New SCOTUS Judge II: The Wrath of Kavanaugh

[Minoosh]

It might also be because you are not an old fart.

Prior to displays which were even capable at all of displaying text in bold, italics, underlined, etc., it was quite common to see asterisks and underscores placed on either side of a word to indicate emphasis.

And I thought it was cutting edge because an editor I trust used it in a Facebook post. Certain characters are avoided due to conventions, when special symbols might indicate a certain HTML code. It was also part of our naming conventions at the paper. The automatic archiving depended heavily on precise "slugs" for stories.

A tangent, but the evolving nature of Internet postings interests me.

 

[acbytesla]

A woman writes about what men don't know:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/life...e8-b2b5-79270f9cce17_story.html?noredirect=on

This kind of thing is so true. Most men are good people, but we're oblivious. The older I get the more oblivious I believe I was when I was younger. And I'm convinced that to a certain degree everyone is, but I believe men are much more oblivious about women than women are about men.

We live in our own worlds/minds and think everyone thinks like we do and have similar experiences. But NOTHING could be farther from the truth. We may have a lot in common with others but also there are many many differences. We like different things and we're afraid of different things.

I have never given a moment's thought to being sexually assaulted. But i know for a fact that women do. Most have their share of battle stories about overly aggressive and crude men/boys.

 

[The Big Dog]

Nope, I mean this testimony.



If the texts concerning Ramirez's allegations occurred prior to the New Yorker reaching out to Kavanaugh about the story, then that testimony would be false, wouldn't it?

No, because he just testified when he first learned about it. let me get you that quote again:

"[Judge Kavanaugh]: They couldn’t — the New York Times couldn’t corroborate this story and found that she was calling around to classmates trying to see if they remembered it. And I, at least — and I, myself, heard about that, that she was doing that. And you know, that just strikes me as, you know, what is going on here? When someone is calling around to try to refresh other people, is that what’s going on? What’s going on with that? That doesn’t sound — that doesn’t sound good to me. It doesn’t sound fair. It doesn’t sound proper. It sounds like an orchestrated hit to take me out. That’s what it sounds like."

the since then refers to the testimony/written questions.

 

[Belz...]

This kind of thing is so true. Most men are good people, but we're oblivious. The older I get the more oblivious I believe I was when I was younger. And I'm convinced that to a certain degree everyone is, but I believe men are much more oblivious about women than women are about men.

We live in our own worlds/minds and think everyone thinks like we do and have similar experiences. But NOTHING could be farther from the truth. We may have a lot in common with others but also there are many many differences. We like different things and we're afraid of different things.

I have never given a moment's thought to being sexually assaulted. But i know for a fact that women do. Most have their share of battle stories about overly aggressive and crude men/boys.

To be fair I think people are oblivious to experiences that they don't have. It's human nature.

 

[acbytesla]

Why? Lots of heavy drinkers don't have blackouts. It doesn't strike people uniformly, your personal experiences aren't representative of drinkers in general or Kavanaugh specifically.
http://www.bbc.com/future/story/20180613-why-do-only-some-people-get-blackout-drunk

The problem with this study is that it relies on survey questions. The ONLY way I knew I had a blackout was because others told me that I had done or said things i don't recall.

But thanks for the link. That was an interesting article.

 

[acbytesla]

To be fair I think people are oblivious to experiences that they don't have. It's human nature.

I agree. But that's why I believe we need to practice a higher degree of tolerance and be less critical of others.

 

[Cavemonster]

No, because he just testified when he first learned about it. let me get you that quote again:

"[Judge Kavanaugh]: They couldn’t — the New York Times couldn’t corroborate this story and found that she was calling around to classmates trying to see if they remembered it. And I, at least — and I, myself, heard about that, that she was doing that. And you know, that just strikes me as, you know, what is going on here? When someone is calling around to try to refresh other people, is that what’s going on? What’s going on with that? That doesn’t sound — that doesn’t sound good to me. It doesn’t sound fair. It doesn’t sound proper. It sounds like an orchestrated hit to take me out. That’s what it sounds like."

the since then refers to the testimony/written questions.

Then you really have an argument to pick with this guy:

In light of that, it appears that his testimony should be interpreted to mean that he learned about it since the New Yorker began asking him about it.

 

[The Big Dog]

McConnell says only senators will be able to see the FBI report and reiterates the vote is happening this week.

 

[The Big Dog]

Then you really have an argument to pick with this guy:

Yeah, no worries, that guy did not have the benefit of the quote I posted because the NBC grifters had not quoted it yet.

 

[Belz...]

McConnell says only senators will be able to see the FBI report and reiterates the vote is happening this week.

It's turtles all the way through.

 

[Paul2]

Now that the investigation is apparently unhindered, who receives a copy of the report? Will Trump refuse to release the report, or release it but with inconvenient facts missing?

Thats the question that Flake, Collins, and Murkowski better ask themselves, and confirm things six ways to Sunday.

 

[smartcooky]

Regarding the date on Kavanagh's calendar that could be the date in question, and the rebuttal (paraphrasing)... there are more boys listed on Kavanaugh's calendar than Ford claimed were at the gathering, hence it contradicts Ford's claim.

Brace yourself and please give your full attention, this is a complex concept: People may have arrived at the gathering after Ford left.

Exactly, and if you listen to her testimony, she actually implies just that

"MITCHELL: Can I ask you just to follow up on that? When you said it was clear that they had been drinking prior, do you mean prior to the time you had gotten there or prior to the time they had arrived?

FORD: Prior to the time that they arrived. I don’t recall who arrived first, though, whether it was me or them.

MITCHELL: OK, please continue.

FORD: OK. So I recall that the — I could — I can sketch a floor plan. I recall that it was a sparsely furnished, fairly modest living room.

And it was not really a party like the news has made it sound. It was not. It was just a gathering that I assumed was going to lead to a party later on that those boys would attend, because they tended to have parties later at night than I was allowed to stay out.

So it was kind of a pre-gathering.​

 

[xjx388]

From your own link:


So there's a strong likelihood that a frequent heavy drinker has experienced blackouts. And that's the key to whether Kav would remember attacking someone, or whether he would even have perceived his behavior as an attack.

That strikes me as begging the question.

 

[The Big Dog]

Well, the real question is just how much harm did Avenatti's little stunt with his accuser do to The Resistance last night?

That she was lying is clear, but will the stench of that false accusation (and the other false accusation) bleed over to the other two claims?

Given that they are totally uncorroborated at this point, the answer clearly should be yes.

 

[theprestige]

That strikes me as begging the question.

"That happened."

"No it didn't."

"Yes it did. You must have forgotten."

"I'm pretty sure I'd remember something like that."

"Not if you were blackout drunk at the time."

"Dude, seriously?"

"Seriously! You must have got blackout drunk, and then that happened, and you just don't remember it!"

"Do you remember me ever being blackout drunk?"

"... No."

"This conversation is over."

 

[carlitos]

As I mentioned earlier, it's not possible for someone else to remember you being blackout drunk. That's not what the word means.

 

[The Big Dog]

Avenatti's mark said she could identify the boys because they wore their uniforms at weekend gang rape parties.

Georgetown Prep students do not and never did wear uniforms.

So, yeah....

 

[Minoosh]

The sexual assault allegations are different, but the drinking statements could never be prosecuted as perjury.

Separately, no, but in context they are related due to possible blackouts. (Odd he wasn't more prepared for this, IMO). If he could truthfully say that his friends never told him of any blackout incidents, he could have said that. If a Dem senator then said, "Can you rule out any such incidents?" he could have fielded that easily without getting defensive ("You're asking me to prove a negative.").

[One problem I have is that much of the news coverage is conflating "blackout" with "pass out."

(I accidentally cut off attribution for this quote)(ETA: Carlitos). Me too. If someone says, "I hope I didn't do anything to offend you last night," or "How did we get home?" that's evidence of a blackout.

At this point anyone who claimed he was lying about the drinking age is flat out lying themselves

I'd need transcripts to tell.

It appears that Kavanaugh omitted another salient fact. It's not just beer that he likes but 'red red wine'.

Maybe he was talking about the song .

And me with my limited drinking experience has 'blacked out'.

I got that with a couple of prescription drugs (and no alcohol).

But I sure as hell never referred to a chart to determine how many is too many.

Sometimes abnormal drinkers don't know how to answer the question, because they're not sure what's normal.

McConnell says only senators will be able to see the FBI report and reiterates the vote is happening this week.

This strikes me as fair enough as long as all senators get an unredacted report.

 

[carlitos]

Avenatti's mark said she could identify the boys because they wore their uniforms at weekend gang rape parties.

Georgetown Prep students do not and never did wear uniforms.

So, yeah....

I'm taking a chance here by asking you to document a claim.

- Please link that claim about the uniforms here so that I can read it.
- Please confirm that this claim is not about athletes wearing their team uniforms on weekends.

 

[acbytesla]

This strikes me as fair enough as long as all senators get an unredacted report.

It doesn't strike me as fair. Kavanaugh will be making decisions for us all, not just for Senators. Closed door meetings, hiding documents and evidence from the American people is generally reprehensible.

'Sunlight is the best disinfectant'
--Justice William O Douglas