timschochet
Footballguy
As I just wrote, you have to make the attempt.Impossible endeavor.
As I just wrote, you have to make the attempt.Impossible endeavor.
I’m happy you have a life where victims of sexual misconduct are nothing more than pawns in a game you can laugh at. I don’t have that luxury. I’m glad you don’t understand and empathize with victims well enough to get why it could take so long for a victim to come forward. It’s a reality I wish I didn’t understand or have to deal with on a daily basis.A week or two? Lol. You sell out your true motivation.
That's not really true. We may not be able to get CSI-level certainty about the truth of this allegation, but there are things that we can draw inferences from that should make the allegation more credible or less credible.I think you are focusing on the wrong thing. Sometimes people dont want to come forward, it happens. The more important point here is we are talking about a situation from forever ago when they were both 17 and probably both drinking( even though of course i dont think they have mentioned that she was drinking, but how could we know for sure all these years later). So many grey area possibilities here. Especially when one thing that is an almost absolute among people is that their account of a situation puts them in the best light. Memories also morph quite a bit over time.
Oh and in addition we are getting a third hand account of these details.
By making a big deal of it and putting it in the news for 2 more weeks isnt a legit endeavor. It is literally impossible to get to the bottom of this.
What? The Cosby thing is because someone keeps acting as of the length of time is relevant.No it doesnt. He has referred to somebody as cosby. He has said minimizing this is the worst thing on the internet. He doesnt get to have his cake and eat it too. Dont be a sucker.
I did not say so he wouldn’t be on SCOTUS.I asked why it took her 30 years to come forward and you said so the guy won't be on the SCOTUS. And you're blaming me? Take a break, Ford.
I referred to “they didn’t come forward for 30 years” as a Cosby defense. And yes, minimizing the allegations themselves - not the truth of them, but making fun of someone saying she had to fight off a rapist by saying it was attempted kissing - is the worst thing on the internet.No it doesnt. He has referred to somebody as cosby. He has said minimizing this is the worst thing on the internet. He doesnt get to have his cake and eat it too. Dont be a sucker.
Do you have a link to where he categorically denied the story? The last one I saw was him saying he had no recollection of that happening.That's not really true. We may not be able to get CSI-level certainty about the truth of this allegation, but there are things that we can draw inferences from that should make the allegation more credible or less credible.
For example, the accuser identified a third party who at least witnessed the attempted rape and possibly participated in it. If that person had come forward and said "Yep, I was there and that totally happened just like she described," that would definitely make the allegation a lot more believable. Actually, though, that guy categorically denied this story.
Similarly, if the accuser told somebody about this attack contemporaneously, that would also be corroborating evidence. It doesn't have to be a police report. Just a friend that who says "I wasn't at the party, but she seemed really shaken the next day, and when I asked her what was wrong she said that Brett tried to rape her." So far we don't have any evidence that anything like that happened, but for all we know there may be something like that in the letter -- we haven't seen it.
If the accuser's therapist says (with permission obviously) that the accuser did actually talk about this attack in therapy 15 years ago, that would be mild corroborating evidence. That still leaves a long gap and leaves open the possibility that the accuser is misremembering things, but it would clearly make her account at least a little more believable.
And of course, if other women come forward to say that they too were assaulted by Brett Kavanaugh, then the story becomes much more believable. That may very well happen. It hasn't yet, but it's too soon to expect that now.
In other words, yeah, right now this is her word against theirs, but that doesn't mean that it's impossible to produce evidence that she's telling the truth.
Do you have a link to where he categorically denied the story? The last one I saw was him saying he had no recollection of that happening.
https://www.weeklystandard.com/john-mccormack/kavanaugh-classmate-named-in-letter-strongly-denies-allegations-of-misconductThe Kavanaugh classmate quoted in the New Yorker is Mark Judge, a writer in Washington, D.C. Judge spoke to THE WEEKLY STANDARD Friday afternoon, strongly denying that any such incident ever occurred. "It's just absolutely nuts. I never saw Brett act that way," Judge told TWS.
Judge says he first learned he was named in the letter during an interview with the New Yorker. "[Ronan Farrow] said: As you know, you're named in the letter. And I did not know," he said.
The Kavanaugh classmate told TWS that the New Yorker did not provide him the name of the woman alleging wrongdoing, a specific date of the alleged incident, or the location where the incident is alleged to have occurred. The woman alleging misconduct has requested that her identity be protected, according to media reports.
After Judge categorically denied ever witnessing an attempted assault by Kavanaugh, I asked him if he could recall any sort of rough-housing with a female student back in high school (an incident that might have been interpreted differently by parties involved). "I can't. I can recall a lot of rough-housing with guys. It was an all-boys school, we would rough-house with each other," he said said. "I don't remember any of that stuff going on with girls."
Judge says he still does not know the name of the woman who made the allegations.
The party would kick either of them out if they did.Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski have been awfully silent about this. If they announced that they can’t support this guy until this matter is resolved with an investigation, then there WILL be an investigation. But would they do this?
Sure. I know it’s tough to really empathize with attempted rape victims and think that maybe from their perspectives the only way they can move forward with therapy and their lives when their attempted rapist is in the news is to finally tell someone with authority even though they don’t expect anything to come of it and that maybe, just maybe, it’s not all about the alleged rapist’s new job but more about her for once, but it’s an important perspective to consider in times like this in my opinion.Oh. Okay, thanks.
She is not a victim. We have zero idea if any of the unknown events occurred.Sure. I know it’s tough to really empathize with attempted rape victims and think that maybe from their perspectives the only way they can move forward with therapy and their lives when their attempted rapist is in the news is to finally tell someone with authority even though they don’t expect anything to come of it and that maybe, just maybe, it’s not all about the alleged rapist’s new job but more about her for once, but it’s an important perspective to consider in times like this in my opinion.
Aren’t these two sentences in direct contradiction of each other?She is not a victim. We have zero idea if any of the unknown events occurred.
No.Aren’t these two sentences in direct contradiction of each other?
Didn't know this, thanksFor the many reasons to hate McConnell and for the many more reasons why someone should hate McConnell... it is pretty telling when even McConnell attempted to persuade Trump from nominating Kavanaugh. For as despicable as McConnell is, he has to know something about Kavanaugh that we do not. Maybe this rape thing isn't what McConnell knows but the fact McConnell was not 100% for Kavanaugh is telling.
How would you know that? What if there are contemporaneous accounts from family/acquaintances she told at the time?She is not a victim. We have zero idea if any of the unknown events occurred.
When something that collobrates something actually happened, then we can call her a victim. Right now we have no idea if these two people ever even met.How would you know that? What if there are contemporaneous accounts from family/acquaintances she told at the time?
My conversation with Ramblin is based on an assumption that it is true, as he set that as a parameter for his question. I have said this before.She is not a victim. We have zero idea if any of the unknown events occurred.
She specifically named Kavenaugh plus his accomplice, How she could come with the second name and give a place and time where it alleged happened if they had never met?When something that collobrates something actually happened, then we can call her a victim. Right now we have no idea if these two people ever even met.
Whether or not you can call her one has no bearing on whether she is one.When something that collobrates something actually happened, then we can call her a victim. Right now we have no idea if these two people ever even met.
Maybe she found an old Georgetown Prep yearbook in a thrift store. Who knows?She specifically named Kavenaugh plus his accomplice, How she could come with the second name and give a place and time where it alleged happened if they had never met?
Yes, I supposed that is possible, but seems unlikely.Maybe she found an old Georgetown Prep yearbook in a thrift store. Who knows?
It does. Of course, twenty years ago I would have found it equally unlikely that the Republican Party would openly attack women accusing men of attempting to rape them, but here we are.Yes, I supposed that is possible, but seems unlikely.
I agree with this, with an emphasis on "looked into." I can imagine a scenario in which this is all resolved in a 5-minute conversation with the woman involved:It’s possible this woman is lying. It’s possible she’s flat out crazy. It’s possible she was drunk or high (on purpose or someone drugged her) and thought Kavanaugh did this and it was actually another person, it’s possible Kavanaugh did this. There are many possibilities. They should be looked into before someone is confirmed to the SCOTUS.
If it plays out like that, we're done and Kavanaugh gets confirmed. Of course, if any of those questions gets a "yes," then things get a lot more complicated and we should slow this down.Did anybody else witness this attack? No.
Did you file a police report? No.
Did you tell anybody else about the attack after it occurred? No.
Thank you for time.
Anita Hill down? Now, she only accused Thomas of sexual harassment but it would not seem a stretch to believe that if she had accused Thomas of attempted rape, that the attacks on her character by Republicans would have been any less.It does. Of course, twenty years ago I would have found it equally unlikely that the Republican Party would openly attack women accusing men of attempting to rape them, but here we are.
If she had accused him of attempted rape, I believe that the Republican Party would have shut up. But I may just be naive.Anita Hill down? Now, she only accused Thomas of sexual harassment but it would not seem a stretch to believe that if she had accused Thomas of attempted rape, that the attacks on her character by Republicans would have been any less.
Does “I’ve been talking to psychologists about this for 20+ years” work for telling someone else?I agree with this, with an emphasis on "looked into." I can imagine a scenario in which this is all resolved in a 5-minute conversation with the woman involved:
If it plays out like that, we're done and Kavanaugh gets confirmed. Of course, if any of those questions gets a "yes," then things get a lot more complicated and we should slow this down.
Absolutely. Twenty years ago we only expected the Democratic Party to play so dirty.It does. Of course, twenty years ago I would have found it equally unlikely that the Republican Party would openly attack women accusing men of attempting to rape them, but here we are.
Yes they are. First you claim that she isn’t a victim...the claim we don’t know what happened.
Maybe. I would need to know more in that case.Does “I’ve been talking to psychologists about this for 20+ years” work for telling someone else?
I’ll be honest, it’s always been my impression that (historically) the Republican Party as a unit did take physical sexual assault very seriously. Not all members, but that “we will keep you safe” mindset was on of the attractive qualities of the party for conservative female voters. I don’t believe that’s the case anymore.My ingroup has always taken accusations of sexual misconduct seriously and given survivors the respect and support they deserve. But that wicked outgroup is always attacking women and downplaying sexual assault.
So...appointing him should be a lifetime endeavor?You could be right. But I think you have to try anyhow. It’s a lifetime appointment.
Yeah, right, see Willie Horton campaign ad.Absolutely. Twenty years ago we only expected the Democratic Party to play so dirty.
Yeah, Dennis Hastert was a true Republican leader. One that even to this day Rs look up to.Absolutely. Twenty years ago we only expected the Democratic Party to play so dirty.
We don't even know what the claim is or if there is anything which collaborates it. I would not even refer to her as an alledged victim until we know some details and have something that collaborates that some event took place between the two.Yes they are. First you claim that she isn’t a victim...the claim we don’t know what happened.
Yeah, Republican Al Gore should be ashamed for bring up the whole furlogh issue against Dukakis.Yeah, right, see Willie Horton campaign ad.
But you definitively claimed she wasn’t a victim. You are doing what you are complaining everyone else is doing.We don't even know what the claim is or if there is anything which collaborates it. I would not even refer to her as an alledged victim until we know some details and have something that collaborates that some event took place between the two.
Al Gore ran a campaign ad against Dukakis featuring Willie Horton?Yeah, Republican Al Gore should be ashamed for bring up the whole furlogh issue against Dukakis.
Obviously not. That ship sailed with Trump and Roy Moore.I’ll be honest, it’s always been my impression that (historically) the Republican Party as a unit did take physical sexual assault very seriously. Not all members, but that “we will keep you safe” mindset was on of the attractive qualities of the party for conservative female voters. I don’t believe that’s the case anymore.
Trump and Roy Moore definitely showed that it had sailed, but it may have done so some time ago when the conveniently folded-in religious fundamentalist group got more and more misogynistic. I just don’t know.Obviously not. That ship sailed with Trump and Roy Moore.