Kavanaugh Hearing

A number of reasons. First, there is an issue of what level it would be charged at, which is legally important here because he could be charged with 3rd degree or above but not 4th degree due to statute of limitations. The easiest path to 3rd degree would have been if she had been drinking, which would be nearly impossible to prove at this point. They could go with the violence to up this to 3rd degree, but that will be hard without some physical evidence as well unless the friend turns on him. Second, I doubt the Montgomery County Police are going to be best able to chase down a bunch of students that have likely scattered over the years. Third, obviously, criminally charging on a crime this old is always going to be complicated, especially sexual crimes, which are already difficult to charge and convict, which is one reason that they are under-reported.

 

It would be a great injustice.

Attempted rape is not "stupid stuff." Don't try to minimize this, and don't try to blame the victim.

 

See this is where I call BS.

So lets say it did happen, yet she still graduates from an elite school, goes on to earn a PHD and secure a prestigious position in research and teaching. Goes on to marry and have a family. Wheres the trauma?

My take:
At 15 she's at a party, drinking having fun. Makes out and gets felt up by someone(it even could have been BK). 40 years later of feminist/liberal activism plus the MeToo movement she convinces herself she was sexually assaulted.

 

Innocent until proven guilty is for criminal courts, not the court of public opinion. The public can draw whatever conclusions they want.

If you take issue with someone's argument, why not address it directly?

 

Not a criminal trial. We as citizens are allowed to use any level to make a determination for whether we support hiring somebody to a job. And I say that as somebody that is encouraging people not to make judgments about the case either way right now.

 

Wow. I cannot believe you just said that.

 

So again an unprovable accusation will ruin someone reputation.

 

Christine Blasey Ford Wants F.B.I. to Investigate Kavanaugh Before She Testifies

If their goal is to make it just seem like a delay ploy, they’re doing a real good job of it. If it’s anything else, much less so.

“The woman who has accused President Trump’s Supreme Court nominee of sexual assault threw into doubt plans for an extraordinary Senate hearing to air her accusations, charging on Tuesday that some senators have already made up their minds and insisting that the F.B.I. investigate first.

Speaking through her lawyers, Christine Blasey Ford did not explicitly rule out appearing next Monday before the Senate Judiciary Committee to testify along with Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh. But echoing Senate Democrats, she said an investigation should be ‘the first step’ before she is put ‘on national television to relive this traumatic and harrowing incident.’”

 

I agree, this isn’t a criminal trial.

I’m confused about the any level statement?

 

Okay that is completely absurd psychologically. You think people with trauma even as severe as causing PTSD couldn't earn a PhD, marry, and have a family? It isn't helpful, but it happens all the time.

What she described and what you described is not the same. Given that you weren't there, have never met any of the participants, and have no clue about the circumstances, your "take" is baseless.

 

We could decide that the person is not qualified for the job at any level of belief that we have in her story. So a person could make a decision at 90% (he gets the job unless the are 90% sure that he did it), 51%, 50%, 25%, any threshold that they want. That is largely up to them.

 

If it's just a delay ploy, then delay and give her what she wants. Republicans have control until the end of December AT MINIMUM. There's no rush.

 

This is getting really weird. Maybe some of the internet psychologists in here could explain?

 

Statute of limitations is long since up.
The question is one of character more than the law now.

It is interesting to me though, that people are so quick to dismiss her and trust him. Both are successful professionals, she clearly isn’t doing it for money and has to know the firestorm she will face, and the argument that she would let her life be destroyed (as it almost surely will be, ask Anita Hill) over this just seems a bizarre argument as to her motivation. Especially given she had talked about this in the past, and wasn’t the last minute raiser of it, she raised it a while back.
I have been clear with my concerns around the metoo movement, but the reaction to this woman is exactly why it exists. Our dear leader today said he felt sorry for him and nothing about her. Grassley said he would talk to her on the phone. The committee gave her a couple of days to decide whether to do, and then prep for, what will be one of the most intimidating things anyone can do. People used to the public eye spend weeks or months prepping for hearings like this. And all the while she is being called a liar, out for revenge, a martyr for the dems etc, while he gets almost no scrutiny other than how it affects his nomination. And his friend and alleged accomplice was basically allowed to opt out of it all (again with no scrutiny) because the republicans control the committee. It’s all fairly sad, but predictable I guess.
My only thing is...Hear her out (assuming she testifies) then form an opinion. Maybe she is a charlatan, but let her show us that. Until then, every woman who wants to come forward from abuse or bad behavior is watching this and asking why in the hell they would ever think about it, let alone do it.

 

But wait didn't you just say....

So as a citizen, I'm determining that she is FOS.

 

There’s a Supreme Court term starting in a few weeks.

Have the hearing on Monday. Tell her if she wants to talk to the committee, she’s welcome to show up to the hearing. And make clear that, if she doesn’t show up, the committee will use that time to vote on the nomination.

 

Why the victim of sexual assault wants an investigation before she's put in front of a bunch of partisans who want to sweep her under the rug? I dunno. That's a tough one.

@96Gatorcise
Weren't you just demanding that she go to law enforcement for an investigation? Looks like that's exactly what she wants.

 

So when Reid said that he has sources with proof that Romney didn’t pay taxes (not that it would have mattered), then said he lied about the whole thing, this helps Feinstein? She’s leaving and taking one for the team.

 

And enjoy the political fallout that comes from refusing to investigate an attempted rape allegation for your SCOTUS pick.

The Supreme Court term starting in a few weeks isn't meaningful.

 

I also said "And I say that as somebody that is encouraging people not to make judgments about the case either way right now."

A person can make a determination about the job fitness at any level of being sure that they want. I am simply pointing out that given how sure you are, especially given the complete lack of evidence either way, seems to be based on something other than the case. And, BTW, I told a friend of mine that declared her a rape victim the same thing earlier today. You can look through my posts on this thread. I have stuck to the idea that we don't know and, therefore, shouldn't be making judgments about the veracity of claims, because those judgments are baseless. Much like your "take" was.