Status
Not open for further replies.
This poll was conducted up until 24th Sept, so I would imagine it excludes the latest Swetnick allegations, but it's still surprising:

"..a majority of Republicans (54%) say the judge should be confirmed even if the allegations of sexual misconduct are true, according to The Marist poll."

- This survey of 997 adults was conducted September 22nd through September 24th, 2018
- 80% were registered voters identifying 36% D, 27% R, 34%

Sad but not surprising. It just confirms what so many of us already knew: all they care about is getting an extremely conservative judge on the SC before the mid-terms. If they don't mind their president sexually assaulting women why not a SC judge who sexually assaulted women?
 
Has anyone figured out what Bush/Trump are hiding when it comes to released documents from Kavanaugh's White House career? W. would have held back 27,000 pages; Trump withheld 100,000. The WH lawyers said these were "candid" conversations on how to nominate people to federal judgeships, and that releasing them would severely hurt the ability to recruit good nominees. I know Cory Booker got some, but still not all.

I'm trying to come up with an example of what sorts of conversations would affect recruiting. If Dems are right, this is the first time executive privilege has been invoked to withhold records in a Supreme Court nominee case. Have key senators been allowed to see them, or are they just as in the dark as the American public?

I admit, I zoned out some on this thread. If someone has links or can provide compelling hypotheticals, I would much appreciate it.
 
This poll was conducted up until 24th Sept, so I would imagine it excludes the latest Swetnick allegations, but it's still surprising:

"..a majority of Republicans (54%) say the judge should be confirmed even if the allegations of sexual misconduct are true, according to The Marist poll."
What surprised you? Were you expecting more support for Kavanaugh, or less?

Sad but not surprising.
54 percent is a good deal less than Trump's general support from Republicans.
 
What surprised you? Were you expecting more support for Kavanaugh, or less?

54 percent is a good deal less than Trump's general support from Republicans.

True, but to think that over half of them think a man who not only sexually assaulted women but also lied about it to the SJC should hold one of the highest positions in the country is still surprising. And this is the party of family values?:jaw-dropp
 
Christine Blasey Ford has asked for an FBI investigation.
Debbie Ramirez has asked for an for an FBI investigation and has offered to testify under penalty of perjury.
Now Julie Swetnick as asked for an FBI investigation.

Swetnick's statement is given under penalty of perjury, too. Aside from anything else, it would cost her her career.
 
Hmm, Thirsty’s witness was going to parties where she was at least 18 and in college into sophomore year in college when he was 16 and going to be a junior.

She went to ten or so parties where gang rapes were going on, she got gang raped at one in 1982, and kept going until 1983.

Sounds legit.

Plus, she doesn't even really exist. She's just a prank by 4chan.
 
Last edited:
What surprised you? Were you expecting more support for Kavanaugh, or less?

54 percent is a good deal less than Trump's general support from Republicans.

That's a fair question. I was surprised that such a high number of americans in general and republicans in particular, being as comparatively puritanical as they are, would so easily disregard sexual offences.

Perhaps I shouldn't be. This makes me think. I'm off to check if John Hogue has discovered a quatrain indicating this as a sign of impending apocalypse.

Lo
The great shameless, audacious bawler,
He will be elected governor of the army:
The boldness of his contention,
The bridge broken, the city faint from fear​

And Lo
The great Senate will ordain the triumph
for one who afterwards will be vanquished, driven out:
At the sound of the trumpet of his adherents there will be
put up for sale their possessions, enemies expelled.​
 
What should the default skeptical position be for rape accusations?

Same as for the reporting of any other crime (burglary, theft, assault, murder)... you proceed from a position that the complainant is making an honest report, then you set about investigating the veracity of that report.

How would you like it if you called the Police and told them that someone was in the process or burgling your house, and their response was "do you have any evidence to prove it?" or "you left your house unlocked so you deserved it?" or "you must have pissed the burglar off somehow so its your own fault?" This is effectively what happens when you dismiss a rape complainant's allegations.

I don't get this mindset that when a woman is raped, that some men (and I have to say, they are mostly older, right-leaning types) fail to understand that rape, attempted rape or sexual assault are a very traumatic experiences for the victims - they have been personally violated. There is a well documented and well researched history of people and authority figures such as Police and College staff not believing the victim's outcries. When that happens, the trauma is magnified - not only have they been physically violated, but they have also been emotionally traumatised through being disbelieved.

IMO, it is the potential additional trauma resulting from being disbelieved, as well as the shame associated with having to explain to a stranger, often in graphic detail, what happened to them, that causes women to so often not report that they have been sexually violated.
 
Last edited:
Same as for the reporting of any other crime (burglary, theft, assault, murder)... you proceed from a position that the complainant is making an honest report, then you set about investigating the veracity of that report.

How would you like it if you called the Police and told them that someone was in the process or burgling your house, and their response was "do you have any evidence to prove it?" or "you left your house unlocked so you deserved it?" or "you must have pissed the burglar off somehow so its your own fault?" This is effectively what happens when you dismiss a rape complainant's allegations.

I don't get this mindset that when a woman is raped, that some men (and I have to say, they are mostly older, right-leaning types) fail to understand that rape, attempted rape or sexual assault are a very traumatic experiences for the victims - they have been personally violated. There is a well documented and well researched history of people and authority figures such as Police and College staff not believing the victim's outcries. When that happens, the trauma is magnified - not only have they been physically violated, but they have also been emotionally traumatised through being disbelieved.

IMO, it is the potential additional trauma resulting from being disbelieved, as well as the shame associated with having to explain to a stranger, often in graphic detail, what happened to them, that causes women to so often not report that they have been sexually violated.
Gloria Allred was raped and had a child from the rape, she never reported it.
To an extent Bill Cosby is paying the price.
Is Kavanaugh somehow in the same camp as Cosby?
 
Is it, though?

One might not think so in light of the fact that an individual like trump was actually elected to the highest office of the land, but there were all sorts of reasons for that which could have been viewed as valid. These have been discussed to no end - abortion issues, scotus nominations, snubbing the elites and so on...

This is cut-and-dried 'would you elect a sexual offender to a lifelong justice position'. There's really no justification that I can see for it, and it shines a much shadier light on those original reasons for having elected trump to begin with.
 
This is cut-and-dried 'would you elect a sexual offender to a lifelong justice position'. There's really no justification that I can see for it, and it shines a much shadier light on those original reasons for having elected trump to begin with.

Party over country. It's been fairly obvious that this is the case for many for quite a while.

They don't care what Kavanaugh may or may not have done. They care that the Republicans want him in, and that the Democrats don't.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom