All-purpose news and politics thread: Two Steps Beyond!(Part II)

[JCAll]

It helps that they also believe such a thing could never happen to them personally. Although everyone else seems to get hurt by the mentality, so 'helps' may have been the wrong word....

I don't think that's it. I think it stems from a belief that that's just how the world works. Just look at the defenses you're seeing, it's all a variation of "everyone does it". Acceptance, never demands fof change.
That might also explain the victim blaming. Since "everyone does it" it must be her fault for putting herself in that position, she must be weak or a troublemaker for letting it happen or complaining about it later.
That's the entire horrible political commentator postion every time sexual assault comes up at any time.

[Mister Mets]

I don't think that's it. I think it stems from a belief that that's just how the world works. Just look at the defenses you're seeing, it's all a variation of "everyone does it". Acceptance, never demands fof change.
That might also explain the victim blaming. Since "everyone does it" it must be her fault for putting herself in that position, she must be weak or a troublemaker for letting it happen or complaining about it later.
That's the entire horrible political commentator postion every time sexual assault comes up at any time.

The defenses aren't all variation of "everyone does it."

To be fair, this is one of the defenses. There's a liberal argument that's kind of similar, voiced by Matthew Ygleisias who finds it suspicious that Kavanaugh can deny something so completely given the vagueness of the details. He expanded on it in a podcast saying that if he had been accused of doing something similar, he would be unable to deny it because of the drinking culture he grew up in (he hopes he never did anything outrageous, but he's been blackout drunk so it remains a possibility.)

Other defenses would be the belief that she's lying, as well as the argument that one accusation shouldn't be enough to derail a nomination, given the possibility she's mistaken. The latter is the argument I'm seeing the most on conservative twitter/ blogs.

One series of comment I'm seen is people talking about when they've been mistaken about major details of a crime.

https://twitter.com/ScottAdamsSays/s...66519190827008

I'm pretty sure the people on the left would be making the exact same argument if the situation were reversed.

Since Kavanaugh has denied the incident ever occurred, any variation of "everyone does it" or "boys will be boys" isn't a valid defense, since we're not considering the significance the actions of a teenager, but a middle-aged adult.

[Handsome men don't lose fights]

Looking for a little advice. I started using Facebook again after six years away from it. My out of state cousin is a Trumper who keeps sending me Trump **** and posts about Muslims. His dad and my mom were estranged for thirty years but have recently made up, so if I flip out on my cousin, it could make things really hard for her. Is there any way I can ignore him without blocking him or putting him on blast? He's REALLY annoying the f*** out of me.

[Kirby101]

Looking for a little advice. I started using Facebook again after six years away from it. My out of state cousin is a Trumper who keeps sending me Trump **** and posts about Muslims. His dad and my mom were estranged for thirty years but have recently made up, so if I flip out on my cousin, it could make things really hard for her. Is there any way I can ignore him without blocking him or putting him on blast? He's REALLY annoying the f*** out of me.

Why not unfriend him. If anyone asks you can just say, you don't like politics on faccebook. Leave it at that.

[Malvolio]

Looking for a little advice. I started using Facebook again after six years away from it. My out of state cousin is a Trumper who keeps sending me Trump **** and posts about Muslims. His dad and my mom were estranged for thirty years but have recently made up, so if I flip out on my cousin, it could make things really hard for her. Is there any way I can ignore him without blocking him or putting him on blast? He's REALLY annoying the f*** out of me.

Just literally ignore his posts. No rule on facebook that you have to respond.

[Handsome men don't lose fights]

Why not unfriend him. If anyone asks you can just say, you don't like politics on faccebook. Leave it at that.

I called my niece begging for help, and she talked me through putting him on restricted so I don't have to see his crappy posts. The day is saved once more by a savvy 7th grader.

I couldn't just unfriend him, even if he is a total 'munch. We share a grandma : (

[Mecegirl]

I called my niece begging for help, and she talked me through putting him on restricted so I don't have to see his crappy posts. The day is saved once more by a savvy 7th grader.

I couldn't just unfriend him, even if he is a total 'munch. We share a grandma : (

Oh good. Cuz I was going to say that you can mute or unfollow people. You don;t have to unfriend someone to not see posts.

[Handsome men don't lose fights]

Oh good. Cuz I was going to say that you can mute or unfollow people. You don;t have to unfriend someone to not see posts.

Yeah, I'm not the guy for tech support. Took me four years to learn how to thread a tweet. I recently learned you can change font colors on these boards, and I've been here since 2011.

@Malivio
I can ignore anything as long as I can't see it. My house is filled with spiders, but as long as they keep their distance, I don't go hunting.

[Mister Mets]

I'll note that I'm going to articulate views that I don't necessarily hold here.

The general establishment GOP argument is that she may be mistaken somehow, based on what we know about the unreliability of the memory, and some of the circumstances (IE- this was an allegation about someone she didn't know very well at the time, and never saw again, who she became aware of again when he was a middle-aged judge.)

https://www.theatlantic.com/health/a...e-fake/281558/

https://www.healthline.com/health-ne...e-worse-091313

https://www.newyorker.com/science/ma...y-recollection

In this case, she wouldn't really know that she's in the wrong, so she wouldn't really consider the possibility that an FBI investigation would demonstrate she's mistaken. There would also be limited legal penalties for being mistaken (It's really difficult to have a perjury trial if someone knows they were wrong.)

It would also be unlikely that an FBI investigation would be able to establish what happened, given the vagueness of the details (she's not sure where exactly it happened, or when, or who all the other people were.) So if she were lying completely, it doesn't stand to reason she would be afraid of being caught. The FBI investigation of Anita Hill's allegations (which were more recent and dealt with workplace misconduct in a federal agency) led the White House to conclude they were unfounded, which hasn't exonerated Thomas in the views of the mainstream media today.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/19/polit...ine/index.html

There are three things I've considered on this mess.

In Kavanaugh's favor, it seems very unlikely that if he were to sexually assault one woman, it would be someone who would end up being a law professor. In addition, when prominent abusers have been accused in the past, other victims tend to come forward (see Harvey Weinstein, Donald Trump, and even Al Franken.) So, if her story is true, it does suggest there are others out there, and that the lack of further allegations is an example of a dog not barking. It could very well be that Ronan Farrow is submitting his final draft of a story with multiple sourced allegations against Kavanaugh, but if nothing else comes out that increases the possibility Kavanaugh is innocent.

In Ford's favor, she started mentioning the encounter well before the current #metoo moment, so it can't be seen as a response to the moment.

One problem with the discussion is that it seems there are people on the different sides who think that the other side is arguing in bad faith. Some of the arguments in favor of rejecting Kavanaugh suggest that conservatives know that he's probably guilty, while some of the defenses of Kavanaugh are based on the presumption that his critics know that he's likely innocent. That's not really the case. Some people have information that others don't (Kavanaugh has many friends in conservative Washington circles who can speak to his character; there are people who have been abused and know others who have been abused who see parallels in Ms. Ford's experiences.)

Called it.

A New Yorker story by Farrow and Jane Mayer details a new accusation against Kavanaugh.

The woman at the center of the story, Deborah Ramirez, who is fifty-three, attended Yale with Kavanaugh, where she studied sociology and psychology. Later, she spent years working for an organization that supports victims of domestic violence. The New Yorker contacted Ramirez after learning of her possible involvement in an incident involving Kavanaugh. The allegation was also conveyed to Democratic senators by a civil-rights lawyer. For Ramirez, the sudden attention has been unwelcome, and prompted difficult choices. She was at first hesitant to speak publicly, partly because her memories contained gaps because she had been drinking at the time of the alleged incident. In her initial conversations with The New Yorker, she was reluctant to characterize Kavanaugh’s role in the alleged incident with certainty. After six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney, Ramirez said that she felt confident enough of her recollections to say that she remembers Kavanaugh had exposed himself at a drunken dormitory party, thrust his penis in her face, and caused her to touch it without her consent as she pushed him away. Ramirez is now calling for the F.B.I. to investigate Kavanaugh’s role in the incident. “I would think an F.B.I. investigation would be warranted,” she said.

In a statement, Kavanaugh wrote, “This alleged event from 35 years ago did not happen. The people who knew me then know that this did not happen, and have said so. This is a smear, plain and simple. I look forward to testifying on Thursday about the truth, and defending my good name--and the reputation for character and integrity I have spent a lifetime building--against these last-minute allegations.”

White House spokesperson Kerri Kupec said the administration stood by Kavanaugh. “This 35-year-old, uncorroborated claim is the latest in a coordinated smear campaign by the Democrats designed to tear down a good man. This claim is denied by all who were said to be present and is wholly inconsistent with what many women and men who knew Judge Kavanaugh at the time in college say. The White House stands firmly behind Judge Kavanaugh.”

Ramirez said that, when both she and Kavanaugh were freshmen at Yale, she was invited by a friend on the women’s soccer team to a dorm-room party. She recalled that the party took place in a suite at Lawrance Hall, in the part of Yale known as the Old Campus, and that a small group of students decided to play a drinking game together. “We were sitting in a circle,” she said. “People would pick who drank.” Ramirez was chosen repeatedly, she said, and quickly became inebriated. At one point, she said, a male student pointed a gag plastic penis in her direction. Later, she said, she was on the floor, foggy and slurring her words as that male student and another stood nearby. (Ramirez identified the two male onlookers, but, at her request, The New Yorker is not naming them.)

A third male student then exposed himself to her. “I remember a penis being in front of my face,” she said. “I knew that's not what I wanted, even in that state of mind.” She recalled remarking, “That’s not a real penis,” and the other students laughing at her confusion and taunting her, one encouraging her to “kiss it.” She said that she pushed the person away, touching it in the process. Ramirez, who was raised a devout Catholic in Connecticut, said that she was shaken. “I wasn’t going to touch a penis until I was married,” she said. “I was embarrassed and ashamed and humiliated.” She remembers Kavanaugh standing to her right and laughing, pulling up his pants. “Brett was laughing,” she said. “I can still see his face, and his hips coming forward, like when you pull up your pants.” She recalled another male student shouting about the incident. “Somebody yelled down the hall, ‘Brett Kavanaugh just put his penis in Debbie’s face,’ ” she said. “It was his full name. I don’t think it was just ‘Brett.’ And I remember hearing and being mortified that this was out there.”

Ramirez acknowledged that there are significant gaps in her memories of the evening, and that, if she ever presents her story to the F.B.I. or members of the Senate, she will inevitably be pressed on her motivation for coming forward after so many years, and questioned about her memory, given her drinking at the party.

And yet, after several days of considering the matter carefully, she said, “I’m confident about the pants coming up, and I’m confident about Brett being there.” Ramirez said that what has stayed with her most forcefully is the memory of laughter at her expense from Kavanaugh and the other students. “It was kind of a joke,” she recalled. “And now it’s clear to me it wasn’t a joke.”

Meanwhile, Michael Avenatti claims to represent a woman with credible claims against Kavanaugh.

[Handsome men don't lose fights]

Called it.

A New Yorker story by Farrow and Jane Mayer details a new accusation against Kavanaugh.



Meanwhile, Michael Avenatti claims to represent a woman with credible claims against Kavanaugh.

Good call, Mets.

[4saken1]

Second woman alleges sexual misconduct by Kavanaugh, this time in college

Oh, well! Boys will be boys!

[worstblogever]

Second woman alleges sexual misconduct by Kavanaugh, this time in college

Oh, well! Boys will be boys!

Avenatti is also intimating he has a 3rd, as yet unnamed accuser.


I already saw that former Trump flack AJ Delgado has responded and predicted that Senate Republicans pressure Kavanaugh to withdraw his nomination by Wednesday, so they don't spend Thursday interrogating Christine Blasey Ford and make their party look even more stupid than they've been for the past ten days in an open hearing, recreating the Anita Hill hearings. Especially for a guy with TWO MORE accusers waiting in the wings, and when they can just plug in one of the other Federalist Society favorites who hopefully haven't been repeatedly sexually assaulting women.

The female judge seems the most likely to fit that bill. I'd hope, anyway.

[Gray Lensman]

Avenatti is also intimating he has a 3rd, as yet unnamed accuser.


I already saw that former Trump flack AJ Delgado has responded and predicted that Senate Republicans pressure Kavanaugh to withdraw his nomination by Wednesday, so they don't spend Thursday interrogating Christine Blasey Ford and make their party look even more stupid than they've been for the past ten days in an open hearing, recreating the Anita Hill hearings. Especially for a guy with TWO MORE accusers waiting in the wings, and when they can just plug in one of the other Federalist Society favorites who hopefully haven't been repeatedly sexually assaulting women.

The female judge seems the most likely to fit that bill. I'd hope, anyway.

The big thing is that Trump likely wants someone who will rule he can't be prosecuted and/or the Mueller investigation is unconstitutional, and he will likely refuse to consider anyone else unless he can get the same assurances.

[Robotman]

Avenatti is also intimating he has a 3rd, as yet unnamed accuser.


I already saw that former Trump flack AJ Delgado has responded and predicted that Senate Republicans pressure Kavanaugh to withdraw his nomination by Wednesday, so they don't spend Thursday interrogating Christine Blasey Ford and make their party look even more stupid than they've been for the past ten days in an open hearing, recreating the Anita Hill hearings. Especially for a guy with TWO MORE accusers waiting in the wings, and when they can just plug in one of the other Federalist Society favorites who hopefully haven't been repeatedly sexually assaulting women.

The female judge seems the most likely to fit that bill. I'd hope, anyway.

I really don’t see the Republicans backing down from this. Trump and his lemmings know that things look bad in November for them and if they don’t get a nominee through this time, the democrats could block any other nominees if they gain control of the House and Senate.

[Kirby101]

I really don’t see the Republicans backing down from this. Trump and his lemmings know that things look bad in November for them and if they don’t get a nominee through this time, the democrats could block any other nominees if they gain control of the House and Senate.

If they go through with this, not only do they help make sure they lose both Houses, but expect Kavanaugh to be impeached.