Kavanaugh Can Join Thomas.

[Aroura]

A lawyer close to the White House said the accusation of attempted rape will not derail Kavanaugh's nomination. "No way, not even a hint of it," he told . "If anything, it's the opposite. If somebody can be brought down by accusations like this, then you, me, every man certainly should be worried. We can all be accused of something."

Every Man should be Worried, says the White House

This is beyond disgusting.  Insinuating that women make these accusations just to bring men down, when the facts are actually that the vast majority of women sexually assaulted never even report it, due to fear that she'll be the one ruined.  

And in this case, there is some actual evidence to back up her claim.  Aside from  the fact that she made it some 6 years ago.

The retired FBI agent who gave Ford a polygraph test in early August confirmed to  that Ford's answers indicated "no deception," meaning "she was being truthful" in affirming her allegations against Kavanaugh. A therapist's notes from 2012 also partially corroborate her story. 

Men should only be worried if they regularly assault women or defend other men who do.  And even then, good news fella's, chances are you'll still get off scott free.  Because most people won't believe the woman, and she'll be painted as a lying whore (Or she'll never even make the accusation, but will keep silent in fear and shame).  Although there are signs this is finally changing, a little, a tiny bit. 

Not yet enough.

[RoadRunner79]

I think that they are taking this seriously, and are going to hear this woman out. I’ve also heard, that the Democrats object (what’s new) and won’t be attending. This information was sat on for some time, and I don’t see that it should disrupt the schedule at the last minute. It should be taken seriously, and any investigation deemed appropriate should continue. I don’t see it going very far. Democrats have been actively trying to disrupt this democratic process in some pretty shady ways already. With some of the crazy protestors childishly disrupting the hearing being shown receiving money just before the confirmation proceedings. But it doesn’t appear so far that Democrats have been taking the high road, and there is the possibility, that this is another part of that.

---

And all of the sudden; anonymous hearsay, about an account that we have little details on; and happened about 40 years ago, is evidence.  For some, it sometimes appears, that evidence and reason is heavily dependent on what narrative the wish to tell.

Wow trying to high jack a thread asking about an investigation into a sexual assault to serve your ideological bullocks you really have no moral center do you ?And accusing us of ideological bias when yours couldn't be clearer is just rich .

---

I just see a disrepency in reasoning from other encounters, and wonder which one is true this time. It seems applicable to the conversation.   Is testimony about an event from 40 years ago evidence or not?      Do we launch a scientific investigation into the matter, before we can believe it?  All applicable to this topic.

[SaStrike]

[John V]

I never said they weren't a factor.

Your question seems to imply it.

I only noted that you don't really have any evidence for your claim.  Your inference hinges on Feinstein believing that a full investigation of the matter would prove fruitless

That's the inference itself. The inference doesn't hinge on that. The inference is based on the reasonable assumption that Feinstein would have introduced the matter in the normal course of affairs if she believed it had merit. That's perfectly logical. You made one objection - that she was concerned about the claimant's anonymity - but that's refuted by the fact that Feinstein could have, and eventually did, make the charge known without revealing the claimant's identity.

[Aroura]

I think that they are taking this seriously, and are going to hear this woman out. I’ve also heard, that the Democrats object (what’s new) and won’t be attending. This information was sat on for some time, and I don’t see that it should disrupt the schedule at the last minute.  It should be taken seriously, and any investigation deemed appropriate should continue. I don’t see it going very far. Democrats have been actively trying to disrupt this democratic process in some pretty shady ways already. With some of the crazy protestors childishly disrupting the hearing being shown receiving money just before the confirmation proceedings.  But it doesn’t appear so far that Democrats have been taking the high road, and there is the possibility, that this is another part of that.

---

Wow trying to high jack a thread asking about an investigation into a sexual assault to serve your ideological bullocks you really have no moral center do you ?And accusing us of ideological bias when yours couldn't be clearer is just rich .

---

I just see a disrepency in reasoning from other encounters, and wonder which one is true this time. It seems applicable to the conversation.   Is testimony about an event from 40 years ago evidence or not?      Do we launch a scientific investigation into the matter, before we can believe it?  All applicable to this topic.

There is already more evidence than just 40 year old hearsay.
The accusation was made at least 6 years ago.  It's not like it just now came out of nowhere.

You also mischaracterize "sitting on it".  They held back because the woman did not want her life ruined by getting involved in such a big political mess.  She was forced to come forward when a someone leaked the existence of the letter to the press.
Feinstein held the information because the accuser requested it.

The accuser, Ford, is risking everything.  She's not some paid protester.  She has a career and is a respected person.  Just making the accusation could ruin her, because of how our society tends to view female accusers as either liars or whores.  Or just dimsmissing that sort of behavior as  "boys will be boys". As you have so aptly demonstrated.

Naturally we should look into it. What do you think of the existing evidence, that She talked about it years ago with her future husband and later a therapist, among others, and has passed an FBI-administered lie detector test?

[John V]

Men should only be worried if they regularly assault women

So far, no other women have accused Kavanaugh. So, he shouldn't be worried?

[RoadRunner79]

Men should only be worried if they regularly assault women

So far, no other women have accused Kavanaugh. So, he shouldn't be worried?

Actually there have been many who have come out as saying that this goes against the character of Kavanaugh at the time.

[Aroura]

Pedantic

[John V]

Pedantic

No, you had a valid point. In the metoo movement, after a person is accused, a number of additional accusations usually follow, and then the person's career is ruined. In the unusual case where there's a lone accusation, that usually fades.

[Aroura]

Every time I post on this forum lately I regret it. The world is full of assholes and trolls.


Also I have you on ignore AM, so you can stop responding to me I can't see it anyway.

And you don't have to worry anymore anyway. Clearly your contributions are more important so it's all yours.