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.
Claims ? Great they are true, thank god that in this country proof is also required because destroying a man's life on here say is as bad as the rape he is accused of if he didn't do it.
In this case. 0 evidence. Witnesses deny Ford's claims. Ford's own therapist contradicts her claims. She can't remember the when or where. It doesn't get any worse than this to build a case. Yet the left in their zeal to push agenda have done away with the idea of innocent until proven guilty.
Remember this next time a black man is accused of rape. A cop shoots an unarmed alleged criminal. Bill Clinton is accused of sexual assault.
Did it ever occur to you that Ford might be telling the truth? My guess is that your mind was made up before she even arrived to give testimony. Because it has already been proven that Kavanaugh told many lies, and yet, strangely, that doesn't seem to bother you.
Again, no one else aside from Ford and Kavanaugh matter here because they weren't in that room.
She swore under oath that it did happen. Why do you automatically believe him and discount her? Was it his sober, intelligent, steady, non-hysterical refuting of her testimony that convinced you?
1. you aren't actually correct on the facts. Ford claimed there were 4 people involved, then 2. in all cases, all those involved have said it didn't happen they weren't there.
2. Why do I aut9omatically believe? I don't. I look at the evidence. There is no evidence to support the allegation. That requires me to reject the allegation. This is an every single time event for me. I don't care if the accused is a democrat or republican. I don't care if the accuser is male of female. I only care that if an accusation made, that I weigh the evidence and based on that make my decision.
in this case, there is simply no evidence that BK did this act. There is however an overwhelming body of evidence that says BK wasn't that kind of person. period.
Well how about a few witnesses to back her claims who she claims were there?
Why do think that Kavanaugh's and Judge's denials are more reliable than her claims? Have they provided any evidence that they were elsewhere during that time?
At this point the investigation isn't even about Dr. Ford. It's about whether Judge Kavanaugh would make a good Supreme Court justice. Judge Kavanaugh proved that he is an inappropriate candidate in multiple ways. Even if Dr. Ford is lying about the entire incident, Kavanaugh was unable to control his temper, lied many times under oath, deflected questions, and looks and acts like an alcoholic. He is not a good candidate for Supreme Court justice no matter what Dr. Ford did. She proved he could be baited into a partisan argument which is not a good look for the most important judge in the country who will serve for decades. The GOP is desperate to confirm him because they believe they don't have time to confirm someone else before the midterms and they think they will lose their ass on voting day. And they have good reason to be concerned.
Only in your dreams. I see you gave up on Dr. Ford too.
He's been a Federal Court of Appeals Judge for 12 years. There are over 300 of his decisions/rulings/dissents available to the public. Read them all. That's his body of work as a Federal Judge.
If we want a bit of the back story - he was a partisan hack who worked on the Ken Starr Clinton investigation and took glee in attacking Clinton in public (questioning) about very private sexual matters.
He was then put up for appointment to Judge by a POTUS who was selected by the Conservative Majority on the SCOTUS...the same one who got us into all those wars and caused the Great Recession.
He was unable to be confirmed easily to the bench.....turned down by the ABA as not being fit for it. After a bunch of back and forth he was finally rated "qualified". But many who did the interviews (lawyers trained in ethics and judgement) were troubled by what they heard from him before he was a judge (to put it nicely, he is not flexible....maybe a dry drunk like GW?).........
THAT is his history. Let's not pretend that this guy was loved by the American Bar Association and/or that he was a top pick and/or would have been by a elected (as opposed to selected) POTUS.
All of that matters. Whether GOP or Dem or Independent, I take a better view of judges who were actually tops and respected by all.....as opposed to a guy getting paid back for harassing the POTUS (Clinton).
History matter.
BTW, in the same vein, my wife was in politics. We saw many judges appointed, including those who expected sex with anyone they came in contact with, others who were the #1 snake lawyers in the county, etc....in some cases they were appointed due to "owed favors", in others a swap or to shut them up and keep them out of politics. Many of them you wouldn't trust alone with ANY of your family members.
Now they are dressed up in robes and sit over murder cases.
Continuing the fun, I had a case with a car loan (I gave) that the guy didn't pay me. I needed to get a judgement and so I filed a case. So there I go into this big county courthouse and they assign me a Judge who my wife had testified against at the State level (the snake!). All Rise!
Hey, he did the first "right" thing I ever saw him do. When he saw my rare last name he said he should recuse himself and assigned me another judge.
1. you aren't actually correct on the facts. Ford claimed there were 4 people involved, then 2. in all cases, all those involved have said it didn't happen they weren't there.
2. Why do I aut9omatically believe? I don't. I look at the evidence. There is no evidence to support the allegation. That requires me to reject the allegation. This is an every single time event for me. I don't care if the accused is a democrat or republican. I don't care if the accuser is male of female. I only care that if an accusation made, that I weigh the evidence and based on that make my decision.
in this case, there is simply no evidence that BK did this act. There is however an overwhelming body of evidence that says BK wasn't that kind of person. period.
And an overwhelming body of evidence that says he is precisely that kind of person, not to mention his proclivity for lying, in general:
Again, no one else aside from Ford and Kavanaugh matter here because they weren't in that room.
She swore under oath that it did happen. Why do you automatically believe him and discount her? Was it his sober, intelligent, steady, non-hysterical refuting of her testimony that convinced you?
For me it isn't who I believe but what can be proven. Regardless of whether or not Kavanaugh is selected the out come of this witch hunt will impact his life greatly.
In this great nation I still expect the burden of proof to fall upon the accuser.
At this point the investigation isn't even about Dr. Ford. It's about whether Judge Kavanaugh would make a good Supreme Court justice. Judge Kavanaugh proved that he is an inappropriate candidate in multiple ways. Even if Dr. Ford is lying about the entire incident, Kavanaugh was unable to control his temper, lied many times under oath, deflected questions, and looks and acts like an alcoholic. He is not a good candidate for Supreme Court justice no matter what Dr. Ford did. She proved he could be baited into a partisan argument which is not a good look for the most important judge in the country who will serve for decades. The GOP is desperate to confirm him because they believe they don't have time to confirm someone else before the midterms and they think they will lose their ass on voting day. And they have good reason to be concerned.
Statistics are statistics--there's nothing "blind" about it.
My point is you cannot lean on statistics as way to uphold your argument, when we have actual evidence and proof to the contrary, because then those statistics no longer apply.
If I man is 90 years old, you cannot use as an argument for when he will die by saying that "statistically speaking" he will die at age 77, because that statistic no longer applies to him.
Ford's claims are not true, every witness has testified that her accounting of events is false, and it never happened.
Besides, she was not raped. By her accounts, not even one button was ever undone, much less her being raped.
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.
