Merged Kavanaugh/Ford OpinionComment threads for Oct 1

[iceberg]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general,

Your subjective opinion carries no legal weight and violates a multitude of citizen rights.

No. She claims that negatively altered her life and that would support that statement. Also, we would like to know if she has a pattern of untruthfulness which would certainly alter the facts of this case.

Her attorney was quick to deny the Senators the polygraph test done by the attorneys tester. They could only get the written report. I want to get the test papers and see how a real expert interprets them.

you won't find many math teachers giving you credit for an answer if they don't see your work.

 

[jc456]

Your subjective opinion carries no legal weight and violates a multitude of citizen rights.

you mean like the right to face your accuser?
the right to be innocent until proven guilty?

funny...the left only gives a fuck about rights when it suits their purposes.

Kavanaugh has not been charged with a crime, hence, his legal rights are not being jeopardized or challenged. He is, in fact, being given the opportunity to challenge allegations made by his accuser even though there is no real law to protect a person from another citizens allegations of wrongdoing other than civil actions. Kavanaugh is applying for a job. He is not on criminal trial. If he was applying for a job as a landscaper and someone told you to keep your doors locked because he was a thief, you would not have to prove he was a thief. You could decide not to hire him based on the comment and allegation of one person. Your subjective opinion would suffice legally to deny the applicant a job.

But it's the highest court of the land. The FBI MUST investigate her therapists notes recordings and any electronic correspondence as well

Under what legal doctrine or theory is the FBI allowed to ignore the constitutional laws that protect citizens?

Ask Michael Cohen or Paul Manafort

how about Flynn, Papadopolis, Carter Page?

 

[jc456]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general,

Your subjective opinion carries no legal weight and violates a multitude of citizen rights.

What rights does having to prove your mental state violate? What right does having to prove your baseless claims violate?

First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments.

you need to give more than spouting amendments bubba. tell us how?

Spouting amendments? How about if you just read them.

I know them, explain how any are violated. You said it not me bubba. Quote how they were violated.

Hence the verbiage Spout!!!!

 

[OldLady]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general, and especially much more information about the therapy sessions in which, by her own account, “she came to understand the incident as a trauma with lasting impact on her life.”

If you are in the process of derailing a Supreme Court nominee based on otherwise unsubstantiated allegations of sexual misconduct thirty-six years ago, and in that process giving the nominee a reputation as a rapist, it seems to me you have the moral obligation to either turn over all relevant evidence, or withdraw your allegation. In the absence of that evidence and any corroboration beyond her say-so, if I were a Senator I would ignore the allegations.

Rachel Mitchell Memo Lists Weaknesses in Ford Claim: READ | Heavy.com

You're suggesting she's mentally ill now? Good one.

She may be.

That's how she has managed to attain a Ph.D., be steadily employed as a researcher and professor and has concurrently raised a family. It doesn't seem that a "mental illness" serious enough to impact her credibility would allow her to function that way.

Maybe, but then there's the issue of her memory. Obtaining a Ph.D isn't that challenging...especially in psychology.

The memory (or lack thereof ) has been explained by cognition experts over and over again. Have you read none of them that have been linked here in the numerous threads?

 

[Camp]

• Perhaps most importantly, she does not remember how she got from the party back to her house.
  • Her inability to remember this detail raises significant questions.

No, it doesn't. I remember big important events but not who drove me to them. I was best man at my best friends wedding and can not remember who drove me there or who drove me home. Somebody did too ensure I did not drive, knowing there would be some drinking.

 

[jc456]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general, and especially much more information about the therapy sessions in which, by her own account, “she came to understand the incident as a trauma with lasting impact on her life.”

If you are in the process of derailing a Supreme Court nominee based on otherwise unsubstantiated allegations of sexual misconduct thirty-six years ago, and in that process giving the nominee a reputation as a rapist, it seems to me you have the moral obligation to either turn over all relevant evidence, or withdraw your allegation. In the absence of that evidence and any corroboration beyond her say-so, if I were a Senator I would ignore the allegations.

Rachel Mitchell Memo Lists Weaknesses in Ford Claim: READ | Heavy.com

You're suggesting she's mentally ill now? Good one.

She may be.

That's how she has managed to attain a Ph.D., be steadily employed as a researcher and professor and has concurrently raised a family. It doesn't seem that a "mental illness" serious enough to impact her credibility would allow her to function that way.

Maybe, but then there's the issue of her memory. Obtaining a Ph.D isn't that challenging...especially in psychology.

The memory (or lack thereof ) has been explained by cognition experts over and over again. Have you read none of them that have been linked here in the numerous threads?

nonsense. corroboration is needed. not memory recall.

 

[Thinker101]

• Perhaps most importantly, she does not remember how she got from the party back to her house.
  • Her inability to remember this detail raises significant questions.

No, it doesn't. I remember big important events but not who drove me to them. I was best man at my best friends wedding and can not remember who drove me there or who drove me home. Somebody did too ensure I did not drive, knowing there would be some drinking.

Yup, apparently being a drunk does have some disadvantages.

 

[AzogtheDefiler]

• Perhaps most importantly, she does not remember how she got from the party back to her house.
  • Her inability to remember this detail raises significant questions.

No, it doesn't. I remember big important events but not who drove me to them. I was best man at my best friends wedding and can not remember who drove me there or who drove me home. Somebody did too ensure I did not drive, knowing there would be some drinking.

How is that possible? This is not even coming from me but from a trained prosecutor. How do you not remember who drove you to and from a party at a time with no cell phones? LOL.

 

[jc456]

• Perhaps most importantly, she does not remember how she got from the party back to her house.
  • Her inability to remember this detail raises significant questions.

No, it doesn't. I remember big important events but not who drove me to them. I was best man at my best friends wedding and can not remember who drove me there or who drove me home. Somebody did too ensure I did not drive, knowing there would be some drinking.

but, you remember being driven. she can't even say that. I don't care about your memories, I care about the lack of hers. I don't punish any person for only and accusation and no evidence. I just don't. you I supposed do. you should move to another country if that's how you wish the rule of law to be.

 

[Camp]

Your subjective opinion carries no legal weight and violates a multitude of citizen rights.

What rights does having to prove your mental state violate? What right does having to prove your baseless claims violate?

First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments.

you need to give more than spouting amendments bubba. tell us how?

Spouting amendments? How about if you just read them.

I know them, explain how any are violated. You said it not me bubba. Quote how they were violated.

Hence the verbiage Spout!!!!

You do not know them or you would not be making your silly request. The first covers free speech, the fourth covers illegal search and seizures and rhe fifth covers self-incrimination.

 

[jc456]

Amy Klobuchar loves to drink beer for breakfast. I saw a video on the Joe Pags show Friday her making the statement at a state fair interview. hly shit, can't make this shit up. here's a lady obviously who loves to drink for breakfast asking a nominee about his drinking habits and hers seem quite concerning to me now.

 

[jc456]

What rights does having to prove your mental state violate? What right does having to prove your baseless claims violate?

First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments.

you need to give more than spouting amendments bubba. tell us how?

Spouting amendments? How about if you just read them.

I know them, explain how any are violated. You said it not me bubba. Quote how they were violated.

Hence the verbiage Spout!!!!

You do not know them or you would not be making your silly request. The first covers free speech, the fourth covers illegal search and seizures and rhe fifth covers self-incrimination.

I said, I knew them, I asked you to say what violated them in the statements in the thread. so far you've just been dancing.

 

[2aguy]

Not....a.....court....of....law.....it's....a....job....interview.

`
I don't think the hyper partisan right gets that message. They keep bringing up courtroom terminology (which most don't understand and just parrot) that is not applicable to this hearing. The FBI will not ask Ford for her therapy documents as they have nothing to do with this hearing....except in the minds of the partisan online legal experts. (the FBI is not reaching a decision or recommendation. They are just compiling the investigation directly related to Kavanaugh and reporting on it) The interview committee will not ask for those documents either, for the same reason.

And still, they persist.

She made allegations against an innocent man, and she brought out her Therapy notes as confirming her story....so sorry, they should be given up to be evaluated as to her mental state.......you people are disgusting.

 

[2aguy]

In America the accused get to cross examine their accuser.

Since she refuses, her allegation should be ignored.

Not....a.....court....of....law.....it's....a....job....interview.

Sorry, moron, at a job interview you are not subject to a 5 year jail sentence if you lie...this is far more than a job interview.....

 

[LordBrownTrout]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general, and especially much more information about the therapy sessions in which, by her own account, “she came to understand the incident as a trauma with lasting impact on her life.”

If you are in the process of derailing a Supreme Court nominee based on otherwise unsubstantiated allegations of sexual misconduct thirty-six years ago, and in that process giving the nominee a reputation as a rapist, it seems to me you have the moral obligation to either turn over all relevant evidence, or withdraw your allegation. In the absence of that evidence and any corroboration beyond her say-so, if I were a Senator I would ignore the allegations.

Rachel Mitchell Memo Lists Weaknesses in Ford Claim: READ | Heavy.com

You're suggesting she's mentally ill now? Good one.

She may be.

That's how she has managed to attain a Ph.D., be steadily employed as a researcher and professor and has concurrently raised a family. It doesn't seem that a "mental illness" serious enough to impact her credibility would allow her to function that way.

Maybe, but then there's the issue of her memory. Obtaining a Ph.D isn't that challenging...especially in psychology.

The memory (or lack thereof ) has been explained by cognition experts over and over again. Have you read none of them that have been linked here in the numerous threads?

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general, and especially much more information about the therapy sessions in which, by her own account, “she came to understand the incident as a trauma with lasting impact on her life.”

If you are in the process of derailing a Supreme Court nominee based on otherwise unsubstantiated allegations of sexual misconduct thirty-six years ago, and in that process giving the nominee a reputation as a rapist, it seems to me you have the moral obligation to either turn over all relevant evidence, or withdraw your allegation. In the absence of that evidence and any corroboration beyond her say-so, if I were a Senator I would ignore the allegations.

Rachel Mitchell Memo Lists Weaknesses in Ford Claim: READ | Heavy.com

You're suggesting she's mentally ill now? Good one.

She may be.

That's how she has managed to attain a Ph.D., be steadily employed as a researcher and professor and has concurrently raised a family. It doesn't seem that a "mental illness" serious enough to impact her credibility would allow her to function that way.

Maybe, but then there's the issue of her memory. Obtaining a Ph.D isn't that challenging...especially in psychology.

The memory (or lack thereof ) has been explained by cognition experts over and over again. Have you read none of them that have been linked here in the numerous threads?

Yes, I know about cognition. Its just that she can't recall and no one can corroborate. Thats a problem.

 

[jc456]

Not....a.....court....of....law.....it's....a....job....interview.

`
I don't think the hyper partisan right gets that message. They keep bringing up courtroom terminology (which most don't understand and just parrot) that is not applicable to this hearing. The FBI will not ask Ford for her therapy documents as they have nothing to do with this hearing....except in the minds of the partisan online legal experts. (the FBI is not reaching a decision or recommendation. They are just compiling the investigation directly related to Kavanaugh and reporting on it) The interview committee will not ask for those documents either, for the same reason.

And still, they persist.

She made allegations against an innocent man, and she brought out her Therapy notes as confirming her story....so sorry, they should be given up to be evaluated as to her mental state.......you people are disgusting.

yes, she focused on her therapy hence opening the door to investigation. she also asked for the investigation. folks, one shouldn't volunteer information they don't wish to use, cause it puts themselves in the direct line of the investigation. just saying, open your mouth, pay the price.

 

[Camp]

• Perhaps most importantly, she does not remember how she got from the party back to her house.
  • Her inability to remember this detail raises significant questions.

No, it doesn't. I remember big important events but not who drove me to them. I was best man at my best friends wedding and can not remember who drove me there or who drove me home. Somebody did too ensure I did not drive, knowing there would be some drinking.

How is that possible? This is not even coming from me but from a trained prosecutor. How do you not remember who drove you to and from a party at a time with no cell phones? LOL.

As I remember those times way back before cell phones, we teenagers would generally hang out at one of our hangouts and wait for someone with a car to offer us a ride.

 

[jc456]

The credibility of her allegation against Judge Kavanaugh cannot be accurately assessed without access to her therapy and psychiatric history in general, and especially much more information about the therapy sessions in which, by her own account, “she came to understand the incident as a trauma with lasting impact on her life.”

If you are in the process of derailing a Supreme Court nominee based on otherwise unsubstantiated allegations of sexual misconduct thirty-six years ago, and in that process giving the nominee a reputation as a rapist, it seems to me you have the moral obligation to either turn over all relevant evidence, or withdraw your allegation. In the absence of that evidence and any corroboration beyond her say-so, if I were a Senator I would ignore the allegations.

Rachel Mitchell Memo Lists Weaknesses in Ford Claim: READ | Heavy.com

You're suggesting she's mentally ill now? Good one.

She may be.

That's how she has managed to attain a Ph.D., be steadily employed as a researcher and professor and has concurrently raised a family. It doesn't seem that a "mental illness" serious enough to impact her credibility would allow her to function that way.

Maybe, but then there's the issue of her memory. Obtaining a Ph.D isn't that challenging...especially in psychology.

The memory (or lack thereof ) has been explained by cognition experts over and over again. Have you read none of them that have been linked here in the numerous threads?

Are you saying that every prisoner that was falsely accused shouldn't be allowed out of jail? cause they were falsely accused?

 

[jc456]

• Perhaps most importantly, she does not remember how she got from the party back to her house.
  • Her inability to remember this detail raises significant questions.

No, it doesn't. I remember big important events but not who drove me to them. I was best man at my best friends wedding and can not remember who drove me there or who drove me home. Somebody did too ensure I did not drive, knowing there would be some drinking.

How is that possible? This is not even coming from me but from a trained prosecutor. How do you not remember who drove you to and from a party at a time with no cell phones? LOL.

As I remember those times way back before cell phones, we teenagers would generally hang out at one of our hangouts and wait for someone with a car to offer us a ride.

yep, and you should know who they were if you use it in an accusation. She should have had this all ready to go. and yet. hmmmmmmmm let's research her credit card records on where she was in July.

 

[LordBrownTrout]

You're suggesting she's mentally ill now? Good one.

She may be.

That's how she has managed to attain a Ph.D., be steadily employed as a researcher and professor and has concurrently raised a family. It doesn't seem that a "mental illness" serious enough to impact her credibility would allow her to function that way.

Maybe, but then there's the issue of her memory. Obtaining a Ph.D isn't that challenging...especially in psychology.

The memory (or lack thereof ) has been explained by cognition experts over and over again. Have you read none of them that have been linked here in the numerous threads?

Are you saying that every prisoner that was falsely accused shouldn't be allowed out of jail? cause they were falsely accused?

Libs always said they'd rather let a thousand criminals go instead of incriminating an innocent person. Lol. As long as they're a D, of course.