SCOTUS: No longer content with stacking, they're now dealing from the bottom of the deck

[Kilmer17]

4 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

 

Well the guy isn't going to go to jail regardless.  There is the court of public opinion, but there should also be a legitimate investigation so as much information and details as possible can be used to come to the best possible conclusion. 

 

I don't know. We have to cross that bridge when we get there I suppose, however when we say "cooperate" it should also be reasonable as far a what is being requested of her.  Last I heard she is asking for an investigation to be done first before testifying.  Does that sound unreasonable?

She’s calling for an investigation BY THE FBI.  Essentially creating an unobtainable requirement.  

 

 

[NoCalMike]

1 minute ago, Kilmer17 said:

She’s calling for an investigation BY THE FBI.  Essentially creating an unobtainable requirement.  

 

 

 

Is it unobtainable or just unobtainable in the timeline that the GOP wants this to be wrapped up? Not being snarky, just asking because she isn't the only one asking for the FBI to be involved. 

[Kilmer17]

13 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

 

Is it unobtainable or just unobtainable in the timeline that the GOP wants this to be wrapped up? Not being snarky, just asking because she isn't the only one asking for the FBI to be involved. 

Edit.  Missed the word ONLY. DOH!

 

 

Edited September 19, 2018 by Kilmer17

[Popeman38]

1 minute ago, NoCalMike said:

Is it unobtainable or just unobtainable in the timeline that the GOP wants this to be wrapped up? Not being snarky, just asking because she isn't the only one asking for the FBI to be involved. 

The FBI normally doesn’t investigate 36 year old sexual assault allegations. 

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Cooked Crack]

16 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

Can he be forgiven?  I would say yes, however forgiving him *and* rewarding him with a lifetime appointment to a position that will shape our laws for the next 40 years? Nah.

He already has a job with a lifetime appointment now. Right now this is a job interview for another one. Senate could literally investigate this matter if they wanted.

[redskins59]

5 minutes ago, Popeman38 said:

That’s not what you are asking here. What you are asking is for a man to take a polygraph that if any flags get raised will disqualify him forever from the peak of his profession. And likely ends his career. And you want to compare that to taking a poly to get a job?

 

Here’s a hint, the govt asks if you have been convicted of a felony or misdemeanor (not traffic related misdemeanors) in their security clearance process. Not accused. So in theory, Brett Kavanaugh could apply for a position requiring a clearance right now and not be disqualified. 

 

Here is the deal though. Kavanaugh says he didn't do it.  Ford says Kavanaugh did it.  How are you going to prove that Kavanaugh did it?  Mark Judge, the other guy in the room according to Ford, says he does not remember.  It is something that nobody can prove since it's been a long time. How are they going to investigate?  What will they be able to prove?  Nothing will come out of an investigation.   What I would do is, in order to make the results more robust, make both Mark Judge and Bret Kavanaugh take a polygraph test. I will bet that the test becomes more accurate if you test more than one person.  

If both Mark Judge and Bret Kavanaugh fail the test, they are not telling the truth, period.

[Larry]

2 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

 

Is it unobtainable or just unobtainable in the timeline that the GOP wants this to be wrapped up? Not being snarky, just asking because she isn't the only one asking for the FBI to be involved. 

 

Or unibtainable because the entire GOP is actively attempting to protect a President they don't even like, from the consequences of the multiple crimes which he continues to publicly commit, by trying to create the belief that the entire FBI is composed entirely of radical anti American hippies, unanimously attempting to frame an innocent man, because they just can't stand conservatives. 

[Kilmer17]

Just now, Cooked Crack said:

He already has a job with a lifetime appointment now. Right now this is a job interview for another one. Senate could literally investigate this matter if they wanted.

Right.  But not if she refuses to show up 

[NoCalMike]

4 minutes ago, Popeman38 said:

The FBI normally doesn’t investigate 36 year old sexual assault allegations. 

 

I would suggest investigating a potential supreme court judge doesn't fall under the realm of normal, yeah?

 

 

2 minutes ago, Larry said:

 

Or unibtainable because the entire GOP is actively attempting to protect a President they don't even like, from the consequences of the multiple crimes which he continues to publicly commit, by trying to create the belief that the entire FBI is composed entirely of radical anti American hippies, unanimously attempting to frame an innocent man, because they just can't stand conservatives. 

 

Well.....there's that.  Hahaha. 

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

 

[Popeman38]

Just now, redskins59 said:

Here is the deal though. Kavanaugh says he didn't do it.  Ford says Kavanaugh did it.  How are you going to prove that Kavanaugh did it?  Mark Judge, the other guy in the room according to Ford, says he does not remember.  It is something that nobody can prove since it's been a long time. How are they going to investigate?  What will they be able to prove?  Nothing will come out of an investigation.   What I would do is, in order to make the results more robust, make both Mark Judge and Bret Kavanaugh take a polygraph test. I will bet that the test becomes more accurate if you test more than one person.  

If both Mark Judge and Bret Kavanaugh fail the test, they are not telling the truth, period.

First of all, no one can make him take a poly. Second, even if you could make them and they both failed, there is a 30% chance the test is wrong. It DOES NOT mean they are not telling the truth. Why can’t you comprehend that?

[Cooked Crack]

3 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

Right.  But not if she refuses to show up 

The Senate isn't going to investigate. Got to have some type of leverage. Right now the plan is to listen then vote for him. Still don't know if she shows up without some fact finding investigation though.

[visionary]

 

 

 

[Kilmer17]

1 minute ago, Cooked Crack said:

The Senate isn't going to investigate. Got to have some type of leverage. Right now the plan is to listen then vote for him. Still don't know if she shows up without some fact finding investigation though.

Walk us through this. 

 

Investigate what exactly?   She says she doesn’t remember when or where it happened.  And has only named two people who were there that both contradict her.  

 

So so what would they be looking for?

[twa]

29 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

Again this idea that Kavanaugh has somehow been punished his whole life for this alleged incident. 

 

who said that?

[redskins59]

Just now, Popeman38 said:

First of all, no one can make him take a poly. Second, even if you could make them and they both failed, there is a 30% chance the test is wrong. It DOES NOT mean they are not telling the truth. Why can’t you comprehend that?

 

Okay then, how are you going to prove that Kavanaugh didn't do it? This was 30 something years ago.  Without a polygraph, you can't prove anything.

  The number that I see most often when it comes to polygraph is  that it is 90% accurate.  He doesn't need to take a poly, but disqualify him if he doesn't take one.  

There is strength in numbers.  Let's say that there was an  assault involving 10 people.  Let's suppose that they are all guilty. Now, let's use the 70% accuracy number.  The 10 people are given a polygraph test.  They all deny it.  Now, if 7 out of 10 people fail it, are you going to believe that they are lying or not?  The more people you polygraph, the more accurate it becomes.

I will say that if both Mark Judge and Kavanaugh fail the test, they definitely did it.

[tshile]

49 minutes ago, Jumbo said:

..i bet they plow ahead with no investigation and tell ford to show up or not...

 

I agree

 

and now you’ll have an accusation that’s credibility was built on: hey she came forward, hey she’s willing to testify!

 

only for her to not actually show up.  Which will be excused because she made a demand that the fbi investigate (which they already declined, does not have jurisdiction over, and would be a huge delay)

 

but hey she was willing to testify 

 

and she’s doctor. With a list of people who says she’s a swell person

 

If she’s telling the truth then it just has the unfortunate side effect of exhibiting all the hallmarks of a political stunt. 

33 minutes ago, Popeman38 said:

When did the burden of proof in this country shift from the “prosecutor” to the “defense?” 

It’s been like that in sexual assault cases for years now. Colleges are real bad about it. 

 

The accusation alone can be very harmful even if not true. 

[Cooked Crack]

10 minutes ago, Kilmer17 said:

Walk us through this. 

 

Investigate what exactly?   She says she doesn’t remember when or where it happened.  And has only named two people who were there that both contradict her.  

 

So so what would they be looking for?

Start with those in attendance. No one seems to be denying that they even know each other.

 

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 19, 2018 by visionary

[Popeman38]

18 minutes ago, redskins59 said:

 

Okay then, how are you going to prove that Kavanaugh didn't do it? This was 30 something years ago.  Without a polygraph, you can't prove anything.

  The number that I see most often when it comes to polygraph is  that it is 90% accurate.  He doesn't need to take a poly, but disqualify him if he doesn't take one.  

There is strength in numbers.  Let's say that there was an  assault involving 10 people.  Let's suppose that they are all guilty. Now, let's use the 70% accuracy number.  The 10 people are given a polygraph test.  They all deny it.  Now, if 7 out of 10 people fail it, are you going to believe that they are lying or not?  The more people you polygraph, the more accurate it becomes.

I will say that if both Mark Judge and Kavanaugh fail the test, they definitely did it.

Brett Kavanaugh does not have to prove that he did not do it. It has to be proven that he did it. He is presumed innocent. 

 

You are just now reading up on polygraphs and coming here to tell us the best way to proceed with regard to polygraphs. Brett Kavanaugh is not going to take a polygraph. No matter how many times Ford’s attorney parades the fact that her client passed one. 

[visionary]

 

 

 

Maybe they could have a third party that deals with rape victims interview her?

Edited September 19, 2018 by visionary

[DogofWar1]

28 minutes ago, visionary said:

 

It's unfortunate, but that's basically the situation.

 

She has to walk in front of a firing squad that views her as standing between them and achieving a goal they've toiled 40 years for, or her allegation goes poof.

 

The GOP is internally livid at this delay.  Lots of chatter that Brett should just withdraw and let them put up a less controversial candidate.  There was that one woman on the short list.  Could probably get her through quickly.  Others truly want Brett, for a variety of reasons and don't want him to back down.

 

And then there's the ominous question of WHO PAID OFF HIS 200K DEBT AND WILL THOSE CREDITORS ALLOW HIM TO WITHDRAW AT ALL?

 

In any event, there is a precisely 0% chance the GOP will delay this a minute longer than Monday.  If that goes badly, Brett is toast.  If it goes well, they ram through.

 

I understand completely why she would be reluctant to show up.

 

And frankly it's not fair to her for this to happen in this fashion.  But for the rush to get him in, this could be handled with much more care.

 

But life isn't fair, and the chips are down.

[Jumbo]

1 hour ago, Kilmer17 said:

Her lawyer is no dummy.

 

Then she can't match what I'm bringing to the table here with my posting.

[visionary]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 19, 2018 by visionary