Because a 15 year old misbehaving isn’t as bad as a 17 year old facilitating it and making her more vulnerable with alcohol. Not sure how that’s even debatable. One of those boys invited her, she didn’t just show up. It was the early 80’s, it wasn’t like she saw the party on Facebook or Instagram. Someone told her, and then gave her liquor. I can honestly say I was never at a high school party as a junior or senior where there was alcohol and 15 year olds as far as I remember. That in itself should be a red flag, assuming it happened.
I'm so glad that my kids aren't going to law school, Our legal system has become a complete joke on a global scale and all because of Roe v. Wade. You reap what you sow.
I remember going to parties at UF where high school girls were there and there was at least one prominent student leader at these parties. So much revisionist history on this thread.
Typically the president does nominate a moderate when his party doesn't control the senate. So that would be in line with history if the Democrats win in November and another seat comes open. If the Democrats were to take the Biden/McConnell rule even further and not confirm any nominees and the court suffered long vacancies, then that would be a really dangerous situation. You could potentially see the numbers diminish over time if the stalemates persisted. I would think the court itself would have to step in at some point and force the congress to act, something they are reluctant to do.
You must have gone to one boring HS. We had keg parties in the woods where everyone from freshmen to seniors were there and everyone was drinking something. This was in the 80's. According to her story, she doesn't remember how she heard about the gathering or how she got there. Why does it have to be one of the boys? Maybe she showed up with her girlfriend. One more thing, when I was 17 I was chasing tail 15-18 years old. Just like every other 17 year old. It is easy as an adult to look down on it but when your 17, dating in your age range, that includes 15 year olds, is not taboo.
The Ford Team's demands. What an absolute joke! The Demands the "Ford Team" Has Made Are Ludicrous | National Review
Same. I was going all the time between my sophomore and senior year. I remember there was a girl who was a freshman back when I was a junior I think and she was like all about schoolwork early on. Like in the spring I didn't see her in class anymore and thought she transferred, but like a month later I saw her at a party and she said she decided school was boring and just wanted to party all the time. That kind of stuff was going on at pretty much every school as far as I know, but maybe some people weren't hanging out with the party crowd?
It’s time Republicans told the Democrats to go to hell and vote. Nothing they can say or do will satisfy them The liberal left is going to believe what they want and the Republicans are going to believe what they want Nobody’s mind is going to be changed. Vote and get it over with and it will all die over till the next event takes place. This country is so divided Russia will if we are not careful take us over and never fire a shot
It makes for Twitter fun, but I don’t know that her saying he’s wrong means much for or against his theory. I’m pretty confident no one ever thought she was going to say, “Damn, you’re right Ed, silly me. How did I get them confused?” It’ll still come down to whether he has some proof other than what’s in his thread.
She didn't say, "No, you're wrong. I remember Brett." She made it clear that she knew Garrett well enough to know it wasn't him. That's significant. SCOTUS nominee is accused of attempted rape, which is quite significant to most people. Your recommendation is, "To hell with everybody who isn't a Republican, just vote him in anyways." That perfectly encapsulates why this country is divided. Behavior like that divides this country.
The Republicans rolled over more than once in the past while in the majority, so what would stop them from doing it again. Seriously? A hypothetical isn’t making an assumption in your mind? Do you also want to define what the meaning of “is” is? What I am saying is that if 4 out of 5 people present say she is wrong, and are willing to commit perjury to backup that assertion, then what you are saying is we should believe the one (hypothetical) person backing her story instead of the 4 who are saying she is full of it. Out of the 4 that say she is wrong, if we assume that the 2 who were not in the room with them would lie to protect their friends, then why wouldn’t we also assume that the woman would lie to back up her friend? The fact that only 1 out of 5 (according to your hypothetical) says she is telling the truth makes it more likely than not that she may be mistaken. However, if 3 out of the 5 back up her story and the only 2 denying her story are the ones accused of the crime, that makes it more likely than not that she is telling the truth. Logic needs to be used here, and not blind emotion. Like someone brought up before, this is like the Duke Lacrosse situation, where the victim and her friend cried rape, while all the other witnesses/perpetrators said no rape. Except the Duke Lacross case actually had evidence that she was where she said she was and the people she accused were also there.
It begins with “let us assume that...”. And since assumed is also a synonym for hypothetical, are you going to give me an apology, or go and google yourself?
I think giving Kavanaugh the opportunity to go after Dr. Ford is entirely reasonable. As of this point, we have not heard Dr. Ford's account directly from her. So far, Dr. Ford has not provided any information that is can be proven false because it is so vague. That makes it impossible for Kavanaugh to provide any supporting evidence against her accusations. There is nothing that Kavanaugh could say by testifying first that would shed any additional light on this subject. However, if Dr. Ford testified first, she would be able to go on official record about what she remembers. I think that is very important to do that to allow Kavanaugh to know exactly what Dr. Ford remembers and allows him to offer a rebuttal to the details of the charges. There are some discrepancies in Dr. Ford's accusations at this point. She says two boys attacked her, while her therapist's notes say it was four. Her letter says there were four other people at the party, now her lawyer is saying there were five. While not significant discrepancies, they are big enough that they need to be cleared up on the record before Kavanaugh testifies to allow him to know the specifics of Dr. Ford's accusations. Additionally, having Dr. Ford go on the record first allows the committee to be able to narrow down the questions about what parties the Senators need to be asking about. Since no time or place has be provided by Dr. Ford that opens up a wide range of questions that Kavanaugh would have to answer over a significant period of time. Let's say that Kavanaugh goes first, he has to account for every single day he was in DC during that time period. That gives the advantage to Dr. Ford's to know when Kavanugh was in DC and possibly* sculpt her testimony to fit the timeframe Kavanaugh stated he was in DC during that time. Whereas, if Dr. Ford goes first and has to provide the timeframe that she remembers this happening, is dramatically cuts down the time periods that Kavanaugh has to answer questions about. If I were on the Senate Judiciary Committee, I would want Dr. Ford to testify first, allow Kavanaugh to go second, and provide Dr. Ford the opportunity to testify again after Kavanaugh. * - I am not saying Dr. Ford's team will sculpt her testimony, just that it gives the the opportunity to do so.
Do you know what a hypothetical is? Here are the definitions: Definition of ASSUMPTION Definition of HYPOTHETICAL An assumption indicates a belief. A hypothetical does not. A hypothetical tests a theory. My theory was that if the other woman supports Blasey, you will still reject it. You confirmed that. I did not assume that the other woman will support Blasey. That would entail that I believe she will. I have no idea what she will say if she speaks. I asked you to take it as true SOLELY for the purpose of the theory.
And the definition of hypothetical states that assumed is a synonym for hypothetical. You can’t argue the point, so you split hairs. Edit: It is Occum’s Razor here. If 4 out of 5 support one story, it is more likely than not to be the truth. If 3 out of 5 support the other story, and the 2 dissenters have a vested interest in their dissent, then the other story is more likely than not the truth. Without a pattern of similar behavior by Kavanugh established by other witnesses to back up her story, having 1 out of 3 neutral witnesses back up your story doesn’t mean much. But logic has no place in politics, right?
