[QUOTE="duchen, post: 10702062, member: 28366"]Credibilty is not investigated or measured by newspaper or magazine stories. It is done by trained investigators who gather evidence and testimony and by the presentation of witnesses after that process. You have apparently determined that the allegations are not credible based on media stories. What is the fear of an investigation and the rush to confirm? We know the court can function without 8 justices because it did for 280 plus days after Scalia does? Why are Trumpsters so afraid of investigations?[/QUOTE] Interesting... Who did Comey know and consort with?
Allegations don't warrant an investigation... There needs to be a certain degree of credibility to allegations and evidence as a starting point to investigate... For all 3 cases of allegations, there is far more evidence supporting Kavanaugh than condemning him... Pair that with the timing and political nature of these allegations.... and stop whining... Again for the millionth time, I don't think it's fair to call the accusers liars, or to attack them in any way... but it's equally unfair to ruin Kavanaugh for this... The net result, is a stalemate... Nothing happens... Stop acting like time isn't an issue here... Suggesting that is intellectually dishonest... It's a longshot for Democrats to take back the Senate... but it's the only shot they have to block Kavanaugh... so this is what they're resorting to... It's pathetic...
What innocent person has ever demanded, basically, a criminal investigation on themselves? If you're presumed innocent until proven guilty, all an investigation can do is hurt you... Especially because even if you're found, "not guilty," or there is "insufficient evidence," the decision doesn't change the fact that "not guilty" does not mean, "innocent." The seed of doubt will always be there, no matter what... with or without an investigation... Personally, I think 6 FBI background checks and a hearing on Thursday for Ford, and whoever else wants to come, are enough... If it isn't for you... tough luck....
If all it took to have an investigation, are allegations... then I go back to my Kamala Harris satirical comment that "I saw her eating babies." Does there need to be an investigation because I'm accusing her of that?
What innocent person has ever demanded that a false allegation be investigated? I'd venture to say a lot of them. This isn't a criminal matter. There is no presumption of innocence. Go to the police, report the crime, and enjoy your 48-hour hold.
This isn't a criminal investigation. It's a background check for a person nominated for the Supreme Court. The now multiple accusations come from credible enough sources to at least investigate. If Kananaugh is as innocent as he claims, then why not welcome the investigation? There will always be doubts about his innocence with or without an investigation, but what can clear his name more than a complete FBI investigation? Last, @Gator715, if you can put yourself in the same place as Harris at the same time, and can produce some dead babies, by all means, investigate. But if all you have is a stupid hypothetical and you and Harris have never been in the same place, same time, and you never mentioned the baby eating before the recent events, say during a therapy session five years ago, we can all agree your allegation is 100% not credible. Can you say that about Kavanaugh's now multiple accusers?
1. If this isn't a criminal matter, then Ford or any of the accusers aren't entitled to a platform... They are in no position to make any demands, whatsoever... The committee has every right to dictate the terms as they please, and if the accusers don't like it, the committee has a right to move on... 2. I thought you can't tell a victim how they should react to a heinous crime?
Why would I need to produce anything? Ford and Ramirez don't even have witnesses who confirm that the alleged incident took place... They have absolutely nothing...
That's true. They aren't entitled to a hearing. But if the Judiciary Committee wants to retain any sense of legitimacy, they have to put on a hearing. Stop with the stupid analogies and silly comments like these. Let's discuss this like adults. You said that allegations don't warrant investigations. That's patently untrue. Now, nobody is going to investigate crazed ramblings from a seemingly insane person. You're going to end up in the mental hospital. However, if you went into the police station and reported that somebody stole your car, you better bet they would investigate. Likewise, if you went into the police station and reported that somebody raped you, they'd also investigate. The two allegations here are more than credible enough to warrant an investigation. An investigation may turn up nothing, but an investigation here isn't going to hurt the innocent party. The fact that Kavanaugh wants no part of it speaks volumes. He has no interesting in trying to exonerate himself. He just wants to do enough to survive this and get on the Supreme Court. That's not how an innocent person acts.
This is a hearing for a lifetime appointment to the SCOTUS. The accusers deserve to be heard of they have an ounce of credibility. It's too important not to let them speak. And while the accusers can make demands, you are correct that the committee doesn't have to give into the demands. You can't tell a victim how they should react, but you can tell a lot by how someone reacts. Clearly, Dr. Ford believes she was assaulted when she was young and believes Kavanaugh did it. Doesn't mean he's guilty, but her accusation is credible enough to warrant an investigation. Having another accuser only makes Ford's case stronger, assuming the second accusation is credible too. Last, if you accused Harris of eating babies, which party would benefit more from a thorough FBI investigation? You or Harris? And which party would be calling for a full investigation? You or Harris? Now ask yourself why would Ford ask for a full investigation and why Kavanaugh would object?
Quite frankly, the committee shouldn't care about your validation... you wanted Kavanaugh out, before these allegations... this is your best shot to get him out, so you're suggesting they need to humor you and those who believe as you do to maintain "legitimacy." Frankly, I'm suggesting, they shouldn't care about "your sense of legitimacy." I think it's a bad sense of legitimacy, as it abandons presumption of innocence... If I deemed these allegations more substantiated, and credible to pursue further, I would agree that they should go further... But these are weak allegations that have a stink of a political smear to them... Based on what you believe... I know private investigators... (they happen to be conservative, but political affiliation doesn't damage credibility of the accusers, so it shouldn't for an investigator, either). They say, there's not much an investigation would bring to light, 36 years later based on the weak recollections of the accusers.... Because he can still be innocent and suffer for this Gatorlawyer... you're acting as though an investigation would only condemn him if he's guilty... All that needs to happen is the investigation lasts long enough while Democrats win back the Senate, and he's off the Supreme Court... The outcome of the investigation almost doesn't matter at this point... All that matters is the outcome of this election cycle, and the time span of an investigation. That will dictate everything about Kavanaugh, not the outcome of the investigation... It doesn't matter if "his name is cleared," with respect to this nomination which is what we'd simply be clearing his name, for...
Harris would likely object to an investigation.... There's a presumption of innocence that apparently doesn't exist according to you guys... The burden is on me to prove she's guilty, not on her to prove she's innocent....
Good to know, "I thought you can't tell a victim how they should react to a heinous crime," is a "silly and childish" comment to you... I actually stole that line from someone you might know on this board.... Take a look in the mirror, pal...
No, Harris would welcome the investigation because it would completely vindicate her and make you look like a fool for suggesting she eats babies. Remember, your credibility would be investigated too.
Kind of hard to attack my credibility, when I can't name, when, where, or with whom the incident took place with any degree of certainty... and you're supposed to just "believe me" as you guys are suggesting we do to these accusers...
Right, because investigations always have conclusive results, one way or another... Especially in sexual assault/rape cases...
Can you describe in great detail the horrific baby eating event itself? Do you show a single sign someone who witnessed such an horrific event would very likely show? Do you even have a date range and geographic area of less than 5 square miles where this event occurred? Like some other poster suggested, if you think your claim is credible, why not contact the police? Or even a newspaper? At the very least, tell a therapist today in case Harris is up for something nationally in the future.
This isn't a criminal case. The standard of proof is lower. So why not investigate and let the 100 member Senate decide for themselves armed with as much credible information the FBI can find in a reasonable time frame?
Neither can Ford nor Ramirez... All of their eye-witnesses that are now publicly known, have denied the events took place or do not recall the events. Ford had pretty much no date range or geographic area, apart from being the early to mid-80s, probably 1982... and a very general location of a house... I'll be sure to call up a Senator and the Washington Post 36 years from now, when I'm ready...
