Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If he is confirmed, the Supreme Court will lose its integrity and become a joke. Over 600 law professors signed a joint letter to the senate urging them not to confirm him. And it has nothing to do with the allegations against him.
I think those liberal law professors are a bad joke and have no integrity.
None of the things you just described is the same as being sexually assaulted.
NOBODY has the right to hold a person down on a bed, cover their mouth so they cannot scream, and cram their hands down that person's pants to touch their genitals.
NOBODY.
I don't give a damn if it was 30-40 years ago. That was not okay in the 1980s and it's not okay now.
I even said in my previous post it wasn't sexual assault but it still was assault. So, you're saying that only rape victims can be traumatized by a violent assault, huh?? Or that that is the only one "worthy" of being treated & investigated as a "serious crime". Thousands of aggravated assault, carjack, home invasion, robbery, etc. victims would beg to differ with you that the crimes committed against them were traumatic and left emotional, as well in many cases, physical scars.
I even said in my previous post it wasn't sexual assault but it still was assault. So, you're saying that only rape victims can be traumatized by a violent assault, huh?? Or that that is the only one "worthy" of being treated & investigated as a "serious crime". Thousands of aggravated assault, carjack, home invasion, robbery, etc. victims would beg to differ with you that the crimes committed against them were traumatic and left emotional, as well in many cases, physical scars.
I do get what you're saying. Feminist would have us to believe that a same act a said woman does willfully all the time, becomes the worst thing known to man if she says it was not consensual. I could see the argument if it was violent and random with an uncertain outcome like other assault often can be.
This isn't middle school. Kavanaugh was a 17-year-old HS senior. Despite some of the usual high school craziness, that's still plenty old enough to know just as well as adult how serious sexual assault it, even by early 80s standards. In fact, a lot of states even say teens should be tried as adults for the most serious of crimes. Isn't that what these "tough on crime" types say ought to be done to teenage criminals?
Who says he was 17 years old? Ford?
Who says he was even her "attacker"?
Ford?
Ford, who can't remember a thing about anything that happened 36 years ago, let alone anything that happened less than 2 months ago?
The only one who "didn't know" the JC would go TO her & due to her "fear of flying"...unless it's for her work or her vacation time?
Quote:
If this was just about the usual "a bit too loud for the neighbors drunkenness", and maybe in addition some mouthing off to a cop or a neighbor who told him to pipe down and/or shut down the party and nothing worse than that, I'd agree with you. Uncouth behavior from 2 yrs either side of 18? Certainly. But nothing approaching the level of a major violent crime.
If what was? Ford's unsubstantiated claims against Kavanaugh?
Quote:
BTW, if some 16/17 yr olds did something like commit seriously humiliating harassment or battery, then yes I would have those types investigated, too. Again, because that age is plenty old enough to know just as well as an adult how serious such acts or expressions are. If you're old enough to have a job outside the family business, that presumes you are old enough to have the social skills needed to operate in the workplace. If you are social-skills capable of outside-of-family employment, then you're old enough to apply those skills in a sub-college/trade-school educational setting.
So are you good with having "those types" of public school 16/17 year old teens who attack their teachers/seriously humiliate/batter them in class investigated, too? I'm sure you've seen the videos. Maybe a little more investigation in to Michael Brown's 18 year old background - as opposed to the media showing baby pictures/school pictures and his parents/family talking about what a sweet kid he was...while he charged a cop?
Liberals/dems in "power" don't do that. They take the "insinuation"; and run with it ...with the help of the liberal MSM. The liberal sheep just follow along....
The real question is: What's the point of all of the liberal BS? What's the end game they are looking for?
I totally can see why people would be skeptical. I lean toward believing her because I remember those kinds of parties myself, and as a victim of a sexual assault, I understand how some details get lost, while other details are seared into one's mind. As for the timing, he is a candidate for a lifelong appointment to the most powerful court in the nation. It's at exactly that time that many women would want the world to know his true character.
while i do agree that some details are lost over time, something are never lost, like the person that assaulted you, where the assault took place, when the assault happened, the date mostly, not the exact time s few people watch a clock regularly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by natalie469
If he is confirmed, the Supreme Court will lose its integrity and become a joke. Over 600 law professors signed a joint letter to the senate urging them not to confirm him. And it has nothing to do with the allegations against him.
rubbish. kavanaugh is a highly qualified jurist as evidenced by his work on the appellate court for more than a decade.
Status:
"Moldy Tater Gangrene, even before Moscow Marge."
(set 26 days ago)
Location: Dallas, TX
5,790 posts, read 3,614,084 times
Reputation: 5697
Quote:
Originally Posted by luckyram
LOL...so after 30 or 40 years you expect the police, FBI, etc to investigate any complaint from high school kids who were 16 -18 yrs old when an assault, "humiliating harassment" (LMAO...yeah...like there wouldn't several MILLION of potential complaints/investigations if that criteria were applied), etc. occurred??
I can just see the "humiliation" claims now...."He pulled my pigtails!!"..."He used a straw to shoot a spitball at me and I felt humiliated"...."He mooned me while changing in the locker room"..."He called me a bad name" ... WHAAA HAAA HAAAA!!!
Now I get how deluded people like Ford think and how insanity like this takes root.
We adults wouldn't put up with sexual harassment or other severely humiliating behavior in the workplace (which, btw, 15 or 16 years olds are presumed old enough to work in). Why should children (or at least teens) have to put up with it - especially if they already have many adult-type characteristics? Note well I'm speaking of acts and expressions that, had they occurred in the workplace, would qualify for harassment.
Status:
"Moldy Tater Gangrene, even before Moscow Marge."
(set 26 days ago)
Location: Dallas, TX
5,790 posts, read 3,614,084 times
Reputation: 5697
Quote:
Originally Posted by Informed Info
Who says he was 17 years old? Ford?
Who says he was even her "attacker"?
Ford?
Ford, who can't remember a thing about anything that happened 36 years ago, let alone anything that happened less than 2 months ago?
The only one who "didn't know" the JC would go TO her & due to her "fear of flying"...unless it's for her work or her vacation time?
If what was? Ford's unsubstantiated claims against Kavanaugh?
So are you good with having "those types" of public school 16/17 year old teens who attack their teachers/seriously humiliate/batter them in class investigated, too? I'm sure you've seen the videos. Maybe a little more investigation in to Michael Brown's 18 year old background - as opposed to the media showing baby pictures/school pictures and his parents/family talking about what a sweet kid he was...while he charged a cop?
Liberals/dems in "power" don't do that. They take the "insinuation"; and run with it ...with the help of the liberal MSM. The liberal sheep just follow along....
The real question is: What's the point of all of the liberal BS? What's the end game they are looking for?
I'd be perfectly OK with investigation into Brown's background IF it is relevant to the shooting - but I prefer to focus on the shooting itself. At any rate, the riot was about more than just Brown, but general police brutality. The neighborhood simply did not trust the Ferguson police to treat them fairly and that's what brought about the whole mess. But back to Brown. First, concentrate on the incident at hand, then investigate his background if its necessary to conduct a personality profile.
As for Kavanaugh, we hold SCOTUS candidates to higher standard of behavior than whatever Brown was doing. The higher the position of responsibility the more rigorous the scrutiny should be.
while i do agree that some details are lost over time, something are never lost, like the person that assaulted you, where the assault took place, when the assault happened, the date mostly, not the exact time s few people watch a clock regularly.
rubbish. kavanaugh is a highly qualified jurist as evidenced by his work on the appellate court for more than a decade.
I was sexually assaulted. I don't remember the date.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
