Kavanaugh accused of sexually assaulting classmate in high school

[krazen1211]

Of course that useless old bat Feinstein only caved to pressure and released these documents at the last minute, when she could have done so in July, and had an actual impact. She should be booted off the judiciary committee.

After the 2018 elections you will be able to boot someone off the judiciary committee.

[RFKFan68]

He's going to be confirmed. People should put energy into flipping the Senate to block more Trump judicial appointments especially if something happens to anyone on the Supreme Court in the next two years.

[The DEI Hire]

The alleged victim didn't want to go public with it out of fear for her own safety.

This.

Furthermore, re: the timing of this story, I'll quote the New Yorker article.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not going to quote the rest for copyright reasons, but everyone should read it before taking a side or commenting on the issue. Here is a link: https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/a-sexual-misconduct-allegation-against-the-supreme-court-nominee-brett-kavanaugh-stirs-tension-among-democrats-in-congress

This story was broken by Jane Mayer and Ronan Farrow. These are the same people who broke the story about Eric Schneiderman. Painting the article as a hit job is gross and misses key context.

The claim that "the timing here is suspicious" is also a red herring. This "concern" gets raised for each of these allegations, then the people who (t)roll this line out never own up when the allegations turn out to be well supported and the accusers resign or own up to it. The timeline for accusers to come forward with allegations is extremely complicated and deals with a very sensitive issue. The false claim rate for these types of attacks, while non-zero, is very low. Anybody who wants to play this game by realistic odds should recognize that this is probably a serious allegation with at least some validity to it. To dismiss it out of hand is obviously partisan and hackish.

To immediately assume it's true with nothing to actually back the claim is partisan and hackish as well.

[Take your vitamins and say your prayers, Brother!]

Let Kavanaugh take a polygraph, by a certified polygrapher, before a vote is held.

Let Feinstein resign from the Senate if this matter is made of whole cloth.

[Sic Semper Tyrannis]

Between McConnell's insistence that Kavanaugh not be selected as the nominee and the release of the counter letter in under twenty-four hours following the reveal of this incident leads me to believe that Senate Republicans knew about this well in advance (probably because Kavanaugh told them about it) and have been deliberately expediting this process to keep this hushed.

Considering this is for a lifetime appointment to one of the most important offices in the country, the hearing should be delayed until this is seriously investigated.

Admittedly this is true.   The release of a counter-letter in less than 24 hours is quite fishy when you consider it would have taken a few days just to receive it through the mail, especially with the Hurricane disrupting the post office.

It's also possible that they had that prepared in the event someone tried to do a false smear campaign. It hasn't exactly been secret that Dems want to to everything they can to block Kavanaugh's confirmation by any means possible. Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

Come on. It would be a hell of a coincidence for Republicans to preemptively have a back-up denial document just in case their candidate is accused of sexual assault and then have that exact thing happen with no relation or connection whatsoever.

It's certainly a possibility. It's not the first time it's happened during a justice's confirmation hearing, and it's pretty obvious the Dems will grasp at whatever straws they can to try and block Kavanaugh.

And in this day and age with politicians and such accused of sexual misconduct, it doesn't hurt to have those who can speak on your character ready in the event someone makes a false accusation.

65 specifically from his high school days? Even someone who thrives on be country for the sake of contrariness like yourself can't possibly believe that that is a coincidence. Did they get 65 women from his college days to? 65 more from Law School? Another 65 for his first four years of practicing law? Did they go ahead and get approximately 700 female character Witnesses over the last 40 Years of his life? Or....? Is it simply an example you calling out being more important than actually calling out for being realistic about sexual assault?

I'm simply not foolish enough to believe one conveniently timed sexual assault accusation is true without some sort of evidence or other accusers to back it.

I'm also not crazy enough to think someone's career should be ruined for those same reasons.

You dodged the question completely. Why do they specifically have over 60 character witnesses from the same period the rape potentially happened? When the Republicans were also begging t###p to not pick Kennedys handpicked successor.

BTW, please don't turn this personal.

It's very possible they have a number of character witnesses from various points in his life, not just high school. It's a high profile appointment that's vulnerable to anyone taking any opportunity they can to sink it simply because Trump was the one who got to do it.

As badger said, whats more likely? That they have like 700 character witnesses from throughout his life prepared specifically to defend him on a dime, or that they know there's dirt? Do they have 700 character witnesses for every vulnerable R senator? Do they have 700 character witnesses for every cabinet appointee? It reeks, certainly enough to deny confirmation to a lifetime appointment that holds incredible power. This ain't a criminal trial.

[OSR stands with Israel]

This thread is an example of why polarization has become so bad in this nation .

[Mister Mets]

Let Kavanaugh take a polygraph, by a certified polygrapher, before a vote is held.

Let Feinstein resign from the Senate if this matter is made of whole cloth.

Polygraphs aren't worth much.

https://www.apa.org/research/action/polygraph.aspx

Feinstein hasn't made any outlandish statements regarding the validity of the accusation.

[DrScholl]

Let Kavanaugh take a polygraph, by a certified polygrapher, before a vote is held.

Let Feinstein resign from the Senate if this matter is made of whole cloth.

Not that resigning would do McConnell any good considering that California has a Democratic Governor. Kavanaugh is the problem here, not Feinstein.

[The DEI Hire]

Between McConnell's insistence that Kavanaugh not be selected as the nominee and the release of the counter letter in under twenty-four hours following the reveal of this incident leads me to believe that Senate Republicans knew about this well in advance (probably because Kavanaugh told them about it) and have been deliberately expediting this process to keep this hushed.

Considering this is for a lifetime appointment to one of the most important offices in the country, the hearing should be delayed until this is seriously investigated.

Admittedly this is true.   The release of a counter-letter in less than 24 hours is quite fishy when you consider it would have taken a few days just to receive it through the mail, especially with the Hurricane disrupting the post office.

It's also possible that they had that prepared in the event someone tried to do a false smear campaign. It hasn't exactly been secret that Dems want to to everything they can to block Kavanaugh's confirmation by any means possible. Hope for the best, prepare for the worst.

Come on. It would be a hell of a coincidence for Republicans to preemptively have a back-up denial document just in case their candidate is accused of sexual assault and then have that exact thing happen with no relation or connection whatsoever.

It's certainly a possibility. It's not the first time it's happened during a justice's confirmation hearing, and it's pretty obvious the Dems will grasp at whatever straws they can to try and block Kavanaugh.

And in this day and age with politicians and such accused of sexual misconduct, it doesn't hurt to have those who can speak on your character ready in the event someone makes a false accusation.

65 specifically from his high school days? Even someone who thrives on be country for the sake of contrariness like yourself can't possibly believe that that is a coincidence. Did they get 65 women from his college days to? 65 more from Law School? Another 65 for his first four years of practicing law? Did they go ahead and get approximately 700 female character Witnesses over the last 40 Years of his life? Or....? Is it simply an example you calling out being more important than actually calling out for being realistic about sexual assault?

I'm simply not foolish enough to believe one conveniently timed sexual assault accusation is true without some sort of evidence or other accusers to back it.

I'm also not crazy enough to think someone's career should be ruined for those same reasons.

You dodged the question completely. Why do they specifically have over 60 character witnesses from the same period the rape potentially happened? When the Republicans were also begging t###p to not pick Kennedys handpicked successor.

BTW, please don't turn this personal.

It's very possible they have a number of character witnesses from various points in his life, not just high school. It's a high profile appointment that's vulnerable to anyone taking any opportunity they can to sink it simply because Trump was the one who got to do it.

As badger said, whats more likely? That they have like 700 character witnesses from throughout his life prepared specifically to defend him on a dime, or that they know there's dirt? Do they have 700 character witnesses for every vulnerable R senator? Do they have 700 character witnesses for every cabinet appointee? It reeks, certainly enough to deny confirmation to a lifetime appointment that holds incredible power. This ain't a criminal trial.

Once again, opposition is very eager to grasp at whatever straws they can to ensure Kavanaugh isn't confirmed, even if it's a baseless accusation.

You can stop pretending you actually care about why he could be denied and the supposed "victim".

[136or142]

This thread is an example of why polarization has become so bad in this nation .

You've been one of the two worst partisans in this thread.

[OSR stands with Israel]

This thread is an example of why polarization has become so bad in this nation .

You've been one of the two worst partisans in this thread.

Lol no the facts is this letter amounts to nothing and if it did it would have been released in July .


Also by the way I opposed Franken’s ousting as well .

[Sic Semper Tyrannis]

Once again, opposition is very eager to grasp at whatever straws they can to ensure Kavanaugh isn't confirmed, even if it's a baseless accusation.

You can stop pretending you actually care about why he could be denied and the supposed "victim".

You're the one who's grasping at straws to pretend there's not even a shadow of a doubt that this is just some democratic fabrication. And FTR, I'm one of those people who wanted Franken gone from the get-go. It takes actual evidence for me to not believe allegations against democrats. It took me a while to accept that maybe Keith wasn't guilty, and I'd honestly vote for Cisneros's opponent if I lived in that district.

[Sic Semper Tyrannis]

This thread is an example of why polarization has become so bad in this nation .

You've been one of the two worst partisans in this thread.

Lol no the facts is this letter amounts to nothing and if it did it would have been released in July .


Also by the way I opposed Franken’s ousting as well .

Being against franken's resignation does not help your credibility on matters of sexual assault.

[The DEI Hire]

This thread is an example of why polarization has become so bad in this nation .

You've been one of the two worst partisans in this thread.

Lol no the facts is this letter amounts to nothing and if it did it would have been released in July .


Also by the way I opposed Franken’s ousting as well .

Being against franken's resignation does not help your credibility on matters of sexual assault.

And pretending every single accusation of sexual assault without proof is true doesn't help yours.

[Meclazine for Israel]

This thread is an example of why polarization has become so bad in this nation .

You've been one of the two worst partisans in this thread.

Lol no the facts is this letter amounts to nothing and if it did it would have been released in July .


Also by the way I opposed Franken’s ousting as well .

Being against franken's resignation does not help your credibility on matters of sexual assault.

OK then, how do you gain credibility on matters of sexual assault in two sentences or less?

[ponderosa peen 🌲]

The alleged victim didn't want to go public with it out of fear for her own safety.

This.

Furthermore, re: the timing of this story, I'll quote the New Yorker article.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Not going to quote the rest for copyright reasons, but everyone should read it before taking a side or commenting on the issue. Here is a link: https://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/a-sexual-misconduct-allegation-against-the-supreme-court-nominee-brett-kavanaugh-stirs-tension-among-democrats-in-congress

This story was broken by Jane Mayer and Ronan Farrow. These are the same people who broke the story about Eric Schneiderman. Painting the article as a hit job is gross and misses key context.

The claim that "the timing here is suspicious" is also a red herring. This "concern" gets raised for each of these allegations, then the people who (t)roll this line out never own up when the allegations turn out to be well supported and the accusers resign or own up to it. The timeline for accusers to come forward with allegations is extremely complicated and deals with a very sensitive issue. The false claim rate for these types of attacks, while non-zero, is very low. Anybody who wants to play this game by realistic odds should recognize that this is probably a serious allegation with at least some validity to it. To dismiss it out of hand is obviously partisan and hackish.

To immediately assume it's true with nothing to actually back the claim is partisan and hackish as well.

I mean, yeah? I didn't do that though. Did you not read this part of my quote:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Key word: probably. Obviously, at this stage, we don't know what happened. All I was saying is that people are bending over backwards to give him the benefit of the doubt, even though these allegations seem credible and the line of attack against them is, more often than not, proven wrong and discredited. If you want to play an odds game, the odds are not looking good for those who are saying this is some sort of conspiracy.

[Take your vitamins and say your prayers, Brother!]

Let Kavanaugh take a polygraph, by a certified polygrapher, before a vote is held.

Let Feinstein resign from the Senate if this matter is made of whole cloth.

Not that resigning would do McConnell any good considering that California has a Democratic Governor. Kavanaugh is the problem here, not Feinstein.

A Democratic Senator pulls a "victim" out of a hat.  While this shouldn't be dismissed out of hand, it's not unreasonable to look at least a little askance at this, especially given that the victim chooses to remain anonymous.

The allegation made is serious.  Kavanaugh probably cannot lie through a polygraph on this;  The allegation involves another party besides the victim, and it involves him putting his hand over the alleged victim's mouth.  But if he passes, Feinstein ought to be held to account for her role in bringing forth an "anonymous" victim to throw a wrench in the nomination confirmation process.  

I do not put it past pro-choice advocates to fabricate something such as this if they believe Kavanaugh to be a legitimate threat to Roe v. Wade.  And I don't believe that a nominee for a SCOTUS appointment should not be rejected solely on the basis of a last-minute accusation by a victim that will not break her anonymity.  I think the polygraph could be a reasonable compromise for the purpose of confirmation, only.

[The DEI Hire]

Once again, opposition is very eager to grasp at whatever straws they can to ensure Kavanaugh isn't confirmed, even if it's a baseless accusation.

You can stop pretending you actually care about why he could be denied and the supposed "victim".

You're the one who's grasping at straws to pretend there's not even a shadow of a doubt that this is just some democratic fabrication. And FTR, I'm one of those people who wanted Franken gone from the get-go. It takes actual evidence for me to not believe allegations against democrats. It took me a while to accept that maybe Keith wasn't guilty, and I'd honestly vote for Cisneros's opponent if I lived in that district.

I already addressed this, but since you chose not to pay attention, I'll post it again:

I'm simply not foolish enough to believe one conveniently timed sexual assault accusation is true without some sort of evidence or other accusers to back it.

I'm also not crazy enough to think someone's career should be ruined for those same reasons.

My opinion on how it should be handled has nothing to do with party affiliation. If the roles were reversed, my view on this still would not change.

[ponderosa peen 🌲]

Let Kavanaugh take a polygraph, by a certified polygrapher, before a vote is held.

Let Feinstein resign from the Senate if this matter is made of whole cloth.

Not that resigning would do McConnell any good considering that California has a Democratic Governor. Kavanaugh is the problem here, not Feinstein.

A Democratic Senator pulls a "victim" out of a hat.

The allegation made is serious.  Kavanaugh probably cannot lie through a polygraph on this;  The allegation involves another party besides the victim, and it involves him putting his hand over the alleged victim's mouth.  But if he passes, Feinstein ought to be held to account for her role in bringing forth an "anonymous" victim to throw a wrench in the nomination confirmation process.  

I do not put it past pro-choice advocates to fabricate something such as this if they believe Kavanaugh to be a legitimate threat to Roe v. Wade.  And I don't believe that a nominee for a SCOTUS appointment should not be rejected solely on the basis of a last-minute accusation by a victim that will not break her anonymity.  I think the polygraph could be a reasonable compromise for the purpose of confirmation, only.

I am very disappointed that you feel this way.

[136or142]

This thread is an example of why polarization has become so bad in this nation .

You've been one of the two worst partisans in this thread.

Lol no the facts is this letter amounts to nothing and if it did it would have been released in July .


Also by the way I opposed Franken’s ousting as well .

I was referring to your false assertion that the FBI had concluded that there was nothing to this claim.

[Bea O'Problem]

This thread is an example of why polarization has become so bad in this nation .

You've been one of the two worst partisans in this thread.

Lol no the facts is this letter amounts to nothing and if it did it would have been released in July .


Also by the way I opposed Franken’s ousting as well .

I was referring to your false assertion that the FBI had concluded that there was nothing to this claim.

The FBI isn't investigating this because it isn't in their jurisdiction. The FBI still added the claim to his background file.

[Pericles]

Let Kavanaugh take a polygraph, by a certified polygrapher, before a vote is held.

Let Feinstein resign from the Senate if this matter is made of whole cloth.

Not that resigning would do McConnell any good considering that California has a Democratic Governor. Kavanaugh is the problem here, not Feinstein.

A Democratic Senator pulls a "victim" out of a hat.  While this shouldn't be dismissed out of hand, it's not unreasonable to look at least a little askance at this, especially given that the victim chooses to remain anonymous.

The allegation made is serious.  Kavanaugh probably cannot lie through a polygraph on this;  The allegation involves another party besides the victim, and it involves him putting his hand over the alleged victim's mouth.  But if he passes, Feinstein ought to be held to account for her role in bringing forth an "anonymous" victim to throw a wrench in the nomination confirmation process.  

I do not put it past pro-choice advocates to fabricate something such as this if they believe Kavanaugh to be a legitimate threat to Roe v. Wade.  And I don't believe that a nominee for a SCOTUS appointment should not be rejected solely on the basis of a last-minute accusation by a victim that will not break her anonymity.  I think the polygraph could be a reasonable compromise for the purpose of confirmation, only.

Regardless of whether this is true or not a polygraph test is a terrible way to judge the truth in this matter. Polygraph are overrated and can easily make mistakes-they're not a truth serum equivalent and are not reliable.

[BBD]

Of course that useless old bat Feinstein only caved to pressure and released these documents at the last minute, when she could have done so in July, and had an actual impact. She should be booted off the judiciary committee.

After the 2018 elections you will be able to boot someone off the judiciary committee.

Not a chance, bucko. Senate's only a 50-50 chance anyway. Ole Chuck ain't gonna do squat.

[Take your vitamins and say your prayers, Brother!]

Let Kavanaugh take a polygraph, by a certified polygrapher, before a vote is held.

Let Feinstein resign from the Senate if this matter is made of whole cloth.

Not that resigning would do McConnell any good considering that California has a Democratic Governor. Kavanaugh is the problem here, not Feinstein.

A Democratic Senator pulls a "victim" out of a hat.

The allegation made is serious.  Kavanaugh probably cannot lie through a polygraph on this;  The allegation involves another party besides the victim, and it involves him putting his hand over the alleged victim's mouth.  But if he passes, Feinstein ought to be held to account for her role in bringing forth an "anonymous" victim to throw a wrench in the nomination confirmation process.  

I do not put it past pro-choice advocates to fabricate something such as this if they believe Kavanaugh to be a legitimate threat to Roe v. Wade.  And I don't believe that a nominee for a SCOTUS appointment should not be rejected solely on the basis of a last-minute accusation by a victim that will not break her anonymity.  I think the polygraph could be a reasonable compromise for the purpose of confirmation, only.

I am very disappointed that you feel this way.

I do not believe in the integrity of much of the Pro-Abortion movement.  This issue is a defining issue for so much of the Feminist Left, and it's an issue where folks view the ends as justifying the means.  I can easily see Feinstein exaggerating the credibility of this victim as needed to save Roe v. Wade.  That, of course, has to be balanced by the compelling nature of the allegation, and the fact that it's not unreasonable to believe that Kavanaugh did this.  This is, after all, a lifetime appointment.

If the victim came forth, I would feel differently.  The victim chooses to remain anonymous; what does that tell you?  It doesn't automatically mean that she's a fake, but when allegations such as this go far enough, people do have a right to confront their accusers.  

Let Kavanaugh step up and take a polygraph.  If he passes, let Feinstein take a polygraph to verify good faith in her acts here.  Then, let's vote.  

[Take your vitamins and say your prayers, Brother!]

Let Kavanaugh take a polygraph, by a certified polygrapher, before a vote is held.

Let Feinstein resign from the Senate if this matter is made of whole cloth.

Not that resigning would do McConnell any good considering that California has a Democratic Governor. Kavanaugh is the problem here, not Feinstein.

A Democratic Senator pulls a "victim" out of a hat.  While this shouldn't be dismissed out of hand, it's not unreasonable to look at least a little askance at this, especially given that the victim chooses to remain anonymous.

The allegation made is serious.  Kavanaugh probably cannot lie through a polygraph on this;  The allegation involves another party besides the victim, and it involves him putting his hand over the alleged victim's mouth.  But if he passes, Feinstein ought to be held to account for her role in bringing forth an "anonymous" victim to throw a wrench in the nomination confirmation process.  

I do not put it past pro-choice advocates to fabricate something such as this if they believe Kavanaugh to be a legitimate threat to Roe v. Wade.  And I don't believe that a nominee for a SCOTUS appointment should not be rejected solely on the basis of a last-minute accusation by a victim that will not break her anonymity.  I think the polygraph could be a reasonable compromise for the purpose of confirmation, only.

Regardless of whether this is true or not a polygraph test is a terrible way to judge the truth in this matter. Polygraph are overrated and can easily make mistakes-they're not a truth serum equivalent and are not reliable.

For Court, yes.

For Employment purposes, they are regularly used, including for government work.  Let Kavanaugh take a polygraph on this, just as CIA agents do.