Should a high School incident be relevant 35 years later?

[cale]

What are you even rambling about? If he's found to be believed in the senate hearings, he's going to be confirmed to the Supreme Court.
How does that ruin his life?

I'm not sure suggesting due process be followed prior to someone being accused counts as rambling, but ok. Given how easy it is for everyone to play by the rules and protect the identity of victims and children, it's rather apparent that the goal here was to make this incident as public as possible by Feinstein.

[saucers]

I'm not sure suggesting due process be followed prior to someone being accused counts as rambling, but ok.

You need due process to accuse someone?
She says something happened, he says it didn't happen. Now the senate is trying to find out what happened.

I don't see a problem here.

[cale]

You need due process to accuse someone?
She says something happened, he says it didn't happen. Now the senate is trying to find out what happened.

I don't see a problem here.

There is no reason to come forward with an accusation that isn't followed up with charging the individual, if the goal is not to defame the individual. If you're being honest in your inability to see how damaging these accusations can be to someones career, especially in one where their ethical behavior is paramount in their ability to carry out their duties, then you've got a lot to learn. I suspect you're being intentionally obtuse though, no one is dumb enough to think that if these accusations are found to be without merit that this is just all going to left in the past.

[saucers]

There is no reason to come forward with an accusation that isn't followed up with charging the individual, if the goal is not to defame the individual.

I think the goal here is to make sure a guy who basically raped a woman isn't appointed to a lifetime position on the supreme court.
He's not managing a burger king.

If you're being honest in your inability to see how damaging these accusations can be to someones career, especially in one where their ethical behavior is paramount in their ability to carry out their duties, then you've got a lot to learn. I suspect you're being intentionally obtuse though, no one is dumb enough to think that if these accusations are found to be without merit that this is just all going to left in the past.

Thomas has been on the SC for 27 years, I think he's doing just fine.
If you think this won't backfire on dems if this comes out to be false, you've got a lot to learn.

[z31maniac]

I think the goal here is to make sure a guy who basically raped a woman isn't appointed to a lifetime position on the supreme court.

Thank you for EXACTLY proving my point.

You have already convicted him in the court of opinion without even so much as being arrested.

It pains me that people with your intellectual capacity are allowed to vote.

[MR E30 325is]

I think the goal here is to make sure a guy who basically raped a woman isn't appointed to a lifetime position on the supreme court.
He's not managing a burger king.

Exactly. Why is this point not understood more completely?

If you are an individual being considered for a lifetime position with a very high level organization, in which you pass judgement on others in the most extreme way possible, you need to be squeaky clean. Your friends need to be squeaky clean.

There are too many other individuals who have worked their entire lives, who aren't accused of heinous crimes, who deserve the position.

I mean, just the way his friend Judge writes is more than enough to shake your head in disgust.

[Wschnitz]

You guys are really good at attacking eachother instead of eachothers statements.

Should get back out to the playground I guess.

Raped someone or not its disgusting the fuss thats being put up about wanting to make sure hes clean before appointing him, Merrick Garland had essentially no controversy but because it was Obama they had to make sure it was the end of the fucking world.

[saucers]

Thank you for EXACTLY proving my point.

You have already convicted him in the court of opinion without even so much as being arrested.

It pains me that people with your intellectual capacity are allowed to vote.

Court of public opinion is what you're looking for.
I'm saying find out what happened, then confirm/don't confirm the guy.
It pains me that someone with your morality is allowed to vote.

[Wschnitz]

z31maniac likes to think hes BigBrained and talks down to everyone so, its more that then morality.

[naplesE30]

If this allegation were not so ambiguous in nature it would maybe have some merit. However, to not recall so many details of a life changing event, year, number guys, address, city, home owner etc is questionable at best. It also convienently makes it impossible to defend against in a trial of opinion. Without any facts neither guilt or innocence can be proved. Me thinks it is intentionally vague, so he can’t concretely be exonerated.

[Javier h]

Vague?

Specific names were given which trust me is a huge. Two people have been ID and yes, I suspect one will acknowledge the incident existed with a different twist if able to testify.

Of course the specifics will be given under oath which will include a time frame...dates?

Meanwhile, back in the ranch.....

As did many Trump supporters on social media. Some touted poor student ratings for Ford, failing to notice that they had found an altogether different California professor with a similar name. Others pointed out that Kavanaugh’s mother, also a judge, had been involved in foreclosure proceedings against Ford’s parents. This was true, but this was not revenge served cryogenically cold: Her ruling had been for Ford’s parents, not against them.

Yeah, this will get ridiculous as the days move forward. Why anyone would throw themselves in this mess is beyond me. I suspect a bunch of threats on her life have been made etc. This is one mess, most would want to stay out. Who knows what this is doing to her two kids etc.

Edit: The main "bedroom" witness who allegedly participated wrote a letter to the Senate and said with his attorney, that he doesn't recall anything. Yeah, like who would want to get into this mess! Game over. There is no way to prove anything. The two other people also identified (yes altogether there were four) but not in the bedroom will likely not come forward.

[naplesE30]

Specific names were given which trust me is a huge. Two people have been ID and yes, I suspect one will acknowledge the incident existed with a different twist if able to testify.

You convinced me. I overlooked the huge specific of names.

[cale]

I'm saying find out what happened, then confirm/don't confirm the guy.

No, that's not what you're saying.

I think the goal here is to make sure a guy who basically raped a woman isn't appointed to a lifetime position on the supreme court.

If the goal is to not allow an accused rapist to hold such a powerful position, then a criminal investigation should be held to examine the evidence, not a question answer period. If the true intent was to hold someone accountable for their actions, then the letter accusing the man would have been made available to the FBI as soon as it was given to the senator. It wasn't, it was held in confidence and was only brought forward upon supposedly being leaked to the press. This should be a red flag that justice was not the intent, but using it as leverage.

[naplesE30]

Some of you guys either need to learn the definition of rape, or cut down on the hyperbole a bit. Deal in facts, especially if you think they are on your side, you don’t need to exaggerate things. It only discounts your entire point to someone with a different opinion than yours.

[mrsleeve]

The man has already been appointed to a long term posting of power, and has held a Top Secret security clearance for going on 2 decades now, hes been vetted, hes proven trustworthy and reliable.

Why is this coming out now, why was it not reported 35 years ago???

Why was this held by Finestine rather than passed on to the proper investigative agencies.

Pure politics of the extremist left, and the court of public opinion #metoo.... how to destroy a mans reputation with pure unsubstantiated allegations from an anonymous source, with a questionable story deployed with malice to assassinate a mans charter/reputation, no matter the real facts of the matter, the damage has been done. for 1000 Alex. Even if hes confirmed now his tenure on the SCOTUS is going to be forever tainted. If hes not confirmed and even if this is all found to be BS his reputation is shot his life and future is never going to be what is was a week ago confirmation or not..... The left is so hell bent on killing this nomination that they are willing to destroy a mans life with out any due process to do so. This is BEYOND low even for the CA extremist D contingent....

Lastly this happened 35 years ago, the human memory is fallible even from 30 sec ago, ever play the telephone game, or read the studies about eyewitness testimony being false or massively subjective in criminal witness in a court of law .....

This is strictly a he said she said, and I far more likely to take the word of a Long time federal judge over someone that makes accusation behind a curtain of anonymity and though lawyers. Untill there is much much solid evidence I am going with the He Said/She Said until then.

If it comes out with actual proof..... Let the punishment fit the crime, as this is not a rape, as some of you are liking to grandstand with....