How important is what we did in high school? Kavanaugh accusation


carlimac
 Share

Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

The bar is set so high for Trump that he'll never be able to satisfy the NeverTrump conservatives. He could abolish abortion by fiat, demand prayer in public schools, forbid homosexuals from suing bakers/florists, appoint nine conservatives to the supreme court, and the NeverTrumpers on the right would still find something to complain about.
 

Of course we’ll complain about Trump—he’s a bad guy, has dramatically accelerated an already abysmal trajectory of American political discourse, has supplanted conservatism with a cult of personality rather than principle, and (for NeverTrump Mormons like me) abjectly fails the qualifications set forth in the D&C for evaluating political candidates.  None of that is going away anytime soon.  

But when it comes to SCOTUS nominations—I don’t think you’ll hear me complaining much about a Barrett or a Cruz; just as I don’t believe you heard me complain about Gorsuch.

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, MormonGator said:

The bar is set so high for Trump that he'll never be able to satisfy the NeverTrump conservatives. He could abolish abortion by fiat, demand prayer in public schools, forbid homosexuals from suing bakers/florists, appoint nine conservatives to the supreme court, and the NeverTrumpers on the right would still find something to complain about.
 

I do not consider my self a NeverTrump...  The bar I have set for him is the one found from the Lord about seeking people of good Character...  When it came to voting and I was required to render a judgement on who to vote for... he did not clear it in my judgement.

However we do have him now... and alot of what is being said about him is to use his words "fake news" trying to tear him down.  Should he run again for another 4 years he probably still will not get my vote because he will likely still not clear the bar that I understand the Lord wants me to hold him to.  But that is just me exercising my right and stewardship.  Not me making a judgement beyond the parameters given to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MormonGator
6 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Of course we’ll complain about Trump—he’s a bad guy, has dramatically accelerated an already abysmal trajectory of American political discourse, has supplanted conservatism with a cult of personality rather than principle, and (for NeverTrump Mormons like me) abjectly fails the qualifications set forth in the D&C for evaluating political candidates.  None of that is going away anytime soon.  

But when it comes to SCOTUS nominations—I don’t think you’ll hear me complaining much about a Barrett or a Cruz; just as I don’t believe you heard me complain about Gorsuch.

I find it incredibly fascinating who loves and hates Trump. Especially for people who are lifelong republicans. Of course I understand why democrats/libertarians do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Seems like half my party thinks SCOTUS so unimportant, they have absolutely no theoretical problem with the idea of a former seventeen-year-old rapist taking a seat there.  Whatever Kavanaugh personally did or didn’t do, this whole episode has been most . . . illuminating.

We’ll see whether Trump has enough wind left in his sails to carry this through, I guess. If not, he can nominate someone else.  If he runs to the right/constitutionalist with his next nomination, SCOTUS is safe and we’ll be the better for it.  If he runs left, it will show that some of us (*cough cough*) were right to mistrust him all along. 

ANOTHER PROOF OF MY POINT about mothers and their sons.

You, a lawyer, thinks the Ford allegations with ZERO evidence and perfect political timing with the accuser refusing to testify SHOULD cause the appointment to the SC to be delayed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, anatess2 said:

ANOTHER PROOF OF MY POINT about mothers and their sons.

You, a lawyer, thinks the Ford allegations with ZERO evidence and perfect political timing with the accuser refusing to testify SHOULD cause the appointment to the SC to be delayed.

Very early on in this case I offered my solution:  vote by October 15, or else nominate an even more rock-ribbed constitutionalist/conservative.  Let the Dems try to repeat this game with another nominee or two, and see how much mileage they’ll get—they’ll destroy #metoo for a generation.  

At best, Kavanaugh's life is not going to be ruined by another two or three weeks of waiting for confirmation.  At worst, it won’t even be “ruined” if he has to withdraw his name from consideration and then go back into his chambers at the DC Circuit Court to cry in his (root?) beer.

As unfortunate as I find Kavanaugh’s situation to be, the alternative—that the US Senate should confirm to a lifetime SCOTUS appointment a nominee  with pending (attempted) rape allegations after minimal investigations and no sworn testimony at all—is absolutely unacceptable.  This position comes, in part, from my belief that you don’t throw out due process just because you see your adversary using it against you; and also from my apparently increasingly-rare belief—born of religious indoctrination as well as professional experience—that (attempted) rape is an act of sublime evil.  I’ll be delighted if Kavanaugh’s accusers melt under scrutiny, as I somewhat suspect they will.  But Kavanaugh’s high school antics (or his moral rectitude, as the case may be) are not the altar on which I plan to sacrifice my commitment to due process or my horror at rape.

I’m sorry Trumpians find these parliamentary procedures and moral niceties irritating .  But my recollection of 2016 is that we were assured—assured, mark you!—that Trump would “be smart” and negotiate the swamp better than anyone in living memory; reaching across party lines, cutting deals, and working miracles that had eluded decades of Bushes, Reagans, McConnells, Boehners, et al.  And we were told, repeatedly, that Trump and Trump alone could make all our SCOTUS dreams come true.   

Trump said he could make this happen, so let’s watch him do it.   :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

 
 
 
 
Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Vort said:

The more JAG talks, the more sense he makes.

Hide the children!

Indeed...  The only real issue is not with any of his positions or ideas but the simply idea that the Democrats are trying to run out the clock.

The Republicans have already established that they can delay an SC nomination when they hamstring Obama's pick.  Midterms often see a switch in power for congress.  The Democrats need to delay until after Midterms and the Republicans need it to happen before.  (Unless there is a Historical upset and the Republicans maintain congress)  Otherwise the Democrats do to the Republicans what the Republicans did to the Dems. 

We need them to vet and investigate the accusations without letting it be dragged on and on with no end 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Very early on in this case I offered my solution:  vote by October 15, or else nominate an even more rock-ribbed constitutionalist/conservative.  Let the Dems try to repeat this game with another nominee or two, and see how much mileage they’ll get—they’ll destroy #metoo for a generation.  

At best, Kavanaugh's life is not going to be ruined by another two or three weeks of waiting for confirmation.  At worst, it won’t even be “ruined” if he has to withdraw his name from consideration and then go back into his chambers at the DC Circuit Court to cry in his (root?) beer.

As unfortunate as I find Kavanaugh’s situation to be, the alternative—that the US Senate should confirm to a lifetime SCOTUS appointment a nominee  with pending (attempted) rape allegations after minimal investigations and no sworn testimony at all—is absolutely unacceptable.  This position comes, in part, from my belief that you don’t throw out due process just because you see your adversary using it against you; and also from my apparently increasingly-rare belief—born of religious indoctrination as well as professional experience—that (attempted) rape is an act of sublime evil.  I’ll be delighted if Kavanaugh’s accusers melt under scrutiny, as I somewhat suspect they will.  But Kavanaugh’s high school antics (or his moral rectitude, as the case may be) are not the altar on which I plan to sacrifice my commitment to due process or my horror at rape.

I’m sorry Trumpians find these parliamentary procedures and moral niceties irritating .  But my recollection of 2016 is that we were assured—assured, mark you!—that Trump would “be smart” and negotiate the swamp better than anyone in living memory; reaching across party lines, cutting deals, and working miracles that had eluded decades of Bushes, Reagans, McConnells, Boehners, et al.  And we were told, repeatedly, that Trump and Trump alone could make all our SCOTUS dreams come true.   

Trump said he could make this happen, so let’s watch him do it.   :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

 
 
 
 

I don't agree with you.  I can't possibly write what I'm feeling as eloquently as you but I don't think you've got it right, even being more educated than I am in these things. I think your distaste for Trump and your experiences working with rape victims is clouding your vision.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, carlimac said:

I don't agree with you.  I can't possibly write what I'm feeling as eloquently as you but I don't think you've got it right, even being more educated than I am in these things. I think your distaste for Trump and your experiences working with rape victims is clouding your vision.  

I appreciate that, Carlimac; I’m just not quite sure how to respond to it. ;) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, carlimac said:

I don't agree with you.  I can't possibly write what I'm feeling as eloquently as you but I don't think you've got it right, even being more educated than I am in these things. I think your distaste for Trump and your experiences working with rape victims is clouding your vision.  

You start by Reminding JAG that Kavanaugh's guilt has not been established...

And that the DUE PROCESS investigation he wants into the accusation is happening.  The Statue of Limitation has ended the Local authorities role (That is DUE PROCESS). The FBI has been informed and so far they have declined to presume the investigation further (Unless they change there mind that DUE PROCESS is also done).  The only thing left is the council and the vote, they want to hear from her, they are trying to get her to testify under oath.  She has her chance that is DUE PROCESS.  If she testifies under oath JAG gets what he wants.  If she refuses to testify under oath.. well as a lawyer JAG should understand better then anyone what happen to a case if the star witness fails to show.

As long as the Republicans give her a decent chance to testify...   As long as they do not screw it up by unreasonable haste DUE PROCESS will have it say.  Kavanaugh will have a chance to be vetted (or not be vetted) having faced the accusations

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, carlimac said:

👎 The more he talks the less sense he makes.  I wouldn't wish what's happening to Kavanaugh even on my worst Denemycrat!  

Well, when it happens to certain Denemycrats, they get James Carville to opine about what happens when you drag a dollar bill through a trailer park.  And then they elect, then re-elect, the accused.  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could be wrong, but I get the sense that JAG sees this in terms of a trial. (Which obviously makes sense...) 

 

Someone else already typed out what I was thinking:

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/outlook/kavanaughs-senate-hearing-isnt-a-trial-the-standard-isnt-reasonable-doubt/2018/09/20/1eb1ee34-bd15-11e8-b7d2-0773aa1e33da_story.html

Edited by Colirio
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet

Rather than start another thread on this topic, I thought I'd drop in and share this:

Mormon Women's Group Calls for Probe of Accusations Against Kavanaugh
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/25/us/politics/kavanaugh-mormon-women.html

I'm part of this group, though I can't take any credit for this; I do support the statement.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, LiterateParakeet said:

Rather than start another thread on this topic, I thought I'd drop in and share this:

Mormon Women's Group Calls for Probe of Accusations Against Kavanaugh
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/25/us/politics/kavanaugh-mormon-women.html

I'm part of this group, though I can't take any credit for this; I do support the statement.  

Are they also going to call for a probe of his accuser? When and if she is proven a liar, is your group going to release a statement condemning her in the harshest possible terms? Or does this sort of outrage point only in one direction, female to male?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LiterateParakeet said:

Rather than start another thread on this topic, I thought I'd drop in and share this:

Mormon Women's Group Calls for Probe of Accusations Against Kavanaugh
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/25/us/politics/kavanaugh-mormon-women.html

I'm part of this group, though I can't take any credit for this; I do support the statement.  

Oh dear.  How will you all feel when the vote is delayed to the point that it becomes too late to confirm someone with conservative values? And by that I don't mean conserving the "boys will be boys" mentality from 30 years ago and before. I mean someone who will defend the unborn and the family. Because that is exactly what's going to happen if it's delayed much longer. I think the LDS Senators are capable of making good judgements on their own according to the hearings. Again, what good will further investigation do? All the so-called "witnesses have already been contacted and have denied it. What other evidence would yet more investigating turn up? From this point on it's people making assumptions about what they find compelling  or damning such as this article https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/24/business/brett-kavanaugh-yearbook-renate.html?action=click&module=Ribbon&pgtype=Article which in my opinion is laughable. This happened to a lot of the popular girls in high school and they were aware of it and flattered by it- not "horrified". 

Honestly-for the most part, what went on in high school ( OK I'm several years older than the Kavanaugh crowd but close enough) was so tame compared to the sexual assaults of today.  The "conquests" described by the boys amounted to asking a girl on a date and maybe kissing her.   Perhaps in a non- LDS culture it went further than that. But even still, between Hollywood and porn, I'm sure what goes on today is far more involved and even brutal. But the language of 30-40 years ago can't be assumed to have meant what it  means today. 

I think this group of "Mormon Women" need to chill, get some perspective  and not add to the hysteria. Frustrating to see this article about them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, carlimac said:

Oh dear.  How will you all feel when the vote is delayed to the point that it becomes too late to confirm someone with conservative values? And by that I don't mean conserving the "boys will be boys" mentality from 30 years ago and before. I mean someone who will defend the unborn and the family. Because that is exactly what's going to happen if it's delayed much longer. I think the LDS Senators are capable of making good judgements on their own according to the hearings. Again, what good will further investigation do? All the so-called "witnesses have already been contacted and have denied it. What other evidence would yet more investigating turn up? From this point on it's people making assumptions about what they find compelling  or damning such as this article https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/24/business/brett-kavanaugh-yearbook-renate.html?action=click&module=Ribbon&pgtype=Article which in my opinion is laughable. This happened to a lot of the popular girls in high school and they were aware of it and flattered by it- not "horrified". 

Honestly-for the most part, what went on in high school ( OK I'm several years older than the Kavanaugh crowd but close enough) was so tame compared to the sexual assaults of today.  The "conquests" described by the boys amounted to asking a girl on a date and maybe kissing her.   Perhaps in a non- LDS culture it went further than that. But even still, between Hollywood and porn, I'm sure what goes on today is far more involved and even brutal. But the language of 30-40 years ago can't be assumed to have meant what it  means today. 

I think this group of "Mormon Women" need to chill, get some perspective  and not add to the hysteria. Frustrating to see this article about them.

Mormon Women for Ethical Government is not a conservative group.  (That’s not a slam on @LiterateParakeet; it’s just that based on the things and people about whom they’ve chosen to speak out, they come across as center-left—which I’m pretty sure by most LDS standards makes them pretty much the same as Stalin. ;) )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/25/republicans-hire-female-sex-prosecutor-to-grill-kavanaugh-and-accuser-ford.html

The arguments for why they shouldn't have a sex crimes prosecutor on this senate hearing is incredibly entertaining. You want an FBI investigation done so that all the correct facts are collected and examined, but you don't want a prosecutor who specializes in sex crimes to question both Kavanaugh and Ford? Wouldn't you rather someone with expert experience in the field of sex crimes to ask the more pertinent questions regarding this accusation? Rather than a Senate full of individuals with little to no expert knowledge in this area, beyond the layman's understanding of what is important to question?

Also, her identity was revealed and it's a female prosecutor. 

I wonder what the likelihood is of Ford appearing now.

Edited by BeccaKirstyn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, BeccaKirstyn said:

Wouldn't you rather someone with expert experience in the field of sex crimes to ask the more pertinent questions regarding this accusation?

Not if you were banking on optics of old white men grilling sexual assault survivors for your “October surprise” in a couple hundred Congressional elections a month from now.  

Considering how wrong-footed they were by these accusations, the Senate GOP leadership is handling this whole thing with a level of finesse I’d have hardly thought possible.  

Edited by Just_A_Guy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LiterateParakeet
1 hour ago, Just_A_Guy said:

Mormon Women for Ethical Government is not a conservative group.  (That’s not a slam on @LiterateParakeet; it’s just that based on the things and people about whom they’ve chosen to speak out, they come across as center-left—which I’m pretty sure by most LDS standards makes them pretty much the same as Stalin. ;) )

LOL, I love it JAG.  @carlimac he's right.  I skew Left as well.  I knew that most here would disagree, but I also thought you might find it mindly interesting that a Latter Day Saint Women's group was mentioned in the NYT.  That doesn't happen every day.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share