to admit that this will be a pretty awesome illustration of karma if the GOP bungle this nomination and lose the seat when the Senate flips in November.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

I want Kavanaugh to be confirmed, but I have to admit that this will be a pretty awesome illustration of karma if the GOP bungle this nomination and lose the seat when the Senate flips in November.

How would the GOP bungle this nomination?  All I've seen is grandstanding by the dems.

Edited by JohnnyU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Polish Hammer said:

How would you apply this stance to something similar, say the information that has come out about the Catholic Church recently?

It cartainly makes any investigations into these crimes all the more difficult due to the time spans.

It also makes it that much more galling that the Church decided to hide/obfuscate these crimes and play the shell game with priests getting moved from place to place.

Edited by Sand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JohnnyU said:

How would the GOP bungle this nomination?

If it can somehow be shown that Kavanaugh attempted to rape somebody, that would be disqualifying.  And it's too late to send up another nominee before the midterms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Polish Hammer said:

How would you apply this stance to something similar, say the information that has come out about the Catholic Church recently?

My opinion would be the same. If there was an anonymous accusation about a situation from 35 years ago and the only thing we had was one letter to Feinstein (that may change, but as of right now I believe that is all we have).

The catholic church situation was of course as you know very different. There were plenty of accusations made that were covered up, priests transferred, documents hidden, etc etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

If it can somehow be shown that Kavanaugh attempted to rape somebody, that would be disqualifying.  And it's too late to send up another nominee before the midterms.

None of that is going to happen.  I think it's reasonable to say that Kavanaugh is going to be the SCOTUS and that people like Feinstein (sp?) are disgusting  Looks like last minute desperation to me. 

Edited by JohnnyU

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Sand said:

It cartainly makes any investigations into these crimes all the more difficult due to the time spans.

It also makes it that much more galling that the Church decided to hide/obfuscate these crimes and play the shell game with priests getting moved from place to place.

Difficult, yes.  Impossible, no.  When I read your original post my gut reaction was that you were dismissive of the claim simply because of the time elapsed since it occurred.  The reason I asked these questions is that I didn't want to assume bad motive/intent on your part and understand where you are coming from.  If you are saying that is NOT the case (dismissal of the claim due to time) - and that it was merely a commentary on the difficulty of ascertaining an understanding of its truth - then I think we can agree on that.  

As for the specifics of the Church incident - and as a person that was Catholic raised and educated for 13 years - I totally agree.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, parasaurolophus said:

My opinion would be the same. If there was an anonymous accusation about a situation from 35 years ago and the only thing we had was one letter to Feinstein (that may change, but as of right now I believe that is all we have).

The catholic church situation was of course as you know very different. There were plenty of accusations made that were covered up, priests transferred, documents hidden, etc etc.

But don't you think that in that case (which may be a bad comparison) it all starts with a single person sharing their story - anonymous or not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One distinction I think should be made: some of you are saying it’s an “anonymous accusation.”

My understanding is that the accuser is not anonymous. She identified herself in the letter to Feinstein, people may have spoken to her, and it seems like Kavanaugh’s people knew the allegations was coming, so presumedly they know who the accuser is. 

I agree that getting to the bottom of a 35 year old he said/she said story may be impossible, but any interested factfinders know who the woman is

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, JohnnyU said:

None of that is going to happen.  I think it's reasonable to say that Kavanaugh is going to be the SCOTUS and that people like Feinstein (sp?) are disgusting  Looks like last minute desperation to me. 

Why is Feinstein disgusting? You must be aware that Ronan Farrow independently verified the details of the sexual assault allegation in an article today in The New Yorker.

Edited by squistion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, JohnnyU said:
38 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

If it can somehow be shown that Kavanaugh attempted to rape somebody, that would be disqualifying.  And it's too late to send up another nominee before the midterms.

None of that is going to happen.  I think it's reasonable to say that Kavanaugh is going to be the SCOTUS and that people like Feinstein (sp?) are disgusting  Looks like last minute desperation to me. 

Given that letter, what should Feinstein had done in your opinion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, squistion said:

Why is Feinstein disgusting? You must be aware that Ronan Farrow independently verified the sexual assault allegation in an article today in The New Yorker.

In JohnnyU's defense it's entirely possible that he's not aware of it. It really hasn't been that long, and it's been a pretty significant news day in at least two other respects.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, JohnnyU said:

None of that is going to happen.  I think it's reasonable to say that Kavanaugh is going to be the SCOTUS and that people like Feinstein (sp?) are disgusting  Looks like last minute desperation to me. 

So tell me, how did the GOP get that list of 65 women from his HS days overnight? They have probably known about this allegation for months.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, badmojo1006 said:

So tell me, how did the GOP get that list of 65 women from his HS days overnight? They have probably known about this allegation for months.

Word leaked a week ago, and this many women from his HS got wind of it and got together on their own and supported him. Thats very telling. I've also read that Kavanaugh's alleged companion (classmate) has no recollection of the incident. This isn't going anywhere.

Edited by ArbyMelt

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't necessarily think this should be disqualifying unless we get more info (the lying to Congress and the refusal to agree to recuse himself in Trump-related matters is disqualifying IMO). I think they should probably re-open the hearing and discuss this, and if Kavanaugh says it's untrue under oath and there's no corroboration anywhere they can move forward.

But jeez, the GOP couldn't possibly have picked a worse tack to defend their man. Claiming that acting decent around other women is somehow exonerating and slamming the allegations because the alleged victim chose to remain anonymous is gross. Imagine if a business responded like that after someone prominent in their organization was accused of sexual assault.  The #MeToo crowd would drag them to their death, and rightfully so. It's almost like the GOP is trying to alienate the under 50 female vote.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, badmojo1006 said:

So tell me, how did the GOP get that list of 65 women from his HS days overnight? They have probably known about this allegation for months.

Yep.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, ArbyMelt said:

Word leaked a week ago, and this many women from his HS got wind of it and got together on their own and supported him. Thats very telling. I've also read that Kavanaugh's alleged companion (classmate) has no recollection of the incident. This isn't going anywhere.

I first heard about it yesterday or maybe Wednesday. Who leaked it? And you are seriously going to tell me that 65 women got together to support him just like that? It doesn't smell right

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, ArbyMelt said:

 I've also read that Kavanaugh's alleged companion (classmate) has no recollection of the incident. This isn't going anywhere.

So the guy that was implicated in helping him, allegedly, rape a woman says he can't recall if he did something that horrible?  Case closed.

Edited by Sheriff Bart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, badmojo1006 said:

So tell me, how did the GOP get that list of 65 women from his HS days overnight? They have probably known about this allegation for months.

This part is actually pretty easy to explain.  Kavanaugh clerked for a guy who was a serial sexual harasser, and it was completely predictable that this might be raised as an issue during his confirmation.  So of course they have a bunch of women who have known him for a long time lined up to say nice things about him.  This particular accusation wasn't what they were expecting, but they were expecting something along these lines.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, IvanKaramazov said:

This part is actually pretty easy to explain.  Kavanaugh clerked for a guy who was a serial sexual harasser, and it was completely predictable that this might be raised as an issue during his confirmation.  So of course they have a bunch of women who have known him for a long time lined up to say nice things about him.  This particular accusation wasn't what they were expecting, but they were expecting something along these lines.

Except the list is 65 women who knew him in high school.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, IvanKaramazov said:

This part is actually pretty easy to explain.  Kavanaugh clerked for a guy who was a serial sexual harasser, and it was completely predictable that this might be raised as an issue during his confirmation.  So of course they have a bunch of women who have known him for a long time lined up to say nice things about him.  This particular accusation wasn't what they were expecting, but they were expecting something along these lines.

My sarcasm meter is on the fritz. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so do any of the women who signed that letter actually know the accuser and did they sign it before they knew the allegation was attempted rape those are two questions i would like to know and now that they do know do all of them say sure keep my name on that letter take that to the bank brohans 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Getting 65 women who knew him in high school when he went to all-male school is pretty impressive.  I went to a public school, and I struggled just to get one to know who I was.  :kicksrock:

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.