It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Trying to have it both ways is how we end up with preposterous "mistaken identity" theories pushed by an ex-law clerk of Scalia's (Whelan), Republican PR firms, right-wing media and Republican senators and ensnaring some bystander. How upset aren't Kavanaugh supporters about that?
I mean, Jesus, if you think a woman accusing a man of sexual misconduct with no corroborating evidence is bad, what do you think about the Republicans implying the guilt of a man who hasn't been accused of assault by an alleged victim so that they can avoid calling Ford a liar?
Where's all the right-wing outrage about that?
originally posted by: xuenchen
Bubble Busting Breaking News ..........
Senator Collins and Senator Manchin are voting "YES" for Kavanaugh !!!!!!!!!!
Collins set the BS record straight in a floor speech.
Protesters going nuts !!!!
The dogs are running wild.
Or maybe many on the right, despite what you or others on the left would otherwise have the world believe to be true, actually believe that an accuser of alleged sexual abuse deserves the initial presumption that they are telling what they believe to be true. In other words, an honest allegation.
What most people then expect is a fair vetting of the accusation. You know, that due process thing you think is just a convenient political slogan for the right, but which many on the left clearly don't support now.
So he was certainly identified. First on the list, in fact, with most reporting. Ford confirms this by saying:
So by your logic, Ford could only have been motivated by the truth. She was a successful woman... She had a reputation to protect... She accused Kavanaugh before the actual nomination...
But you give no consideration to other possible motives. Maybe she had a personal grudge that had nothing to do with her public allegations and simply saw an opportunity to scuttle Kavanaugh, regardless of where he was in the process. If he wasn't the actual nominee and she could do it anonymously, where was the risk to her?
Or maybe she did have a political grudge, and decided to lob a false accusation across the fence, hoping that with nothing more, it might stick.
Who knows? You certainly don't.
None of that could be explored in the circus we all witnessed.
Republicans shouting from the rooftops that "it's a smear job!" did nothing to create that circus atmosphere?
But for you, her 'success' and 'risk of loss' are despositive. The fact that lots of smart and successful people do dumb (illegal) things all of the time, appears not to be a consideration at all for you.
I did not say that her success or any risks to her reputation she might incur were dispositive. As I responded above (and if you re-read what I posted originally, it should be clear), I was opining about why she might come off as a person who wouldn't be expected to make a smear and how that could present a problem for Republicans calling her a liar.
Quite right, which makes how it played out even more suspicious.
Let's be honest here. If her story HAD been corroborated by others, like Leland Keyser or by even someone who remembered driving her home, we'd be having an entirely different discussion and Kavanaug's nomination would likely be toast.
I don't see how Keyser remembering driving her home would have substantiated the significant portions of her claim. Kavanaugh is not refuting that he knew Ford and he's not discounting the possibility that he'd been at a party with her. Absence knowledge of the alleged assault at the time, I wouldn't expect anyone to have a specific recollection of a handful of people hanging out in high school some three and a half decades prior. Would you? I'm assuming I'm fairly normal and there would have been possibly a couple hundred of such events during my four years of high school and unless something remarkable happened, why would I remember details of any one of them? And for me, it's only been a little over 20 years.
More likely, Feinstaiein didn't bring it forward because there was no corroborating evidence and the accuser didn't want to come forward. But someone on the left certainly forced their hand.
Finally, a point that we can almost totally agree on. With or without agreeing to confidentiality, one would be very hard pressed bringing an allegation to committee from an accuser who didn't want to come forward. It's also most plausible that somebody on the Left leaked to The Intercept. I think it's reasonable to assume that the purpose of the leak was to force somebody's hand, most likely Fords.
It's at least also possible that Ford herself directed the leak to give herself a reason to come forward.
originally posted by: Sookiechacha
Secondly, I've never done any of things Kavanaugh is accused of doing. Except, I have been black out drunk once to twice in my life, but Kavanaugh denies that he ever has.
Moreover, it's not like we didn't have a process that when the accusation first came to the attention of any member of the committee, it could have been confidentially shared with the entire committee, a further investigation held on the merits of the accusation, and then a final judgement voted upon by the committee.
Instead, we got a public spectacle, with no meaningful investigation, designed to inflict the maximum possible political damage. THAT had nothing to do with finding out the truth.
The means simply justified the end...denying Trump's appointment to the court. If a man's life and reputation were unjustifiably ruined, so be it.
It's a smear job because the democrats on the committee, and whoever leaked it, didn't care if Ford's allegations where true or not.
I was upset by it. Thought is was disgusting...as did many others I've discussed that point with.
She shouldn't have said it. It was a mistake. For Kavanaugh, the same. Blaming the Clintons was a mistake.
Small potatoes. Either they are both unfit, or neither is, on this basis
originally posted by: theantediluvian
a reply to: loam
I'm torn between the conflicting urges to hound every left-leaning/centrist person I know to get out and vote straight Democrat and unplugging everything until it's over.
originally posted by: carlncarl
a reply to: mysterioustranger
how would the truth come out if you don't respond?
when you do respond, if you sit there calmly after days of accusations you actually look more guilty.
there are no reports of him having any type of temper problem when doing his job as a judge.
I would say by not reaching across the floor and slapping spartacus for the interrogation on the high school yearbook he showed an unbelievable amount of restraint.
A person that lacks emotion or empathy would be a very poor choice since it would be difficult to understand an issue in in its entirety, otherwise we could just make robots do the judging.