Jump to content

Justice Kennedy Retires, July 31.


Recommended Posts

Guest El Chalupacabra

Yeah, so I caught part of Kavanaugh's testimony at lunch. If he is innocent, I can understand him being angry, but that kind of went over like a wet fart. He came off as pompous and arrogant. While I still stand by my statement that there should be due process and people shouldn't be allowed to come out of the woodwork to make random accusations 3 decades later (and the fact that the alleged victim's word is apparently evidence enough these days), Kavanaugh came off like a total douche. I don't think he has a chance in hell getting confirmed, now. And for being a d-bag, deservedly so.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 227
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Hey Fozzie, it might be a little too early, but I have your new avatar picked out (assuming you don't think it's so awesome that you want to use it whichever way it goes, anyway)....    

How are the Dems going to stop it? Unless the Republicans want to keep it as a campaign issue, it's going to be done before the midterms. Even if it isn't resolved before then, I wouldn't want to bet

I didn't believe conspiracies when that Kenyan was in office.

I am a super generous person. I think because of the whole atmosphere of the #MeToo movement, Trump's press conference, election year for mid-terms and in general the state of the US today makes this guy have to walk this plank and his own actions in both high school and college have come back to get him. A perfect storm. No one Trump puts forward will come out clean. It is an us versus them kind of mentality.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest El Chalupacabra

I am a super generous person. I think because of the whole atmosphere of the #MeToo movement, Trump's press conference, election year for mid-terms and in general the state of the US today makes this guy have to walk this plank and his own actions in both high school and college have come back to get him. A perfect storm. No one Trump puts forward will come out clean. It is an us versus them kind of mentality.

Well, I agree that the #MeToo movement has become totally political, and at this point, I think there is a case to be made that it is now being used as a political weapon, rather than actually ferret out and shine the spotlight on perverts who abuse women. No one deserves sex abuse. But people also deserve their day in court, too, and I think it is wrong for people to make accusations decades later, after the statute of limitations run out. I get some people go through PTSD or whatever, but the way our justice system is set up, one is innocent until proven guilty and I don't like seeing people accused, and convicted in the court of public opinion, and that becoming the standard which governs modern politics, business, etc.

 

That all said, I am no fan of Trump or his choices (how many crooks can you fit into an administration, anyway?), and Kavanaugh pretty much made a fool of himself. I don't want Kavanaugh on SCOTUS.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Overall, I think Kavanaugh got the short end of the day. Ford was emotionally persuasive and she's got the media behind her. Also, not sure what the prosecutor the Republicans hired was doing with her questions. She was strikingly ineffective. Maybe Grassley told her to take it easy on Ford?

 

Kavanaugh basically got angry (and obviously isn't used to wearing it), which might shore up his base as it were, but it would likely only leave people on the fence still on the fence.

 

One thing that bothered me about Ford's testimony was something most people wouldn't pay attention to. She described to Feinstein why she could be so certain that it was Kavanaugh by describing how memory is encoded in trauma. As a professor, she described the biological process. So she was talking above the heads of the audience and basically using her jargon as its own appeal to authority. Fine, in and of itself.

 

But the thing is, she badly misrepresented the science. We know that memories from many years in the past are extremely unreliable. We've talked about it here in fact. False memories for traumatic events are common, not scientifically impossible as she tried to make it sound. As a psychology professor, she would know she was making a ridiculous statement, but she made it anyway in what sounds like a very prepared response.

 

That gave me my biggest pause. She also said that she wanted to testify at home, but it was impossible. That's just false.

 

 

 

I would like to know why she chose to hide from Kavanaugh in the bathroom but, knowing she had to walk past him and others to exit the house, chose to exit the bathroom, go downstairs, and walk past them, or were they elsewhere?

 

I assume she felt safe with the other boy(s) around. I was more questioning why she left her friend with two boys with rape on their mind.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest El Chalupacabra

Maybe something did happen. Maybe it didn't. I don't know. But the thing is, both Kavanaugh and Ford were minors. And Ford didn't press charges during the time she could have. If Ford is telling the truth, and even if Kavanaugh is a liar, and while tragic if it did happen, the simple fact remains that this event cannot be proven, nor can he be convicted. I don't care if she took a lie detector, because that is not admissible in court. Therefore, I don't think this should have been allowed in the first place.

 

However, the quandary is that without this hearing, people would not have had the chance to see how much of a hothead and how unprofessional Kavanaugh conducted himself. Part of the reason for these hearings is to get a sense of the person's character, and regardless if Ford being allowed to testify is right, wrong, or indifferent, Kavanaugh failed that character test in my eyes. So I have to grudgingly say that maybe this was a good thing Ford did testify, because Kavanaugh showed the world a glimpse of his character, or lack thereof. I mean the guy is a freakin' judge, and I felt his testimony was very unprofessional.

 

That all said, I still do not agree with the way an alleged victim from 36 years ago was trotted out, and her word, and let's be clear, HER WORD ALONE, was treated as gospel.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't care if she took a lie detector, because that is not admissible in court.

 

As a psychologist, she should also know that lie detectors are pseudoscience.

 

Part of the reason for these hearings is to get a sense of the person's character, and regardless if Ford being allowed to testify is right, wrong, or indifferent, Kavanaugh failed that character test in my eyes

 

I'm going to disagree. I agree that the optics weren't great, but I don't believe that it is a sign of bad character to show a little bit of anger about having your character dragged through the mud and be put through hell by sanctimoniousness political operators, only to see it get worse in recent days. If he'd been calm throughout and stuck to his talking points, like he was in the Fox News interview, he would have been hit hard from a different direction. I just don't think he wore it well, probably because he's not a man used to airing the emotion (which would indicate him to actually have the temperament you're looking for).

 

In the end, Clarence Thomas was right 25 years ago for taking the judiciary committee to task for their treatment of him. I'm unpersuaded that Kavanaugh failed any test either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Overall, I think Kavanaugh got the short end of the day. Ford was emotionally persuasive and she's got the media behind her. Also, not sure what the prosecutor the Republicans hired was doing with her questions. She was strikingly ineffective. Maybe Grassley told her to take it easy on Ford?

 

Kavanaugh basically got angry (and obviously isn't used to wearing it), which might shore up his base as it were, but it would likely only leave people on the fence still on the fence.

 

One thing that bothered me about Ford's testimony was something most people wouldn't pay attention to. She described to Feinstein why she could be so certain that it was Kavanaugh by describing how memory is encoded in trauma. As a professor, she described the biological process. So she was talking above the heads of the audience and basically using her jargon as its own appeal to authority. Fine, in and of itself.

 

But the thing is, she badly misrepresented the science. We know that memories from many years in the past are extremely unreliable. We've talked about it here in fact. False memories for traumatic events are common, not scientifically impossible as she tried to make it sound. As a psychology professor, she would know she was making a ridiculous statement, but she made it anyway in what sounds like a very prepared response.

 

That gave me my biggest pause. She also said that she wanted to testify at home, but it was impossible. That's just false.

 

 

 

I would like to know why she chose to hide from Kavanaugh in the bathroom but, knowing she had to walk past him and others to exit the house, chose to exit the bathroom, go downstairs, and walk past them, or were they elsewhere?

I assume she felt safe with the other boy(s) around. I was more questioning why she left her friend with two boys with rape on their mind.

One thing that bothered me about Ford's testimony was something most people wouldn't pay attention to. She described to Feinstein why she could be so certain that it was Kavanaugh by describing how memory is encoded in trauma. As a professor, she described the biological process. So she was talking above the heads of the audience and basically using her jargon as its own appeal to authority. Fine, in and of itself.

I too found this segment of her testimony interesting when I heard it. She is telling the listener the most traumatic part, including the face, the identity, of her attacker,was burned into her memory, and to suggest her absolute certainty, she invoked very arcane, esoteric, academic language.

 

I assume she felt safe with the other boy(s) around. I was more questioning why she left her friend with two boys with rape on their mind

Possible, but those other boys were already downstairs, along with her friend, so why not flee downsrsors first instead of the bathroom? Thats what I cannot understand. Especially since she knew Kavanaugh and Judge were wrestling on the floor, providing her the opportunity to get away and exit the room, and also the house, or at least down to the first floor where other people were located, including her friend.
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I too found this segment of her testimony interesting when I heard it. She is telling the listener the most traumatic part, including the face, the identity, of her attacker,was burned into her memory, and to suggest her absolute certainty, she invoked very arcane, esoteric, academic language.

 

I'm pretty sure I can identify at least one false memory. And it's the thing she claims to remember most, the boys' uproarious laughter. Immediately that triggered doubt in my head as it seems like a perfect thing to focus on and exaggerate as time goes on. The laughter grows and grows in the re-telling in her head over the years.

 

And here's the contradiction that supports the notion. According to Ford, the music had been turned up in order to drown out her shouts. That would have needed to be pretty loud. Loud enough to at least muffle any laughter that might have been going on. Also loud enough that Judge would have needed to raise his voice above it to egg his friend on, but that's another contradiction.

 

Again, the lady they hired to ask the questions really dropped the ball by not at least probing the holes in the story.

Link to post
Share on other sites

They had things to do. The dog and pony show is over. It goes to vote now at 1:30 which is later than it was planned for the Senate. Flake voting yes was a little surprising. Probably left to go work on some members who will vote at 1:30.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well meetings are usually are called from the top of the chain. If your presence is mandatory (and not your assistant or aide) you're expected to remain for the entire meeting. Good for you if you can peace out wherever you want. The Democrats that walked out on this hearing did so because they were grandstanding.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest El Chalupacabra

They had things to do. The dog and pony show is over. It goes to vote now at 1:30 which is later than it was planned for the Senate. Flake voting yes was a little surprising. Probably left to go work on some members who will vote at 1:30.

Flake doesn't care who he pisses off (or pisses on). He's gone come November.

 

On the local news this morning, a bunch of female protestors wanting Flake to vote no, were dressed up as the girls from The Handmaids Tale, saying Kavanaugh was basically the Devil. And they were totally serious. It was great for some early morning lulz.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest El Chalupacabra

 

I don't care if she took a lie detector, because that is not admissible in court.

 

As a psychologist, she should also know that lie detectors are pseudoscience.

 

Part of the reason for these hearings is to get a sense of the person's character, and regardless if Ford being allowed to testify is right, wrong, or indifferent, Kavanaugh failed that character test in my eyes

 

I'm going to disagree. I agree that the optics weren't great, but I don't believe that it is a sign of bad character to show a little bit of anger about having your character dragged through the mud and be put through hell by sanctimoniousness political operators, only to see it get worse in recent days. If he'd been calm throughout and stuck to his talking points, like he was in the Fox News interview, he would have been hit hard from a different direction. I just don't think he wore it well, probably because he's not a man used to airing the emotion (which would indicate him to actually have the temperament you're looking for).

 

In the end, Clarence Thomas was right 25 years ago for taking the judiciary committee to task for their treatment of him. I'm unpersuaded that Kavanaugh failed any test either.

 

Well, totally valid as this is completely subjective. But the way I was looking at it was akin to a job interview. Kavanaugh should have been calm and collected as you say. If he is innocent, sure, he has a right to be angry, (conversely, if he is not, then he doesn't) but that was not the forum to show his anger. We don't need Judge Roy Bean on the Supreme Court.

Link to post
Share on other sites

<shrug>

 

If he were demonstrating a short fuse, I would agree. If he'd shown intemperance sitting as a judge for the last decade I might agree as well. But this is rather extraordinary circumstances that are personal, not professional, in nature.


Anyway, I'll have more thoughts later.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing about Kavanaughs outburst that I found questionable was his insistence on conspiracy theory while also insisting things should to stick to the facts of the sworn witness testimonies.

 

If Judge Kavanaugh had not brought conspiracy theory to the table, his requestion-attack on alcoholism towards that senator (her name slips my mind) while still unfortunate would have felt emotionally understandable. I thought Dr. Ford was emotionally appropriate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I hate to sound sexist here, but did you find her emotionally appropriate because she's a woman and she teared up through out the hearing? Let's be clear. You don't know this woman Torch. How can you say what is an emotionally appropriate response? She had a while to prepare for this. Not much to do in a car ride across country but to prepare. BTW that whole afraid to fly thing turned out to be a huge lie. Every facet of it.

 

As a man I found that Kavanaugh going directly after those who have basically called him guilty without proof to be appropriate. Hey if I'm not going to get the gig f you f you f you and you and you because I'm innocent. Now that's not all guys. It probably came off weird to some because his rage was being read off a script.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Conspiracy theory?

 

Having been falsely accused of assaulting a woman in my life, I fully understand an angry response. It is practically impossible to defend yourself without looking like you are attacking the "victim". I was automatically guilty to people that didn't know us. Luckily the lady that accused me (because I called her out on faking an illness to get oxy) had a pattern of lying and making false accusations. Her credibility to those who knew her was very limited.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

They had things to do. The dog and pony show is over. It goes to vote now at 1:30 which is later than it was planned for the Senate. Flake voting yes was a little surprising. Probably left to go work on some members who will vote at 1:30.

Flake doesn't care who he pisses off (or pisses on). He's gone come November.

 

On the local news this morning, a bunch of female protestors wanting Flake to vote no, were dressed up as the girls from The Handmaids Tale, saying Kavanaugh was basically the Devil. And they were totally serious. It was great for some early morning lulz.

 

 

 

I'm going to be Arizona in November possibly! Poor Mr. Flake...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I detailed what I thought was questionable about Kavanaugh while saying I could understand his emotional response. I said I found Ford emotionally appropriate.

 

I obviously wrote about both Kavanaughs and Fords emotions and yet sexism was proposed because why? No one should require a specific gender or a traumatic past to empathize with someone else.

 

That those two opinions are being pushed backed on is puzzling.

 

Edit: This post has been heavily edited. I dont owe anyone any god damn explanation for what I wrote above or here.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Arm chair QBs are debated. That's why the NFL Network is year round.

 

I asked about the"emotionally appropriate" line because I was curious as to what would not have been emotionally appropriate for her. Kavanaugh was in a no win when it came to the Democrats. After what I've seen in the all day long I believe she was in a no lose situation. She came forward with nothing new and so many in the left said they believe her instead of Kavanaugh.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it worked though. The vote is delayed now for a FBI investigation. It's the best and worst time for politics. I was ready to vote Graham during the 2016 elections if he had made it through the primaries over Clinton but I'm glad I voted Hillary now. Graham's part in the hearing was terrible. It's like they're pandering to this very small population that they want to side with because they consider them their core voters.

Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...