Legal/scotus thread

Enscheff said:
I was using "you" generally. And I couldn't care less about what you think of my opinion. I assign zero value to your "respect".

Allow me to rephrase...

If anyone accuses 3 women of lying about being sexually abused by the same man, that person is scum.

Agree or disagree? Rather than simply being contrarian, man up and state a position.

Your answer to that single question is enough for me to determine what kind of a man you are.
Click to expand...

He's going to have to bump that up to four now.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/su...legation-misconduct-against-kavanaugh-n913581
 
Enscheff said:
I was using "you" generally. And I couldn't care less about what you think of my opinion. I assign zero value to your "respect".

Allow me to rephrase...

If anyone accuses 3 women of lying about being sexually abused by the same man, that person is scum.

Agree or disagree? Rather than simply being contrarian, man up and state a position.

Your answer to that single question is enough for me to determine what kind of a man you are.
Click to expand...

I haven’t seen anyone accuse them of lying? Certainly not here.

I would say to the point there is smoke from fire most likely. At that point the evidence would need to be presented.

I’m not one to convict without enough substance. But at three you got smoke and likely fire.

Like I said before, not a Kav fan
 
Julio3000 said:
I don’t know if they’re true or not. I’m skeptical (because Avenatti) but I think the fact that the woman is willing to swear an affidavit, at the risk of her career and her freedom, is noteworthy. I think there’s already info in the public domain (Judge’s girlfriend, and also a contemporary of theirs who wrote in Slate a couple of days ago about knowledge of a “lineup,” ie a gang rape) that lends credence to the plausibility of the allegation. I’d assume an investigation was in order, and would take careful note of who supports and who opposes such an idea.
Click to expand...

1. She graduated 3 years before Kavanaugh

2. She is unwilling to name any witnesses

3. I am surprised as well she is willing to go on record... should she face prison if she is lying, in your opinion?

4. Avenatti is more of a clown than Trump, and that is saying something
 
Tapate50 said:
Lets all take a moment and agree that ensheff has gone off the deep end shall we?

Holy hell. I mean that's some decent sized hail stones thrown. Beyond 57 level stuff. Super too...

I love reading here, I really do. I love to see both points and sides "discussing the issues" of the day because I don't get a TON of differing perspective around me. BUT- this recent trend of painting people as criminals\racists\sexists because they have a different opinion on a topic is disturbing. I have noticed it crop up in more than one thread. No one's civil anymore. I can see why people stop posting here.

Some of you do a decent job, but that's the minority. This broad brush some use without knowing the character behind the username is depressing. If I'm guilty of such, then I apologize, but jeez guys\gals.... this isn't a good look. We can do better.
Click to expand...

I was wondering if there was any rational person left on this board. Kudos to you.

This is unfortunately the new playbook of the left... just emotion emotion and more emotion. It is embarrassing
 
50PoundHead said:
You are throwing that out as a strawman concocted by the media. That is not the gist of what is being leveled against Kavanaugh. I didn't even read Enscheff's entry, so I don't know what to say there, but both in this thread and the political correctness thread, you seem determined to marginalize anyone who has a complaint about the way things are going in this country.
Click to expand...

Do you want me to point to the stories on the MSM pointing to his drinking as proof? Wouldn't take long.

Hell, just read nsacpi's posts to get you started

And you're damn right... if someone is willing to get rid of due process in this country - I'll have an issue with it. [insert racist accusation here]
 
Enscheff said:
If you accuse 3 women of lying about being raped by the same man, you are scum, period.

I don't need to know anything more about you to make that determination. I don't need a brush to paint you as such...I can just dump the bucket of paint on you and call it good.

This is not a difference of opinion. This is someone being mortally repugnant and hiding behind calling it their opinion.
Click to expand...

Of all the 3 women you are referring to here, none have accused him of raping them
 
If this continues getting out of hand I'm shutting this thread down. This debate about high-school behavior has slightly evolved into arguing like high schoolers.
 
Enscheff said:
LOL, Ford beat those clowns to the punch before they could blabber the "take a polygraph test" line...

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...n-kavanaugh-allegations/ar-AAAGExJ?li=BBnb7Kz

What are they going to say next to protect this scumbag?

When are Kav and Judge going to take their tests?
Click to expand...

1. This is really old news

2. Polygraphs are pretty useless, and are not permissible in court due to their uselessness

3. The questions she received in her polygraph were about her statement, not the details of the event

4. The account she gave in her polygraph was different than the account she gave in the letter to Fienstein

5. They made a couple corrections to the text after the polygraph, in order to match the original senate statement

6. She did the polygraph in Maryland. One of the reasons she delayed testifying was she was afraid of flying

7. On July 30th, she said it was her and 4 other boys. During the polygraph on august 7th. , she said it was 4 boys and a couple of girls. On September 16th, she said there were 3 boys and 1 girl


These are all facts. Take them for what you wish
 
sturg33 said:
Do you want me to point to the stories on the MSM pointing to his drinking as proof? Wouldn't take long.

Hell, just read nsacpi's posts to get you started

And you're damn right... if someone is willing to get rid of due process in this country - I'll have an issue with it. [insert racist accusation here]
Click to expand...

due process would be served by hitting the pause button and having the FBI investigate the allegations
 
sturg33 said:
1. This is really old news

2. Polygraphs are pretty useless, and are not permissible in court due to their uselessness

3. The questions she received in her polygraph were about her statement, not the details of the event

4. The account she gave in her polygraph was different than the account she gave in the letter to Fienstein

5. They made a couple corrections to the text after the polygraph, in order to match the original senate statement

6. She did the polygraph in Maryland. One of the reasons she delayed testifying was she was afraid of flying

7. On July 30th, she said it was her and 4 other boys. During the polygraph on august 7th. , she said it was 4 boys and a couple of girls. On September 16th, she said there were 3 boys and 1 girl


These are all facts. Take them for what you wish
Click to expand...

8. She felt compelled to do her civic duty and tell what she knew about this man even though she knew doing so would probably unleash an avalanche of attacks on her and her family.

Keep attacking the victims if you want. It's pretty clear that a pattern of behavior is emerging that is actually, not all that shocking or hard to believe.
 
Last edited:
Enscheff said:
Great...

So now there are 4 lying women Tapate? Sturg?

All these women lying?
Click to expand...

First of all, you are a small little boy who has serious psychological issues. i presume you were bullied as a kid and like to take it out teenagers today like Taylor.

Luckily I am able to discuss ideas in a rational and not emotionally charged manner so here is my response.

---------------------------------------------------------

Do I believe 2, 3, 4 women are capable of lying. Yes I do. But you may have noticed that i'm not accusing them of lying. What I am saying is, none of them - and I mean none of them, have produced evidence to suggest they are telling the truth.

What do we know:

1. Ford

- Accusations made of an event 35 years ago, where Kavanaugh physically forced himself on her and attempted to rape her

- She named 4 people in the event - that her lawyer assured us would corroborate the story

- All 4 contradicted her story under the penalty of perjury

- She has other people saying she told them of an event in recent years, but never mentioned Brett Kavanaugh

- Her details to her therapist, the senate, and the polygraph have been inconsistent

- To date, only Ford has not testified under the penalty of perjury

- Kavanaugh denies the allegation

- This did not come up during 6 FBI background checks

2. Ramirez

- 7 days ago, wasn't sure if her memory from 35 years ago was good enough. After speaking with lawyers and press 6 days later, is willing to tell a story

- Claims to be at a party 35 years ago and very drunk where a person who could have been Kavanugh exposed his penis close to her face

- She is not sure if it was Kavanaugh

- All potential eye witnesses deny the story

- To date, Ramirez is unwilling to testify under the penalty of perjury

- Kavanaugh denies the allegations

- This did not come up during 6 FBI background checks

3. Swetnick

- Signed affidavit to congress - opening her up to penalties for lying

- Graduated the prep school 3 years before Kavanaugh

- Claims to have attended parties 35 years ago, thrown by high schoolers while she was in college

- Claims to have witnessed multiple instance of drug and gang rape of women at parties

- Claims to have kept going to same parties, but never reported activity to authorities

- Claims she was eventually was a victim in one of these gang rapes

- She only named one person - Kavanaugh - who she claims never touched her - but was present

- Unwilling to name any eye witnesses to corroborate her story

- Kavanaugh denies allegation, and also says he does not even know who this person is

- This did not come up during 6 FBI background checks

- Swetnick also settled in an unrelated sexual harassment lawsuit against her employer, New York Life Insurance. She was represented by Debra Katz, who is representing Dr. Ford today


4. Anonymous Allegation

- An anonymous letter to the Senate regarding an incident in 1998

- There were no names

- There were no addresses

- There was no contact information

- For reference, there were approximately 1,800 anonymous allegations of a pizza child sex trafficking ring before the 2016 election that had more information



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's what we know. These are just the facts. You can call me a whateverist for stating facts... but I'm not sure that's the rational position.
 
Last edited:
Runnin said:
Keep attacking the victims if you want. It's pretty clear that a pattern of behavior is emerging that is actually, not all that shocking or hard to believe.
Click to expand...

How is stating facts, attacking victims? Why can't you all engage in a debate without all of this emotionally charged language?
 
nsacpi said:
due process would be served by hitting the pause button and having the FBI investigate the allegations
Click to expand...

[TW]1044780921944199168[/TW]

I'm curious what the FBI would do in this situation... interview the people in question? Isn't that what's happening?

And if they missed this during the background checks, what makes you think they can add any value now?
 
sturg33 said:
How is stating facts, attacking victims? Why can't you all engage in a debate without all of this emotionally charged language?
Click to expand...

When Cory booker runs for president in a few years you think 57 and runnin are going to give him a pass for his admitted past sexual indiscretions?


Uh. Yeah
 
Ronald Rump said:
If this continues getting out of hand I'm shutting this thread down. This debate about high-school behavior has slightly evolved into arguing like high schoolers.
Click to expand...

The only people taking it out of hand are the folks who can't have a debate of ideas of anything that disagrees with their emotion.

The folks who are not ready to put BK behind bars have remained rational the entire discussion.
 
sturg33 said:
[TW]1044780921944199168[/TW]

I'm curious what the FBI would do in this situation... interview the people in question? Isn't that what's happening?

And if they missed this during the background checks, what makes you think they can add any value now?
Click to expand...

the allegations represent potentially important new information the FBI did not have when doing the background check
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top