ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Brett Kavanaugh , Christine Blasey Ford , Congressional hearings , Supreme Court nominees , Trump controversies

Reply
Old 30th September 2018, 01:42 PM   #441
The Big Dog
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
Judiciary refers false boat claim against Judge Kavanaugh to the FBI for criminal investigation.

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2018/09/29/p...ion/index.html
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 01:43 PM   #442
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,493
Originally Posted by Aridas View Post
Not yet, he hasn't. He has done something, though, which is worth recognizing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stacyhs
The only two people who claim the party and/or assault never happened are Kavanaugh and Judge...the two people accused of being involved in the assault.
When did Judge claim that? He first claimed that he didn't remember the party in question. Later, we got "I never saw Brett act in the manner Dr. Ford describes," in the same letter where he claims to avoid public speaking, which is directly contradicted by Encounter Book's website, who published some of his work. This isn't particularly confidence inducing, especially when he is claimed to have also been very drunk and he's publicly been clear about how much of an extreme alcoholic he was.
Please note my use of "and/or". Judge never claimed the party did not happen but his statement that "I never saw Brett act in the manner Dr. Ford describes," is just another way of saying it never happened as Ford says he was in the room. How could he see the assault and then claim he never say K act in the manner Dr. Ford describes?

Last edited by Stacyhs; 30th September 2018 at 02:01 PM.
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 01:46 PM   #443
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 76,639
Originally Posted by River View Post
How about the argument that Ford is to be believed on her statement, and Kavanaugh is not concerning the alleged assault?

Here we have 3 witnesses named by the accuser that DO NOT corroborate her story. In fact, her alleged friend says she does not even know Kavanaugh. You may want to consider that those same 3 people named by the accuser -- did corroborate Kavanaughs claims regarding the assault. Yet, many posters here say they "believe" her based on her statements. Does that sound like an argument from incredulity?
That is a straw man, yet you keep repeating it.

Kav was evasive, dishonest and downplayed his drinking and drunkenness. Ford was forthcoming and did nothing suggesting dishonesty.

Based on that, I do believe her and not him.

Said witnesses you refer to were not questioned under oath. Said witnesses only said they didn't remember the events, they did not say the events didn't happen.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 30th September 2018 at 01:47 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 01:49 PM   #444
dmaker
Graduate Poster
 
dmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 1,459
Originally Posted by River View Post
Thanks. So is believing someone purely based on allegations, that were not corroborated by her named witnesses. (whos statements support the accused)

Two names.


Carolyn Bryant

Emmett Till
Well, for the record I have never said I believe Dr. Ford. I'm not 100% sure where I stand on that question. To be honest, I'm wrestling with my own bias. I will fully admit that I do not want to see Kavanaugh confirmed. I felt that way long before Dr. Ford ever entered the equation. I felt that way before Kavanaughs damning performance under oath. I do not trust him and I do not like his politics.

I do lean toward believing Dr. Ford, but am finding it difficult to rule out personal bias coloring my judgement. Thankfully, I am not a US Senator.

I will add, however, that Kavanaugh was more evasive, hostile and dissembling than Dr. Ford was during questioning. That weights in her favor in my opinion. If this was a trial and I was a juror, I could not vote to convict Kavanaugh given the current evidence.

Last edited by dmaker; 30th September 2018 at 01:54 PM.
dmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 01:52 PM   #445
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,962
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
That is a straw man, yet you keep repeating it.

Kav was evasive, dishonest and downplayed his drinking and drunkenness. Ford was forthcoming and did nothing suggesting dishonesty.

Based on that, I do believe her and not him.

Said witnesses you refer to were not questioned under oath. Said witnesses only said they didn't remember the events, they did not say the events didn't happen.
They did submit statements under oath, under penalty of a felony if false statements were made. Their statements support the accused, not the accuser.
__________________
"I've seen more Bigfoot creatures than Mountain Lions and Wolves combined here in KY." ― ChrisBFRPKY

"I've observed 1 creature eating bark from a pine tree and enjoying like it was cotton candy." ― ChrisBFRPKY
River is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 01:53 PM   #446
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 76,639
Originally Posted by River View Post
Don't think you seem biased based on the evidence and witnesses presented concerning Fords allegations? (no prosecutor would touch it)

Do you believe in equal rights for everyone?
It's not a criminal prosecution.

There you go again with the equal rights question. You'll have to explain the relevance.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 01:53 PM   #447
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,962
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
It's not a criminal prosecution.

There you go again with the equal rights question. You'll have to explain the relevance.

It's a simple question. You don't have to answer if you dislike it.
__________________
"I've seen more Bigfoot creatures than Mountain Lions and Wolves combined here in KY." ― ChrisBFRPKY

"I've observed 1 creature eating bark from a pine tree and enjoying like it was cotton candy." ― ChrisBFRPKY
River is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 01:55 PM   #448
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 76,639
Originally Posted by River View Post
They did submit statements under oath, under penalty of a felony if false statements were made. Their statements support the accused, not the accuser.
Round and round the mulberry bush...
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 02:00 PM   #449
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,493
Originally Posted by River View Post
Thanks. So is believing someone purely based on allegations, that were not corroborated by her named witnesses. (whos statements support the accused)

Two names.


Carolyn Bryant

Emmett Till
We have more than just Ford's allegations. We have seen her testimony in which she answered every single question posed to her forthrightly and credibly. If she didn't remember something, she said so. We also have seen BK's testimony in which he entered the room in an angry, self-defensive, hostile, and belligerent manner. We saw him constantly evade questions and refuse to give a clear answer. We saw him accuse the Dems of a conspiracy against him in revenge for Clinton. We saw him lie repeatedly about his yearbook. We saw him claim repeatedly and falsely that all Ford's named witnesses had denied the assault ever took place. We saw him lie repeatedly about the extent of his drinking despite numerous classmates who said he was a very hard drinker who was highly drunk on numerous occasions. We saw him falsely accuse a senator of trying to "make fun" of someone's alcoholism and answered a completely logical and pertinent question regarding ever having blackouts by asking her with a combative and completely inappropriate "Have you?" We saw a man who displayed behavior
and judgment clearly in opposition to that expected of a US SC Justice in a public setting. That is what we have.

Last edited by Stacyhs; 30th September 2018 at 02:08 PM.
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 02:00 PM   #450
AnonyMoose
Muse
 
AnonyMoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Land of the Frozen Chosen
Posts: 605
Kellyanne Conway is now a member of the #metoo movement.

But she didn't report it to the police, and she's only speaking up about now... many years later.

Therefore, she's must be lying and has some kind of agenda going on.

Damn republican commies and their damn lying fake news agendas trying to ruin this country and mens' lives !


__________________
"Some mornings it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps." ~ Emo Phillips
AnonyMoose is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 02:05 PM   #451
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,493
Originally Posted by River View Post
They did submit statements under oath, under penalty of a felony if false statements were made. Their statements support the accused, not the accuser.
This is your problem. In actuality, their statements neither corroborate nor disprove Ford's claims.

Not remembering an event does not prove it never happened. Why do you have trouble understanding something that simple?

ETA: If any of the witnesses had said they remembered that party and remember that BK and MJ never left the room they were all in, then THAT would disprove Ford's story. But no one has.

Last edited by Stacyhs; 30th September 2018 at 02:12 PM.
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 02:14 PM   #452
Captain_Swoop
Penultimate Amazing
 
Captain_Swoop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 22,639
Trump tweets

"Wow! Just starting to hear the Democrats, who are only thinking Obstruct and Delay, are starting to put out the word that the “time” and “scope” of FBI looking into Judge Kavanaugh and witnesses is not enough. Hello! For them, it will never be enough - stay tuned and watch!"
Captain_Swoop is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 02:15 PM   #453
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,741
Originally Posted by dmaker View Post
I will add, however, that Kavanaugh was more evasive, hostile and dissembling than Dr. Ford was during questioning. That weights in her favor in my opinion. If this was a trial and I was a juror, I could not vote to convict Kavanaugh given the current evidence.

I'll tell you what weighs heavily in her favour for me... she repeatedly asked for an FBI investigation. People who are knowingly telling lies simply don't do that.

Add to this, the fact that Kavanaugh repeatedly refused to answer yes/no questions as to whether he would like an FBI investigation. He stalled, evaded, equivocated, filibustered and refused to directly answer these questions, and when he was asked to give only a "yes" or "no" answer, he refused to speak at all. Only liars, the guilty and people with something to hide act this way.

The fact that Dr. Ford wanted an investigation and Kavanaugh didn't tells us all we need know about who is lying, and who isn't.
__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 02:27 PM   #454
alfaniner
Penultimate Amazing
 
alfaniner's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 20,818
(re: Flake)
Originally Posted by Aridas View Post
Not yet, he hasn't. He has done something, though, which is worth recognizing.
You know, I saw the chyron (I love that word!) that said Senator Flake was going to be a definite "Yes" on the Kav vote. This was shortly before the elevator incident. However, I had the feeling he was going to do a McCain and vote "No" when the time came. After all, he's not up for re-election and has nothing to lose. The elevator incident sealed the deal.
__________________
Science is self-correcting.
Woo is self-contradicting.
alfaniner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 02:29 PM   #455
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,493
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
I'll tell you what weighs heavily in her favour for me... she repeatedly asked for an FBI investigation. People who are knowingly telling lies simply don't do that.

Add to this, the fact that Kavanaugh repeatedly refused to answer yes/no questions as to whether he would like an FBI investigation. He stalled, evaded, equivocated, filibustered and refused to directly answer these questions, and when he was asked to give only a "yes" or "no" answer, he refused to speak at all. Only liars, the guilty and people with something to hide act this way.

The fact that Dr. Ford wanted an investigation and Kavanaugh didn't tells us all we need know about who is lying, and who isn't.
That's true...for those who take off their blinders. The others? Phffft! They'll keep on telling us that all the witness have said the assault and/or party never happened, that BK just forgot or misremembered what all those yearbook entries really meant, and that Ford not remembering the exact date or house where the assault took place and how she got or left there indicate she's not being truthful.
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 02:35 PM   #456
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,589
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
This is your problem. In actuality, their statements neither corroborate nor disprove Ford's claims.

Good thing River said "support", rather than either of the words you used.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 02:39 PM   #457
The Big Dog
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
Ford fails every conceivable test,

Where? She does not know
When? Maybe before sophomore year. Maybe.
Who? Owned the house? She does not know
What did she do before or after? Does not know
How? Did she get there?
Why didn’t she say anything when he was adviser to the President, nominated for the DC Circuit!etc etc?

Why? Did she not tell Leland? Hmmm, that is a head scratcher

She almost got molested, and she left her best friend there alone?
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 02:41 PM   #458
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 76,639
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Good thing River said "support", rather than either of the words you used.
They don't support it. How does, I don't remember support either side? Unless we have an expectation that Judge should remember it, it simply does not support Kav.

And it especially doesn't weigh much at all against Kav's evasiveness, lying and not being able to say he welcomed an FBI investigation.
__________________
That new avatar is cuteness overload.
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 02:43 PM   #459
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,962
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Good thing River said "support", rather than either of the words you used.
The witness statements DO corroborate the statement made by Kavanaugh. They do not corroborate Ford.

Do they disprove Ford? Nope.

Fords testimony/allegations alone are what they are, a stand alone accusation with no corroborating evidence. I could say the same thing about Kavanaugh, and without any evidence or corroborating witnesses you're left with the same thing we have here. He said she said. Only, she named witnesses that could not corroborate what her statement was. Their statements did in fact corroborate Kavanaughs statement. Spin it any way you like. Matters not to me.

I would not vote to confirm for entirely other reasons.
__________________
"I've seen more Bigfoot creatures than Mountain Lions and Wolves combined here in KY." ― ChrisBFRPKY

"I've observed 1 creature eating bark from a pine tree and enjoying like it was cotton candy." ― ChrisBFRPKY
River is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 02:43 PM   #460
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,589
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
I'll tell you what weighs heavily in her favour for me... she repeatedly asked for an FBI investigation. People who are knowingly telling lies simply don't do that.

Yeah. They do. Let's leave aside the false dichotomy between her story being true versus her knowingly telling lies. Even people who are knowingly telling lies will brashly proclaim their innocence, inviting investigations, claiming they have nothing to hide.



People who are lying are sure that there's no way anyone can catch them in their lies.
Meadmaker is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 02:47 PM   #461
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 12,741
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Good thing River said "support".
Irrelevant, since they don't "support" Kavanaugh either.

As I said, earlier, I do not remember the Berlin Wall coming down. That does not support, confirm or prove that it never happened; the only thing it supports is that I don't remember it happening.
__________________
"You can't promote principled anti-corruption action without pissing-off corrupt people!" - George Kent on Day one of the Trump Impeachment Hearings
If you don't like my posts, my opinions, or my directness then put me on your ignore list.
This will be of benefit to both of us; you won't have to take umbrage at my posts, and I won't have to waste my time talking to you... simples! !
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 02:48 PM   #462
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,493
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Good thing River said "support", rather than either of the words you used.
Then let me amend my statement to "Their statements support neither Kavanaugh's nor Ford's claims."
Not remembering something is neutral in supporting either claim.
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 02:50 PM   #463
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,962
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
Irrelevant, since they don't "support" Kavanaugh either.

As I said, earlier, I do not remember the Berlin Wall coming down. That does not support, confirm or prove that it never happened; the only thing it supports is that I don't remember it happening.

I don't remember farting in your general direction. Does that mean it never happened?
__________________
"I've seen more Bigfoot creatures than Mountain Lions and Wolves combined here in KY." ― ChrisBFRPKY

"I've observed 1 creature eating bark from a pine tree and enjoying like it was cotton candy." ― ChrisBFRPKY
River is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 02:54 PM   #464
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,962
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Then let me amend my statement to "Their statements support neither Kavanaugh's nor Ford's claims."
Not remembering something is neutral in supporting either claim.
Quote:
“I have no memory of this alleged incident,” “do not recall the party” and “never saw Brett act in the manner Dr. Ford describes.” Mark Judge


Patrick J. Smyth, identified by Ford as being among those downstairs at the party, says “I have no knowledge of the party in question; nor do I have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct she has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh.”


“Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, without, Dr. Ford.”

How are the witnesses supposed to recall something if it never happened? (if Ford made it up) These statements support what Kavanaugh claims, despite the liberal offense taken to it.
__________________
"I've seen more Bigfoot creatures than Mountain Lions and Wolves combined here in KY." ― ChrisBFRPKY

"I've observed 1 creature eating bark from a pine tree and enjoying like it was cotton candy." ― ChrisBFRPKY
River is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 02:57 PM   #465
The Big Dog
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
P.J. said that he had “no knowledge” that the party ever happened and further said that he had never seen BK act improperly toward women.

That ain’t nuetral folks, that is clearly against Ford.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 03:01 PM   #466
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,493
Originally Posted by River View Post
The witness statements DO corroborate the statement made by Kavanaugh. They do not corroborate Ford.

Do they disprove Ford? Nope.

Fords testimony/allegations alone are what they are, a stand alone accusation with no corroborating evidence. I could say the same thing about Kavanaugh, and without any evidence or corroborating witnesses you're left with the same thing we have here. He said she said. Only, she named witnesses that could not corroborate what her statement was. Their statements did in fact corroborate Kavanaughs statement. Spin it any way you like. Matters not to me.

I would not vote to confirm for entirely other reasons.
No matter how many times you say it, does not make it true.
How does not remembering something support BK 's claim that the party never happened in the first place? Corroboration would be if BK could show he was out of the area for the entire summer of 1982 so he could not have been at any such party. People saying they don't remember a party 36 years ago does not support that it never happened. It's a simple thing. I don't know why you refute that. Or do you think you remember every uneventful, spontaneous, small get together you attended during a summer 36 years ago?
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 03:05 PM   #467
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 10,022
I will admit, after looking at transcripts provided, that Kavanaugh did eventually categorically deny that he ever blacked out. But absent a transcript, I don't rely on media summaries. This isn't because they are "fake news." It's because 30 years as an editor taught me that paraphrased quotes often get distorted and are further distorted when people start paraphrasing the paraphrasing. "Mark Judge does not remember such a party" becomes "Mark Judge said it never happened." (I'm paraphrasing).

But I still see evasion on Kavanaugh's part in the way he answered. Especially when he was asked if he'd ever blacked out and he said to the questioner, "Have you?" Also, the way he used so many words and went off on so many tangents to avoid a categorical "no." I give him a strange kind of credit for this.

Bernie Sanders' letter above lays out well the questions that Kavanaugh's testimony has raised.

As far as who in the Ford camp "leaked" - it doesn't matter. It's not illegal and it is largely irrelevant. It's not a smoking gun proving that Democrats are using delaying tactics, but even if it were, so what? Graham, McConnell, Flake, even the lionized McCain embraced blatant obstructionism many times. Dems unanimously approved Scalia and Kennedy, and didn't raise too many questions regarding Gorsuch. Kavanaugh is just an especially bad pick, IMO. Not all loyal legal beagles belong on the Supreme Court.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 03:05 PM   #468
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 4,106
River knows that Kavanaugh was lying in his testimony, Thursday.

River, if the above does not properly reflect your views, then please state them more accurately.
I Am The Scum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 03:06 PM   #469
Aridas
Crazy Little Green Dragon
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 5,557
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Please note my use of "and/or". Judge never claimed the party did not happen but his statement that "I never saw Brett act in the manner Dr. Ford describes," is just another way of saying it never happened as Ford says he was in the room. How could he see the assault and then claim he never say K act in the manner Dr. Ford describes?
Blackout drunk is certainly still an available option, especially if he was indeed just as drunk as Kavanaugh was claimed to be. Mark Judge is certainly on record as admitting to have acted badly with women while blackout drunk on other occasions.
__________________
So sayeth the crazy little dragon.
Aridas is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 03:06 PM   #470
AnonyMoose
Muse
 
AnonyMoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Land of the Frozen Chosen
Posts: 605
No one ever saw Jeffrey Dahmer eat all those body parts. Therefore, Jeffrey Dahmer never did such a thing.


I never saw my neighbour punch his wife in the face. Therefore, he never acted improperly towards his wife.


I don't remember when, where, or how Carl Sagan died. Therefore, he must still be alive.


I never saw that bear sh** in the forest. Therefore, it didn't happen.
__________________
"Some mornings it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps." ~ Emo Phillips
AnonyMoose is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 03:07 PM   #471
crescent
Illuminator
 
crescent's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,210
Originally Posted by Tsukasa Buddha View Post
Linky.

If they aren't even allowed to interview Ford (or even Kavanaugh?), that will strengthen the claim that the White House is forcing a sham investigation.
IINO - Investigation In Name Only

We've been had, there is essentially no investigation

Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
P.J. said that he had “no knowledge” that the party ever happened and further said that he had never seen BK act improperly toward women.
I have no knowledge that you were ever born, I never saw it happen.

And yet, here you are....
crescent is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 03:08 PM   #472
The Big Dog
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
I see that the leftists are trying to flip the burden onto the accused.

Now BK has to show he was out of town the whole time . Sure he was out of town most weekends or at other events, but that is not corroboration, I guess, guilty until proven innocent.

Last edited by The Big Dog; 30th September 2018 at 03:10 PM.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 03:10 PM   #473
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,493
Quote:
“I have no memory of this alleged incident,” “do not recall the party” and “never saw Brett act in the manner Dr. Ford describes.” Mark Judge
Exactly! He has no memory of it, does not recall. He does not say "This party never happened". Also remember that MJ was a blackout drunk at that time by his own admission. There's a reason whey people who don't want to answer questions use the "I don't recall" line. It's neither a denial nor a confirmation.


Quote:
Patrick J. Smyth, identified by Ford as being among those downstairs at the party, says “I have no knowledge of the party in question; nor do I have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct she has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh.”
Again, he never says the party did not happen. If he wasn't in the room, how could he have knowledge of it?
Quote:
“Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, without, Dr. Ford.”

If she only met BK once 36 years ago, why should she remember it? Do you remember everyone you were at a party with 36 years ago? Again, she has no recollection of it. She does not say the party or the assault never happened. But she does say she believes Ford.

Quote:
“I have no memory of this alleged incident,” “do not recall the party” and “never saw Brett act in the manner Dr. Ford describes.” Mark Judge


Patrick J. Smyth, identified by Ford as being among those downstairs at the party, says “I have no knowledge of the party in question; nor do I have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct she has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh.”

There's a reason why people who don't want to answer questions use the "I don't recall" line. It's neither a denial nor a confirmation. Jeff Sessions Said “I Don’t Remember” or “I Don’t Recall” 26 Times During Senate Intel Testimony.
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 03:11 PM   #474
The Big Dog
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
Originally Posted by crescent View Post
IINO - Investigation In Name Only

We've been had, there is essentially no investigation



I have no knowledge that you were ever born, I never saw it happen.

And yet, here you are....
I didn’t say you were at my birth, now did I?
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 03:12 PM   #475
AnonyMoose
Muse
 
AnonyMoose's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Land of the Frozen Chosen
Posts: 605
Originally Posted by The Big Dog View Post
Now BK has to show he was out of town the wholesome. Sure he was out of town most weekends or at other events, but that is not corroboration, I guess, guilty suspected until proven innocent.

FTFY.

Ever heard of the word "suspect" ?

No ? Then maybe you should look it up.
__________________
"Some mornings it's just not worth chewing through the leather straps." ~ Emo Phillips
AnonyMoose is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 03:13 PM   #476
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,493
Originally Posted by Meadmaker View Post
Good thing River said "support", rather than either of the words you used.
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Then let me amend my statement to "Their statements support neither Kavanaugh's nor Ford's claims."
Not remembering something is neutral in supporting either claim.
Quote:
cor·rob·o·rate
/kəˈräbəˌrāt/

verb

confirm or give support to (a statement, theory, or finding).
Being pedantic doesn't always work.
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 03:13 PM   #477
Minoosh
Penultimate Amazing
 
Minoosh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 10,022
Originally Posted by Stacyhs View Post
Then let me amend my statement to "Their statements support neither Kavanaugh's nor Ford's claims."
Not remembering something is neutral in supporting either claim.
Good luck with that. You're dealing with some highly motivated reasoning.
Minoosh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 03:19 PM   #478
The Big Dog
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 29,742
Originally Posted by AnonyMoose View Post
FTFY.

Ever heard of the word "suspect" ?

No ? Then maybe you should look it up.
Oh sorry, “suspected before proven innocent” it is then.

Most people know that the accused does not have to prove his innocence. Different rules for the targets of the leftists, I reckon.
The Big Dog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 03:19 PM   #479
Stacyhs
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Posts: 9,493
And the Oscar for Best Distortion of What Was Actually Said in an ISF Forum goes to....

(drum roll)

The Big Dog!
Stacyhs is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2018, 03:20 PM   #480
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 86,259
Originally Posted by River View Post
BREAKING NEWS!

Attachment 39000
Wow, that's hilar--- oh, sorry, that's right-wing humour, and like left-wing humour it's never funny.

But do go on, keep making fun of sexual assault. You clearly don't care about it.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 05:06 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.