So here's what I think happened between Kavanaugh & Ford

[Clementine]

Having spent four fairly boozy years in college, having been to my share of college parties, and just having a fundamental understanding of that environment, here's what I think happened.

I think he was drunk and he dry humped her for "fun". Stupid, sophomoric, thoughtless, "fun". The mix of booze, testosterone and adrenaline can make a young guy do some pretty stupid shit, and you can DOUBLE that when a buddy is there. He and his buddy laughed about it, and maybe she hid her horror by not acting like she had been attacked. Ask them about it a week later, and they may or may not have remembered it.

Different people (men and women) are sensitive to entirely different things. Clearly this really, profoundly hurt Ford, even though he was clowning around. It wasn't a rape, it wasn't an attempted rape, it was a short, stupid, ignorant act by a drunk kid who was showing off and should have fucking known better. Some women would have laughed it off, some would not, and there is no right or wrong response to it.

Should that disqualify any candidate, three decades later, nominated by a President from either party, for the Supreme Court? Not in my book, but it certainly provides a pretty good excuse for partisans of the opposite party nowadays.

My two cents. Yours?
.

People Ford claimed were there have not backed up her story. Two other guys stated they were there but Kavanaugh was not. Also, her total lack of details is problematic. Not to mention the claim about calling on a cell phone in 1982.

Even if she was correct, it just doesn't sound like a huge deal. They were young and stupid. And drunk.

I suspect that she is a militant leftist who was willing to do anything to stop Kavanaugh. Considering how the left has completely overreacted about everything since the election, nothing surprises me anymore.

Then there is this video. I want to know what is in the envelope that Sheila Jackson Lee discretely handed Ford's lawyer after the hearing. Payment for a job well done? This whole thing stinks. It didn't matter who Trump picked for SCOTUS. The left was ready to attack before they even had a name.

 

[toobfreak]

View attachment 219320

Gotta admit, when you're right, you're right: Hillary is an EXPERT on cucumbers.

Really helps when you know you have the all of the legal bodies charged with prosecuting you actually in your hip pocket behind protecting you!

 

[Pogo]

BUT - I am also a student of human nature, and the sad fact is that some people will either be mistaken or lie, and women do it too. For a variety of reasons, from greed to politics, to revenge or resentment, a man or woman may deliberately mislead or outright lie if sufficiently motivated, and for some people it doesn't take a whole lot of motivation, lying comes fairly easily. Some say that the number of liars is insignificant; well, not really, there are studies that suggest the number of women who accused a man of rape or sexual misconduct only to be determined that it was false is as high as 30% or more. Not saying that is the case with Mrs Ford, I don't know her but she very well may feel that putting Brett Kavanaugh on the SCOTUS is unacceptable enough to lie. Note that her social media pages have been scrubbed, so her feelings about certain issues such as abortion (Roe v Wade) may well be quite strong. But why remove that information if it's fairly innocuous? Point #1 against.

Does not follow. At all. You just admitted you're entirely speculating on what was in those "scrubbed" posts (for which you provide no evidence) -- and then judging only one possible reason for why your speculations would have been scrubbed, completely disregarding others such as the expected invasions of privacy that have already taken place (such as having to vacate her own home) and partisan hackery such as we've seen right on this site calling her "slutting" and to be "countersued" and "jailed" and even questioning the texture of the skin on her neck. One klown posted in all caps right in this thread "SHE WAS ASKING FOR IT". So you've got a strawman/ipse dixit, followed by speculation, followed by a false dilemma.

 

[bripat9643]

Having spent four fairly boozy years in college, having been to my share of college parties, and just having a fundamental understanding of that environment, here's what I think happened.

I think he was drunk and he dry humped her for "fun". Stupid, sophomoric, thoughtless, "fun". The mix of booze, testosterone and adrenaline can make a young guy do some pretty stupid shit, and you can DOUBLE that when a buddy is there. He and his buddy laughed about it, and maybe she hid her horror by not acting like she had been attacked. Ask them about it a week later, and they may or may not have remembered it.

Different people (men and women) are sensitive to entirely different things. Clearly this really, profoundly hurt Ford, even though he was clowning around. It wasn't a rape, it wasn't an attempted rape, it was a short, stupid, ignorant act by a drunk kid who was showing off and should have fucking known better. Some women would have laughed it off, some would not, and there is no right or wrong response to it.

Should that disqualify any candidate, three decades later, nominated by a President from either party, for the Supreme Court? Not in my book, but it certainly provides a pretty good excuse for partisans of the opposite party nowadays.

My two cents. Yours?
.

I think a close, male relative has been abusing her since childhood

I'm more inclined to think something did happen. What pushed me in that direction was the way he danced around agreeing with calling for an FBI investigation. Merits of the investigation aside, he could have just wholeheartedly said, "yes, absolutely, let's do it", and he did not. He kept deflecting to "I called for a hearing". More than once. That didn't look good.

I'd just need more info to reach a conclusion.
.

That doesn't indicate anything to me other than that calling for an FBI investigation is playing right into the hands of the douchebags. You keep pretending that this FBI investigation is something legitimate and not a stall tactic, but we all know otherwise.

 

[OKTexas]

It is blatantly obvious that nothing happen between them. She didn't even hang in the same social circles as Kavanaugh. She is lying big time.

She was simply somebody that the Democrats found that was willing to lie about Kavanaugh. They needed to go back to high school because then it would be hard to prove that it never happen. He had too stellar of a reputation as an adult for the filthy Democrats to ever hang anything on him like a public hair in coke can or something.

She is a card carrying Moon Bat from a family of Moon Bats. Perfect lying bitch for the Democrats.

There is no evidence that she is "lying",
Similarly there is also no evidence that he is "lying".

There is however evidence that he would often get into situations of deep inebriation on "skis" to the point where he couldn't remember what had happened. In fact there is indication he still does. So it's entirely possible that when he says it never happened he is honestly relating what is in his memory.

--- which would mean nobody is "lying". As far as they know.

.

 

[bripat9643]

BUT - I am also a student of human nature, and the sad fact is that some people will either be mistaken or lie, and women do it too. For a variety of reasons, from greed to politics, to revenge or resentment, a man or woman may deliberately mislead or outright lie if sufficiently motivated, and for some people it doesn't take a whole lot of motivation, lying comes fairly easily. Some say that the number of liars is insignificant; well, not really, there are studies that suggest the number of women who accused a man of rape or sexual misconduct only to be determined that it was false is as high as 30% or more. Not saying that is the case with Mrs Ford, I don't know her but she very well may feel that putting Brett Kavanaugh on the SCOTUS is unacceptable enough to lie. Note that her social media pages have been scrubbed, so her feelings about certain issues such as abortion (Roe v Wade) may well be quite strong. But why remove that information if it's fairly innocuous? Point #1 against.

Does not follow. At all. You just admitted you're entirely speculating on what was in those "scrubbed" posts (for which you provide no evidence) -- and then judging only one possible reason for why your speculations would have been scrubbed, completely disregarding others such as the expected invasions of privacy that have already taken place (such as having to vacate her own home) and partisan hackery such as we've seen right on this site calling her "slutting" and to be "countersued" and "jailed" and even questioning the texture of the skin on her neck. One klown posted in all caps right in this thread "SHE WAS ASKING FOR IT". So you've got a strawman/ipse dixit, followed by speculation, followed by a false dilemma.

It was obviously something embarrassing to Ford. So what could it be? Cookie recipes?

 

[task0778]

Having spent four fairly boozy years in college, having been to my share of college parties, and just having a fundamental understanding of that environment, here's what I think happened.

I think he was drunk and he dry humped her for "fun". Stupid, sophomoric, thoughtless, "fun". The mix of booze, testosterone and adrenaline can make a young guy do some pretty stupid shit, and you can DOUBLE that when a buddy is there. He and his buddy laughed about it, and maybe she hid her horror by not acting like she had been attacked. Ask them about it a week later, and they may or may not have remembered it.

Different people (men and women) are sensitive to entirely different things. Clearly this really, profoundly hurt Ford, even though he was clowning around. It wasn't a rape, it wasn't an attempted rape, it was a short, stupid, ignorant act by a drunk kid who was showing off and should have fucking known better. Some women would have laughed it off, some would not, and there is no right or wrong response to it.

Should that disqualify any candidate, three decades later, nominated by a President from either party, for the Supreme Court? Not in my book, but it certainly provides a pretty good excuse for partisans of the opposite party nowadays.

My two cents. Yours?
.

I think a close, male relative has been abusing her since childhood

I'm more inclined to think something did happen. What pushed me in that direction was the way he danced around agreeing with calling for an FBI investigation. Merits of the investigation aside, he could have just wholeheartedly said, "yes, absolutely, let's do it", and he did not. He kept deflecting to "I called for a hearing". More than once. That didn't look good.

I'd just need more info to reach a conclusion.
.

That doesn't indicate anything to me other than that calling for an FBI investigation is playing right into the hands of the douchebags.

What do you do if your only choices are to play into the hands of the douchebags or go through with the vote when you don't have 50?

 

[OldLady]

Having spent four fairly boozy years in college, having been to my share of college parties, and just having a fundamental understanding of that environment, here's what I think happened.

I think he was drunk and he dry humped her for "fun". Stupid, sophomoric, thoughtless, "fun". The mix of booze, testosterone and adrenaline can make a young guy do some pretty stupid shit, and you can DOUBLE that when a buddy is there. He and his buddy laughed about it, and maybe she hid her horror by not acting like she had been attacked. Ask them about it a week later, and they may or may not have remembered it.

Different people (men and women) are sensitive to entirely different things. Clearly this really, profoundly hurt Ford, even though he was clowning around. It wasn't a rape, it wasn't an attempted rape, it was a short, stupid, ignorant act by a drunk kid who was showing off and should have fucking known better. Some women would have laughed it off, some would not, and there is no right or wrong response to it.

Should that disqualify any candidate, three decades later, nominated by a President from either party, for the Supreme Court? Not in my book, but it certainly provides a pretty good excuse for partisans of the opposite party nowadays.

My two cents. Yours?
.

I agree with the fundamental premise that Kavvy's behavior was partially inspired by juvenile recklessness. But your hypothesis is almost entirely a series of alleged events. There is no substantive link between the particulars that Ford has alleged and the particulars you are suggesting as an alternative, and no basis to invent these alternate allegations.

I see no reason to discount the fundamental story that Ford has told. I don't believe she is lying when she says she was pushed into the room by Judge, nor when she says that Kavvy covered her mouth to suppress her screams. Believing your suggestions requires that we either believe Ford is lying, or that her mind invented those things over time. Neither one is a justifiable hypothesis. And, incidentally, ends up essentially being the same tired "She's crazy, she's confused" excuses that have historically been used to marginalize women when they bring sexual assaults to light.

There's a fine line here, and I'm just trying to drill down a bit on it. Maybe a good term would be "perceived intent". I'm not trying to discount her story as much as I am theorizing a situation in which she reasonably perceived herself to be in grave danger when she in fact was not.

I can sure as hell picture a situation in which a drunk guy forces himself on a woman without actually intending to rape her. For him it's, maybe, aggressive, drunk, manly playfulness. For her, it's a fuckin' attack.

Such theorizing is dangerous on a highly partisan message board, granted, but what the hell.

And then, I think it's fair to question whether something that happened that long ago applies today. If my little story is close to being right, then I'd think he was being dishonest in his testimony, and that's that.
.

I can sure as hell picture a situation in which a drunk guy forces himself on a woman without actually intending to rape her. For him it's, maybe, aggressive, drunk, manly playfulness. For her, it's a fuckin' attack.
Manly playfulness? Forces himself on a woman without actually intending to rape her? What IS he doing, then, Mac?

 

[Pogo]

Could she truly believe her accusation, but be mistaken about who it was? I guess so, but she did seem pretty sure that it was him. Wasn't sure about anything else though, which raises another flag. Here's a guy sitting on the 2nd most important federal court in the land and she does nothing about it until he's nominated for the SCOTUS. Why'd she wait? Hard to understand that. Point #2 against.

Once again --- speculation. You don't know that she "waited" or "did nothing" at all. You already admitted you don't know her. So again --- fallacious. This is, again, trying to state a negative, which you cannot do. Hate to be the bearer of bad news but just because Numero Uno didn't hear about something ------- doesn't mean it never happened.

So, she's almost raped, and sufficiently traumatized about it to have serious emotional issues more 30+ years later. Am I to believe a 15 year old girl in that situation goes home and her parents don't realize the emotional state she's in? No torn clothing, no tears, no indication immediately or for the next 30 years that any such event took place? Her BFFs don't see any changes in her behavior, and she says nothing to nobody? I'm sorry, but it doesn't add up. Point #3 against.

You must not have experience around such women. And not much reading ability since her own story was more about suffocation than "almost raped". Nor do you seem to have noticed her mentions of the incident to her therapist and husband, which could not have been preplanned for an event (SCOTUS nomination) she had no way to know would happen in the future.

I mean that's right up there with O'bama's parents in Kenya planting newspaper stories in Honolulu papers in 1961 knowing that he'd be a POTUS candidate some day. Clearly you're starting out here with a predetermined conclusion and bending over backward to make it fit.

 

[bripat9643]

Having spent four fairly boozy years in college, having been to my share of college parties, and just having a fundamental understanding of that environment, here's what I think happened.

I think he was drunk and he dry humped her for "fun". Stupid, sophomoric, thoughtless, "fun". The mix of booze, testosterone and adrenaline can make a young guy do some pretty stupid shit, and you can DOUBLE that when a buddy is there. He and his buddy laughed about it, and maybe she hid her horror by not acting like she had been attacked. Ask them about it a week later, and they may or may not have remembered it.

Different people (men and women) are sensitive to entirely different things. Clearly this really, profoundly hurt Ford, even though he was clowning around. It wasn't a rape, it wasn't an attempted rape, it was a short, stupid, ignorant act by a drunk kid who was showing off and should have fucking known better. Some women would have laughed it off, some would not, and there is no right or wrong response to it.

Should that disqualify any candidate, three decades later, nominated by a President from either party, for the Supreme Court? Not in my book, but it certainly provides a pretty good excuse for partisans of the opposite party nowadays.

My two cents. Yours?
.

I think a close, male relative has been abusing her since childhood

I'm more inclined to think something did happen. What pushed me in that direction was the way he danced around agreeing with calling for an FBI investigation. Merits of the investigation aside, he could have just wholeheartedly said, "yes, absolutely, let's do it", and he did not. He kept deflecting to "I called for a hearing". More than once. That didn't look good.

I'd just need more info to reach a conclusion.

He also kept deflecting to "I'm happy with whatever the Committee wants to do" --- knowing that, at the time, Chairman Grassley was not going to permit an FBI investigation. That phrasing told us much.

But you're correct, he never did express a willingness to call in the FBI directly. He even sat in stony silence at least once when the offer was made to state that and wouldn't say anything.

The Dim douchebags want an FBI investigation so they can stall and dig up more bimbos to lie. They need a good week to put a story together that will hold water. So far they have utterly failed. Quit pretending that anything the Dims want is legitimate in any way. They are sleazy lying scum who are trying to destroy Kavanaugh anyway they can.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Having spent four fairly boozy years in college, having been to my share of college parties, and just having a fundamental understanding of that environment, here's what I think happened.

I think he was drunk and he dry humped her for "fun". Stupid, sophomoric, thoughtless, "fun". The mix of booze, testosterone and adrenaline can make a young guy do some pretty stupid shit, and you can DOUBLE that when a buddy is there. He and his buddy laughed about it, and maybe she hid her horror by not acting like she had been attacked. Ask them about it a week later, and they may or may not have remembered it.

Different people (men and women) are sensitive to entirely different things. Clearly this really, profoundly hurt Ford, even though he was clowning around. It wasn't a rape, it wasn't an attempted rape, it was a short, stupid, ignorant act by a drunk kid who was showing off and should have fucking known better. Some women would have laughed it off, some would not, and there is no right or wrong response to it.

Should that disqualify any candidate, three decades later, nominated by a President from either party, for the Supreme Court? Not in my book, but it certainly provides a pretty good excuse for partisans of the opposite party nowadays.

My two cents. Yours?
.

I think a close, male relative has been abusing her since childhood

I'm more inclined to think something did happen. What pushed me in that direction was the way he danced around agreeing with calling for an FBI investigation. Merits of the investigation aside, he could have just wholeheartedly said, "yes, absolutely, let's do it", and he did not. He kept deflecting to "I called for a hearing". More than once. That didn't look good.

I'd just need more info to reach a conclusion.
.

That's fucking ridiculous. Who would ever do that? What an absurd standard

 

[pismoe]

Having spent four fairly boozy years in college, having been to my share of college parties, and just having a fundamental understanding of that environment, here's what I think happened.

I think he was drunk and he dry humped her for "fun". Stupid, sophomoric, thoughtless, "fun". The mix of booze, testosterone and adrenaline can make a young guy do some pretty stupid shit, and you can DOUBLE that when a buddy is there. He and his buddy laughed about it, and maybe she hid her horror by not acting like she had been attacked. Ask them about it a week later, and they may or may not have remembered it.

Different people (men and women) are sensitive to entirely different things. Clearly this really, profoundly hurt Ford, even though he was clowning around. It wasn't a rape, it wasn't an attempted rape, it was a short, stupid, ignorant act by a drunk kid who was showing off and should have fucking known better. Some women would have laughed it off, some would not, and there is no right or wrong response to it.

Should that disqualify any candidate, three decades later, nominated by a President from either party, for the Supreme Court? Not in my book, but it certainly provides a pretty good excuse for partisans of the opposite party nowadays.

My two cents. Yours?
.

Entirely possible but unprovable, therefore irrelevant, short of either Ford producing movies of the event or Kavanaugh himself coming out and saying: "Hell ya, I did that!" Time to confirm the poor guy and move on to other business.

I think what really happened is, sadly, irrelevant at this point. Dems have a vested interest in keeping the MeToo™ movement stoked up until the election.

Past. Way past. Calling out sexual abusers is the new normal.

-------------------------------------------- its just a snare ready to snag a male or other type human . Reporting Criminal has always been a matter for Adults to report to police or the Authorities . Its my opinion that women just want a Special Status of being Believed even with 36 year old unprovable accusations Synth .

 

[Mac1958]

Having spent four fairly boozy years in college, having been to my share of college parties, and just having a fundamental understanding of that environment, here's what I think happened.

I think he was drunk and he dry humped her for "fun". Stupid, sophomoric, thoughtless, "fun". The mix of booze, testosterone and adrenaline can make a young guy do some pretty stupid shit, and you can DOUBLE that when a buddy is there. He and his buddy laughed about it, and maybe she hid her horror by not acting like she had been attacked. Ask them about it a week later, and they may or may not have remembered it.

Different people (men and women) are sensitive to entirely different things. Clearly this really, profoundly hurt Ford, even though he was clowning around. It wasn't a rape, it wasn't an attempted rape, it was a short, stupid, ignorant act by a drunk kid who was showing off and should have fucking known better. Some women would have laughed it off, some would not, and there is no right or wrong response to it.

Should that disqualify any candidate, three decades later, nominated by a President from either party, for the Supreme Court? Not in my book, but it certainly provides a pretty good excuse for partisans of the opposite party nowadays.

My two cents. Yours?
.

I agree with the fundamental premise that Kavvy's behavior was partially inspired by juvenile recklessness. But your hypothesis is almost entirely a series of alleged events. There is no substantive link between the particulars that Ford has alleged and the particulars you are suggesting as an alternative, and no basis to invent these alternate allegations.

I see no reason to discount the fundamental story that Ford has told. I don't believe she is lying when she says she was pushed into the room by Judge, nor when she says that Kavvy covered her mouth to suppress her screams. Believing your suggestions requires that we either believe Ford is lying, or that her mind invented those things over time. Neither one is a justifiable hypothesis. And, incidentally, ends up essentially being the same tired "She's crazy, she's confused" excuses that have historically been used to marginalize women when they bring sexual assaults to light.

There's a fine line here, and I'm just trying to drill down a bit on it. Maybe a good term would be "perceived intent". I'm not trying to discount her story as much as I am theorizing a situation in which she reasonably perceived herself to be in grave danger when she in fact was not.

I can sure as hell picture a situation in which a drunk guy forces himself on a woman without actually intending to rape her. For him it's, maybe, aggressive, drunk, manly playfulness. For her, it's a fuckin' attack.

Such theorizing is dangerous on a highly partisan message board, granted, but what the hell.

And then, I think it's fair to question whether something that happened that long ago applies today. If my little story is close to being right, then I'd think he was being dishonest in his testimony, and that's that.
.

I can sure as hell picture a situation in which a drunk guy forces himself on a woman without actually intending to rape her. For him it's, maybe, aggressive, drunk, manly playfulness. For her, it's a fuckin' attack.
Manly playfulness? Forces himself on a woman without actually intending to rape her? What IS he doing, then, Mac?

Showing off. Being an asshole. I don't know about you, but I saw stuff not terribly unlike this, and varying degrees of this shit happens every weekend on college campuses.

I'm not condoning or pardoning it. I have two daughters. I just don't see life as a simple, binary, either/or thing. That's just not the way my little brain works.
.

 

[bripat9643]

Having spent four fairly boozy years in college, having been to my share of college parties, and just having a fundamental understanding of that environment, here's what I think happened.

I think he was drunk and he dry humped her for "fun". Stupid, sophomoric, thoughtless, "fun". The mix of booze, testosterone and adrenaline can make a young guy do some pretty stupid shit, and you can DOUBLE that when a buddy is there. He and his buddy laughed about it, and maybe she hid her horror by not acting like she had been attacked. Ask them about it a week later, and they may or may not have remembered it.

Different people (men and women) are sensitive to entirely different things. Clearly this really, profoundly hurt Ford, even though he was clowning around. It wasn't a rape, it wasn't an attempted rape, it was a short, stupid, ignorant act by a drunk kid who was showing off and should have fucking known better. Some women would have laughed it off, some would not, and there is no right or wrong response to it.

Should that disqualify any candidate, three decades later, nominated by a President from either party, for the Supreme Court? Not in my book, but it certainly provides a pretty good excuse for partisans of the opposite party nowadays.

My two cents. Yours?
.

I agree with the fundamental premise that Kavvy's behavior was partially inspired by juvenile recklessness. But your hypothesis is almost entirely a series of alternate alleged events. There is no substantive link between the particulars that Ford has alleged and the particulars you are suggesting as an alternative, and no basis to invent these alternate allegations.

I see no reason to discount the fundamental story that Ford has told. I don't believe she is lying when she says she was pushed into the room by Judge, nor when she says that Kavvy covered her mouth to suppress her screams. Believing your suggestions requires that we either believe Ford is lying, or that her mind invented those things over time. Neither one is a justifiable hypothesis. And, incidentally, ends up essentially being the same tired "She's crazy, she's confused" excuses that have historically been used to marginalize women when they bring sexual assaults to light.

Why do you believe her and not Judge? This is just another variation of "guilty until proven innocent." Your theory requires Judge to be lying. I'm far more inclined to believe him than to believe her. She admits she was so drunk she can't remember anything clearly.

I have no trouble believing Ford is lying. She has been well paid for lying.

 

[Mac1958]

Having spent four fairly boozy years in college, having been to my share of college parties, and just having a fundamental understanding of that environment, here's what I think happened.

I think he was drunk and he dry humped her for "fun". Stupid, sophomoric, thoughtless, "fun". The mix of booze, testosterone and adrenaline can make a young guy do some pretty stupid shit, and you can DOUBLE that when a buddy is there. He and his buddy laughed about it, and maybe she hid her horror by not acting like she had been attacked. Ask them about it a week later, and they may or may not have remembered it.

Different people (men and women) are sensitive to entirely different things. Clearly this really, profoundly hurt Ford, even though he was clowning around. It wasn't a rape, it wasn't an attempted rape, it was a short, stupid, ignorant act by a drunk kid who was showing off and should have fucking known better. Some women would have laughed it off, some would not, and there is no right or wrong response to it.

Should that disqualify any candidate, three decades later, nominated by a President from either party, for the Supreme Court? Not in my book, but it certainly provides a pretty good excuse for partisans of the opposite party nowadays.

My two cents. Yours?
.

I think a close, male relative has been abusing her since childhood

I'm more inclined to think something did happen. What pushed me in that direction was the way he danced around agreeing with calling for an FBI investigation. Merits of the investigation aside, he could have just wholeheartedly said, "yes, absolutely, let's do it", and he did not. He kept deflecting to "I called for a hearing". More than once. That didn't look good.

I'd just need more info to reach a conclusion.
.

That's fucking ridiculous. Who would ever do that? What an absurd standard

Why?
.

 

[Pogo]

Somebody had to take her to the party and take her home that night. Who? If there's one person who could validate her state after she left the party after being assaulted, that's the person. But she doesn't remember who it was. And everybody in America knows about her and this story by now, but nobody has come forward and tell us about how Ford was acting on the way home. Then there's the problem with the dates and places, she doesn't know exactly where or when and never reported the attack to anybody. I understand that, it can't be easy to do that, especially when you're 15 but damn, you can't just say well she claims this so it must be true. Point #4.

We've already done this to death. There is nothing memorable about "a ride home". There isn't particularly anything memorable about a small party where some kids drunk and everybody gets a ride home. Neither would be worthy of memory. There IS on the other hand much to remember about suffocating from a hand being placed over one's mouth with a bigger older person on top of them in a locked room. A hell of a lot. This argument of not remembering the journey home has never had merit.

Matter of fact any such journey would be even less likely to be recalled since during that journey the events in the bedroom would have been forefront in the victim's mind. Far more likely is that the car driver would end up saying "Christine? Christine? We're here" because she hadn't noticed.

rapists don't rape somebody when they're 17 and then never do it again

And again with the reading comprehension --- this isn't a rape. But drunks who get smashed to the point of puking, blacking out and having to reconstruct what went down during that period, *DO* do it again. And as Kavanaugh confirmed, he does.

 

[Stormy Daniels]

Having spent four fairly boozy years in college, having been to my share of college parties, and just having a fundamental understanding of that environment, here's what I think happened.

I think he was drunk and he dry humped her for "fun". Stupid, sophomoric, thoughtless, "fun". The mix of booze, testosterone and adrenaline can make a young guy do some pretty stupid shit, and you can DOUBLE that when a buddy is there. He and his buddy laughed about it, and maybe she hid her horror by not acting like she had been attacked. Ask them about it a week later, and they may or may not have remembered it.

Different people (men and women) are sensitive to entirely different things. Clearly this really, profoundly hurt Ford, even though he was clowning around. It wasn't a rape, it wasn't an attempted rape, it was a short, stupid, ignorant act by a drunk kid who was showing off and should have fucking known better. Some women would have laughed it off, some would not, and there is no right or wrong response to it.

Should that disqualify any candidate, three decades later, nominated by a President from either party, for the Supreme Court? Not in my book, but it certainly provides a pretty good excuse for partisans of the opposite party nowadays.

My two cents. Yours?
.

I agree with the fundamental premise that Kavvy's behavior was partially inspired by juvenile recklessness. But your hypothesis is almost entirely a series of alleged events. There is no substantive link between the particulars that Ford has alleged and the particulars you are suggesting as an alternative, and no basis to invent these alternate allegations.

I see no reason to discount the fundamental story that Ford has told. I don't believe she is lying when she says she was pushed into the room by Judge, nor when she says that Kavvy covered her mouth to suppress her screams. Believing your suggestions requires that we either believe Ford is lying, or that her mind invented those things over time. Neither one is a justifiable hypothesis. And, incidentally, ends up essentially being the same tired "She's crazy, she's confused" excuses that have historically been used to marginalize women when they bring sexual assaults to light.

There's a fine line here, and I'm just trying to drill down a bit on it. Maybe a good term would be "perceived intent". I'm not trying to discount her story as much as I am theorizing a situation in which she reasonably perceived herself to be in grave danger when she in fact was not.

I can sure as hell picture a situation in which a drunk guy forces himself on a woman without actually intending to rape her. For him it's, maybe, aggressive, drunk, manly playfulness. For her, it's a fuckin' attack.

Such theorizing is dangerous on a highly partisan message board, granted, but what the hell.

And then, I think it's fair to question whether something that happened that long ago applies today. If my little story is close to being right, then I'd think he was being dishonest in his testimony, and that's that.
.

I'd have to largely agree with that. Along similar lines, I can't help but remember that Ford herself said that her fear was that Kavvy would accidentally kill her. It seems clear that she would concede that--to a certain extent--he may not have fully recognized the significance of his actions. Even then, I think we have to still balance that against the fact that she did not fully recognize the significance of his actions. As she's said, because he didn't actually rape her she told herself it wasn't really a big deal.

There are plenty of lines of inquiry that could end inconclusively trying to examine whether being drunk leads people to do things that are incompatible with their true nature, or reflective of their true nature. And plenty more about to the degree teenage immaturity implies a need for youthful correction or adult punishment. And while I'm not generally inclined to tolerate a "boys will be boys" defense I also think that it has to be remembered that teenagers of the 70s and early 80s were raised differently than those being raised today.

I think most people have been barking up the wrong tree over all of this. I'm not willing to say that Ford's allegations, even if true, are disqualifying. If Ford had reported the assault when it happened, and if he had been charged and convicted, he would have ended up with a sealed juvenile record, and none of us would be able to know about it now. Chances are, even despite all that, he would still have ended up in the same place and would still have been nominated now, but this story would not be on anyone's plate (and rightly so, because I don't think a single mistake from decades in one's past should hang over them forever). Maybe the sum total of the various allegations that seem to reach well into his adult life, but that is probably left as a separate discussion.

I think the credibility question is more important. And for my part, I've continually pointed to discrepancies that indicate he has lied under oath. Considering the wider context of his nomination and judicial history, his dishonesty is the most important matter.

 

[bripat9643]

Having spent four fairly boozy years in college, having been to my share of college parties, and just having a fundamental understanding of that environment, here's what I think happened.

I think he was drunk and he dry humped her for "fun". Stupid, sophomoric, thoughtless, "fun". The mix of booze, testosterone and adrenaline can make a young guy do some pretty stupid shit, and you can DOUBLE that when a buddy is there. He and his buddy laughed about it, and maybe she hid her horror by not acting like she had been attacked. Ask them about it a week later, and they may or may not have remembered it.

Different people (men and women) are sensitive to entirely different things. Clearly this really, profoundly hurt Ford, even though he was clowning around. It wasn't a rape, it wasn't an attempted rape, it was a short, stupid, ignorant act by a drunk kid who was showing off and should have fucking known better. Some women would have laughed it off, some would not, and there is no right or wrong response to it.

Should that disqualify any candidate, three decades later, nominated by a President from either party, for the Supreme Court? Not in my book, but it certainly provides a pretty good excuse for partisans of the opposite party nowadays.

My two cents. Yours?
.

I agree with the fundamental premise that Kavvy's behavior was partially inspired by juvenile recklessness. But your hypothesis is almost entirely a series of alleged events. There is no substantive link between the particulars that Ford has alleged and the particulars you are suggesting as an alternative, and no basis to invent these alternate allegations.

I see no reason to discount the fundamental story that Ford has told. I don't believe she is lying when she says she was pushed into the room by Judge, nor when she says that Kavvy covered her mouth to suppress her screams. Believing your suggestions requires that we either believe Ford is lying, or that her mind invented those things over time. Neither one is a justifiable hypothesis. And, incidentally, ends up essentially being the same tired "She's crazy, she's confused" excuses that have historically been used to marginalize women when they bring sexual assaults to light.

There's a fine line here, and I'm just trying to drill down a bit on it. Maybe a good term would be "perceived intent". I'm not trying to discount her story as much as I am theorizing a situation in which she reasonably perceived herself to be in grave danger when she in fact was not.

I can sure as hell picture a situation in which a drunk guy forces himself on a woman without actually intending to rape her. For him it's, maybe, aggressive, drunk, manly playfulness. For her, it's a fuckin' attack.

Such theorizing is dangerous on a highly partisan message board, granted, but what the hell.

And then, I think it's fair to question whether something that happened that long ago applies today. If my little story is close to being right, then I'd think he was being dishonest in his testimony, and that's that.
.

I can sure as hell picture a situation in which a drunk guy forces himself on a woman without actually intending to rape her. For him it's, maybe, aggressive, drunk, manly playfulness. For her, it's a fuckin' attack.
Manly playfulness? Forces himself on a woman without actually intending to rape her? What IS he doing, then, Mac?

Showing off. Being an asshole. I don't know about you, but I saw stuff not terribly unlike this, and varying degrees of this shit happens every weekend on college campuses.

I'm not condoning or pardoning it. I have two daughters. I just don't see life as a simple, binary, either/or thing. That's just not the way my little brain works.
.

The claim that women don't lie is absurd. Women lie and lie and lie. If there is one thing women lie about, it's their relations with men. They lie to men and they lie to their friends. I've witnessed it countless times. I could tell you stories about women lying that would curl your hair. I long ago quit believing anything women say about the opposite sex.

 

[pismoe]

Having spent four fairly boozy years in college, having been to my share of college parties, and just having a fundamental understanding of that environment, here's what I think happened.

I think he was drunk and he dry humped her for "fun". Stupid, sophomoric, thoughtless, "fun". The mix of booze, testosterone and adrenaline can make a young guy do some pretty stupid shit, and you can DOUBLE that when a buddy is there. He and his buddy laughed about it, and maybe she hid her horror by not acting like she had been attacked. Ask them about it a week later, and they may or may not have remembered it.

Different people (men and women) are sensitive to entirely different things. Clearly this really, profoundly hurt Ford, even though he was clowning around. It wasn't a rape, it wasn't an attempted rape, it was a short, stupid, ignorant act by a drunk kid who was showing off and should have fucking known better. Some women would have laughed it off, some would not, and there is no right or wrong response to it.

Should that disqualify any candidate, three decades later, nominated by a President from either party, for the Supreme Court? Not in my book, but it certainly provides a pretty good excuse for partisans of the opposite party nowadays.

My two cents. Yours?
.

People Ford claimed were there have not backed up her story. Two other guys stated they were there but Kavanaugh was not. Also, her total lack of details is problematic. Not to mention the claim about calling on a cell phone in 1982.

Even if she was correct, it just doesn't sound like a huge deal. They were young and stupid. And drunk.

I suspect that she is a militant leftist who was willing to do anything to stop Kavanaugh. Considering how the left has completely overreacted about everything since the election, nothing surprises me anymore.

Then there is this video. I want to know what is in the envelope that Sheila Jackson Lee discretely handed Ford's lawyer after the hearing. Payment for a job well done? This whole thing stinks. It didn't matter who Trump picked for SCOTUS. The left was ready to attack before they even had a name.

----------------------------------- heard the envelope contained note of encouragement . [who knows]

 

[OKTexas]

No. It DIDN'T happen.
The day someone is guilty over a 40 year old "HE DID IT" by some ugly hag is the day ALL men should tread carefully.

You need to slow down your reading. What I just said DID happen was Kavanaugh's paranoid meltdown in the committee hot seat. Which --- it did.

I have to presume you're addressing me as the prior post, since you didn't quote anybody.

No it didn't, he should have been more aggressive, about the second time a commie senator asked him if he would ask for an FBI investigation, he should have asked the commie committee members for a show of hands, if he got another clean background check form the FBI, WOULD THEY VOTE FOR HIS CONFIRMATION???

You can bet your ass not one single hand would have risen. It all pure political bullshit.

You don't "ask for a show of hands" in a judicial hearing. klown shoes.

Know what else you don't do? Ask one of the Senators if she's ever been drunk to unconsciousness.

The fucking commies threw civility out the window, Kavanaugh is fighting for his professional life, if he wasn't completely pissed he wouldn't be human. And asking for a show of hands, would prove this bullshit about another investigation was just another delaying tactic, because it wouldn't change one commie vote on the committee. Nothing about this hearing was directed at obtaining the truth.

.