Important Announcement regarding the Alternative Views Subforum

[zeek]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Objectivity and the presumption of innocence.

Objectivity is a goal to strive for that is seldom achieved with certainty. After his tirade against the Democrats last Thursday, I doubt Kavanaugh will ever achieve it on the bench in any case where the Democrats are involved.

Presumption of innocence is a legal right of the accused in a criminal trial. But, this is not a criminal trial. It's about appointment to the highest court in the USA.

So, the standard should be the among highest for any position in the land. Therefore, the presumption of innocence principle doesn't apply. Kavanaugh knew that. Which is why he tried to portray himself as above reproach.

If he had been more honest, he might have portrayed himself as a reformed bad boy like George W. Bush. But, then he would have risked rejection.

He was too ambitious for that. So he misrepresented himself. At least that's how it looks to me given the evidence I've seen at this point.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by zeek

Objectivity is a goal to strive for that is seldom achieved with certainty. After his tirade against the Democrats last Thursday, I doubt Kavanaugh will ever achieve it on the bench in any case where the Democrats are involved.

Presumption of innocence is a legal right of the accused in a criminal trial. But, this is not a criminal trial. It's about appointment to the highest court in the USA.

So, the standard should be the among highest for any position in the land. Therefore, the presumption of innocence principle doesn't apply. Kavanaugh knew that. Which is why he tried to portray himself as above reproach.

If he had been more honest, he might have portrayed himself as a reformed bad boy like George W. Bush. But, then he would have risked rejection.

He was too ambitious for that. So he misrepresented himself. At least that's how it looks to me given the evidence I've seen at this point.

We share a lot of common ground.

1. I agree that objectivity was not achieved, but I don't think anyone in a position of power strived for it.

2. I don't disagree with the idea that the standard in this decision needs to be much higher than "reasonable doubt". That is why I believe it should have been done behind closed doors. It is unlikely that any DA would have brought a case against Kavanaugh based on Ford's testimony, so that clearly didn't rise the standard required in a criminal trial. Yet this trial is televised and discussed ad nauseum, any reasonable person in authority would understand the need to prevent anyone from just slandering the person due to their objection to them being confirmed.

3. I also agree that the evidence is mounting that his behavior in HS and college involved many drunken parties. That doesn't necessarily mean that he misrepresented himself. He did go to Yale which does imply a serious, studious side. His calendar does support the idea that he was a serious, motivated student. He did go to a Catholic school and his portrayal as being a "choir boy" is probably true (I also sang in my church's choir). Being a "choir boy" doesn't mean he didn't go to parties. Also, one would expect in a hearing like this the focus would be on your professional career. For all we know he may have stopped drinking and therefore might not have seen this as relevant.

4. One thing that stands out to me is the focus on his HS, which tells me the opposition cannot say a word against his professional record. That is something I find ugly and disingenuous about the whole thing and agree with him.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

We share a lot of common ground.

1. I agree that objectivity was not achieved, but I don't think anyone in a position of power strived for it.

2. I don't disagree with the idea that the standard in this decision needs to be much higher than "reasonable doubt". That is why I believe it should have been done behind closed doors. It is unlikely that any DA would have brought a case against Kavanaugh based on Ford's testimony, so that clearly didn't rise the standard required in a criminal trial. Yet this trial is televised and discussed ad nauseum, any reasonable person in authority would understand the need to prevent anyone from just slandering the person due to their objection to them being confirmed.

3. I also agree that the evidence is mounting that his behavior in HS and college involved many drunken parties. That doesn't necessarily mean that he misrepresented himself. He did go to Yale which does imply a serious, studious side. His calendar does support the idea that he was a serious, motivated student. He did go to a Catholic school and his portrayal as being a "choir boy" is probably true (I also sang in my church's choir). Being a "choir boy" doesn't mean he didn't go to parties. Also, one would expect in a hearing like this the focus would be on your professional career. For all we know he may have stopped drinking and therefore might not have seen this as relevant.

4. One thing that stands out to me is the focus on his HS, which tells me the opposition cannot say a word against his professional record. That is something I find ugly and disingenuous about the whole thing and agree with him.

Sorry, I guess I missed the point where he characterized himself as a goody-two-shoes "choir boy." He did say that he was not sexually active, yet also admitted that "he liked beer." They should have focused on his underage drinking.

I remember when I was in HS, we had this somewhat flamboyant guy in leisure suits from the Projects that would buy us beer. We called him "pretty boy." Except for numerous false accusations and sleazy lawyering, that is the only "crime" I have seen -- who bought them beer?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Sorry, I guess I missed the point where he characterized himself as a goody-two-shoes "choir boy." He did say that he was not sexually active, yet also admitted that "he liked beer." They should have focused on his underage drinking.

I remember when I was in HS, we had this somewhat flamboyant guy in leisure suits from the Projects that would buy us beer. We called him "pretty boy." Except for numerous false accusations and sleazy lawyering, that is the only "crime" I have seen -- who bought them beer?

McConnell says public won't see FBI report. We'll see the result. If lying under oath is found, he's gone. If not, he's in.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by awareness

McConnell says public won't see FBI report. We'll see the result. If lying under oath is found, he's gone. If not, he's in.

A little sanctimonious preening my friend?

Have you no concern about all the Ford, Swetnick, and Ramirez lies? Numerous articles are being written to discredit the allegations by these false witnesses.

I think the best course of action is to let these 3 Rinos (Collins, Flake, Murkowski) fade into the sunset, let the Senate vote fail, renominate Kavanaugh, and let November's elections be a referendum on him.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

A little sanctimonious preening my friend?

Have you no concern about all the Ford, Swetnick, and Ramirez lies? Numerous articles are being written to discredit the allegations by these false witnesses.

I think the best course of action is to let these 3 Rinos (Collins, Flake, Murkowski) fade into the sunset, let the Senate vote fail, renominate Kavanaugh, and let November's elections be a referendum on him.

Good idea. You've been listening to Fox.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by zeek

Objectivity is a goal to strive for that is seldom achieved with certainty. After his tirade against the Democrats last Thursday, I doubt Kavanaugh will ever achieve it on the bench in any case where the Democrats are involved.

Presumption of innocence is a legal right of the accused in a criminal trial. But, this is not a criminal trial. It's about appointment to the highest court in the USA.

So, the standard should be the among highest for any position in the land. Therefore, the presumption of innocence principle doesn't apply. Kavanaugh knew that. Which is why he tried to portray himself as above reproach.

If he had been more honest, he might have portrayed himself as a reformed bad boy like George W. Bush. But, then he would have risked rejection.

He was too ambitious for that. So he misrepresented himself. At least that's how it looks to me given the evidence I've seen at this point.

The Senate Democrats also knew that, and that's why they worked with other Leftist operatives to orchestrate this smear job.

Evidence? What evidence have you seen beyond uncorroborated accusations 35 years old?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

The Senate Democrats also knew that, and that's why they worked with other Leftist operatives to orchestrate this smear job.

Evidence? What evidence have you seen beyond uncorroborated accusations 35 years old?

He was on the Basketball team and was known by all his friends as one who drinks a lot. In my experience college basketball teams and their parties were similar to what is describe.

His best friend describes a similar lifestyle. Hard to imagine being best friends with someone like that where you also weren't doing pretty much the same.

It is not hard for me to imagine, though I doubt it will be confirmed due to the legal consequences, that he went out drinking with buddies from the basketball team who then raped a girl. Doesn't mean he knew this was the plan or that he did any thing more than buy a girl drinks at a bar.

[ZNPaaneah]

I think the media bias that has been repeatedly bandied about is due to something that Awareness said "who has time for all this crap". People who have time to watch this TV are often those without careers (job at McDonalds rather than their ultimate career) or those who are retired.

In other words the "liberal media bias" is directed towards the 20 something crowd and the Fox news is directed towards retirees.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

I think the media bias that has been repeatedly bandied about is due to something that Awareness said "who has time for all this crap". People who have time to watch this TV are often those without careers (job at McDonalds rather than their ultimate career) or those who are retired.

In other words the "liberal media bias" is directed towards the 20 something crowd and the Fox news is directed towards retirees.

Apparently Fox hasn't done well with any of the posters here. You work at McDonald's?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Apparently Fox hasn't done well with any of the posters here.

to quote the MOTA "whose got time for that crap".

Originally Posted by Ohio

You work at McDonald's?

to misquote the MOTA "who could eat that crap".

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

He was on the Basketball team and was known by all his friends as one who drinks a lot. In my experience college basketball teams and their parties were similar to what is describe.

His best friend describes a similar lifestyle. Hard to imagine being best friends with someone like that where you also weren't doing pretty much the same.

It is not hard for me to imagine, though I doubt it will be confirmed due to the legal consequences, that he went out drinking with buddies from the basketball team who then raped a girl. Doesn't mean he knew this was the plan or that he did any thing more than buy a girl drinks at a bar.

Wow! And you teach forensics? You have just convicted every Basketball team in the country.

"Known by all his friends as one who drinks a lot?" Seriously? You been watching too much CNN. His one friend from HS went on to have a serious addiction. He must be a drunk too!

Hey ZNP, with similar amounts of attention, do you think any of your HS classmates could be bribed to talk about your worst behavior?

Have you heard Obama's own autobiography? Did you hear about his own drug and alcohol habits? Why is it the media never was alarmed with that? Trump has never once touched drugs or alcohol, yet no one gives him any credit for that.

Hey ZNP, any idea what "double standards" mean?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Wow! And you teach forensics? You have just convicted every Basketball team in the country.

"Known by all his friends as one who drinks a lot?" Seriously? You been watching too much CNN. His one friend from HS went on to have a serious addiction. He must be a drunk too!

Hey ZNP, with similar amounts of attention, do you think any of your HS classmates could be bribed to talk about your worst behavior?

Have you heard Obama's own autobiography? Did you hear about his own drug and alcohol habits? Why is it the media never was alarmed with that? Trump has never once touched drugs or alcohol, yet no one gives him any credit for that.

Hey ZNP, any idea what "double standards" mean?

These are different questions. In HS you could certainly condemn me for my behavior, though it didn't rise to anything near what Kavanaugh is accused of. However, I had a friend whose behavior was far worse (drug dealer) who later became Madelline Allbright's assistant secretary of State. I asked how he got the position and I learned that he was honest and forthright about his background.

You asked what evidence I had seen besides the accusations. I gave it. Now you are changing the goal post as though I have convicted him rejected his confirmation because I think he attended a lot of drunken parties that included shameful behavior. I have made it clear repeatedly that I am uncomfortable skipping back to HS behavior to determine if we confirm a judge.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

These are different questions. In HS you could certainly condemn me for my behavior, though it didn't rise to anything near what Kavanaugh is accused of. However, I had a friend whose behavior was far worse (drug dealer) who later became Madelline Allbright's assistant secretary of State. I asked how he got the position and I learned that he was honest and forthright about his background.

As long as the Press only investigates one party, the other party can get away with anything. It has nothing to do with honesty. Does it not concern you in the least that only one party is made accountable for what they have done ... and have not done?

[awareness]

Originally Posted by Ohio

As long as the Press only investigates one party, the other party can get away with anything. It has nothing to do with honesty. Does it not concern you in the least that only one party is made accountable for what they have done ... and have not done?

The tack that sticks up gets hammered. What party has majority?

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Wow! And you teach forensics? You have just convicted every Basketball team in the country.

Only would be true if I knew every basketball team in the country. My post clearly stated that this was consistent with the team I was familiar with.

So yes, the basketball team at my university was guilty of drunken orgy parties to the best of my knowledge (hearsay and 2nd hand conversations overheard).

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Only would be true if I knew every basketball team in the country. My post clearly stated that this was consistent with the team I was familiar with.

So yes, the basketball team at my university was guilty of drunken orgy parties to the best of my knowledge (hearsay and 2nd hand conversations overheard).

Answer your phone. Avenatti is calling.

[zeek]

Originally Posted by Ohio

The Senate Democrats also knew that, and that's why they worked with other Leftist operatives to orchestrate this smear job.

Evidence? What evidence have you seen beyond uncorroborated accusations 35 years old?

I've seen the man have a temper tantrum and act disrespectfully towards United States Senators especially female ones. I imagine he's worse when he's inebriated. Kavanaugh should have watched video tapes of Clarence Thomas's response to the Senate when he was accused of sexual harassment. Unlike Kavanaugh when Thomas defended himself he displayed an attitude of respect toward the co equal branch of government, and maintained a demeanor of decorum and gravitas.

[awareness]

Originally Posted by zeek

I've seen the man have a temper tantrum and act disrespectfully towards United States Senators especially female ones. I imagine he's worse when he's inebriated. Kavanaugh should have watched video tapes of Clarence Thomas's response to the Senate when he was accused of sexual harassment. Unlike Kavanaugh when Thomas defended himself he displayed an attitude of respect toward the co equal branch of government, and maintained a demeanor of decorum and gravitas.

Kav, by his own testimony, doesn't have the temperament to be a supreme.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

Kav, by his own testimony, doesn't have the temperament to be a supreme.

I thought the key criteria to be a supreme was singing and dancing, that and your stance on abortion.

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by zeek

I've seen the man have a temper tantrum and act disrespectfully towards United States Senators especially female ones. I imagine he's worse when he's inebriated. Kavanaugh should have watched video tapes of Clarence Thomas's response to the Senate when he was accused of sexual harassment. Unlike Kavanaugh when Thomas defended himself he displayed an attitude of respect toward the co equal branch of government, and maintained a demeanor of decorum and gravitas.

Why is it that any push back against the Democrats is considered inappropriate?

If you no longer suspect Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, shouldn't you be meekly seeking his forgiveness for these horrible accusations rather than whining about how he defended himself?

Zeek, most people can forgive occasional mistakes, but you lose all credibility when you side with endless and baseless attacks without ever making things right.

And btw are you still clinging to the Russian collusion hoax? You got hundreds of posts to recant, my friend.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

And btw are you still clinging to the Russian collusion hoax? You got hundreds of posts to recant, my friend.

Maybe you should start a new thread -- Posts I regret

[awareness]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Maybe you should start a new thread -- Posts I regret

Kav is in. Bet that won't be on that thread.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by awareness

Kav is in. Bet that won't be on that thread.

Democrats are angry there is only 1 copy to view. Clearly that is a response to previous leaks of confidential documents. They are simply reaping what they sowed in not being trustworthy.

Democrats are angry that Kavanaugh and Ford were not questioned. Really? If Ford had anything more to say she should have said it during the hearing. If there was anything based on what Ford said and Kavanaugh responded with as well as any of the other people questioned that would support her testimony it might have meant they would need to question him. Clearly there wasn't.

Finally a sober minded assessment of what is and what is not a crime. I doubt the FBI is called in very often to investigate teenage drinking from 36 years previously without a crime. Second, it is very difficult to see from Ford's testimony that there is the accusation of a crime, and even if you give her that much it seems clear to me that there was no corroboration of the "criminal allegation".

Finally, was his outburst a sign of lacking the right "disposition" or is it the outrage at the ridiculousness of even pursuing these allegations without evidence or corroborating witnesses?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by ZNPaaneah

Maybe you should start a new thread -- Posts I regret

Thanks. Needed a good laugh.

[zeek]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Why is it that any push back against the Democrats is considered inappropriate?

If you no longer suspect Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, shouldn't you be meekly seeking his forgiveness for these horrible accusations rather than whining about how he defended himself?

Zeek, most people can forgive occasional mistakes, but you lose all credibility when you side with endless and baseless attacks without ever making things right.

And btw are you still clinging to the Russian collusion hoax? You got hundreds of posts to recant, my friend.

It's easy for me to forgive Kavanaugh. After all he didn't jump my bones. I think he lacks the judicial disposition to be on the Supreme Court. And he displayed an animus toward Democratic Senators that I think it is safe to assume will prejudice his decisions going forward. Plus, I believe Christine Ford. Show me the posts I need to recant. Or are you just blowing smoke again?

[Ohio]

Originally Posted by zeek

It's easy for me to forgive Kavanaugh. After all he didn't jump my bones. I think he lacks the judicial disposition to be on the Supreme Court. And he displayed an animus toward Democratic Senators that I think it is safe to assume will prejudice his decisions going forward. Plus, I believe Christine Ford. Show me the posts I need to recant. Or are you just blowing smoke again?

Disregarding your gutter smear ...

I do hope you are right about about Coach K's decisions going forward. Fiery trials of faith and character have a way of affecting one's thinking going forward. Look what happened to Clarence Thomas. I think these two justices may become like-minded, and Thomas is the only justice in SCOTUS history not to become more liberal over time.

Originally Posted by zeek

Show me the posts I need to recant. Or are you just blowing smoke again?

Apparently your memory skills are right up there with Ford, Ramirez, and Swetnick, so I doubt if I could help you out.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by Ohio

Disregarding your gutter smear ...

I do hope you are right about about Coach K's decisions going forward. Fiery trials of faith and character have a way of affecting one's thinking going forward. Look what happened to Clarence Thomas. I think these two justices may become like-minded, and Thomas is the only justice in SCOTUS history not to become more liberal over time.


Apparently your memory skills are right up there with Ford, Ramirez, and Swetnick, so I doubt if I could help you out.

And that is the risk of this entire enterprise. If you "win" it appears worth the risk, but if you lose he is now forged in the fire of the Democrats hypocrisy and lies.

[ZNPaaneah]

Originally Posted by zeek

It's easy for me to forgive Kavanaugh. After all he didn't jump my bones. I think he lacks the judicial disposition to be on the Supreme Court. And he displayed an animus toward Democratic Senators that I think it is safe to assume will prejudice his decisions going forward. Plus, I believe Christine Ford. Show me the posts I need to recant. Or are you just blowing smoke again?

If the past few weeks is any guide Senators will vote along strict party lines unless there is evidence uncovered in the FBI probe of lying under oath or of any other crime.