Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Alakhami, Oct 10, 2018.
Let's discuss and share vids.
why is the first vid not about the guy that cries at calendars and is an angry drunk?
it seems to be some woman interpreting the body language of a woman being interviewed by a senate comitee in a big room with a large group of people present.
Didn't know the place, didn't know the time, didn't know the date, nobody to back up her claims. This wouldn't even have seen court if he wasn't Trump's pick, Democrats stated they would contest anyone that Trump tries to put in office. He was under FBI investigation several times when he was a judge, and never did they come up with anything. People say he got angry in court, well of course he did, his whole world was flipped upside down from an accusation that happened 35 years ago. 35..... Not to mention the people she said were there, had no recollection of him ever being at the party.
If she had any sort of evidence, or anyone that was there to back up her story I would have said throw his ass in jail forever. No evidence though, 35 years later, right before he was about to get in, had hundreds of people say what a nice and humble guy he was, including women. She was prepped for a polygraph test, and her story changed multiple times. She was caught lying multiple times, the whole thing was a Bane Shift show, and was supposed to be a deterrent for votes in upcoming elections. More fighting over power between our political parties while they get nothing done for the people, as usual.
This is starting to set a dangerous tone in this country though, a man's reputation and life can be ruined by a 35 year old accusation with no evidence and nobody to back up your claims. This is a dangerous time for any man in any position of power, or any man with a woman looking to hurt him. This has really taken away from the Me Too movement, and it's making it harder and harder to believe victims when we have a crying wolf once a week. I'm starting to notice a trend, where these women are always after rich men, or powerful men also.
Eric Massa- 2010, Democrat
Anthony Weiner- 2011, Democrat
David Wu- 2011, Democrat
Plenty more Democrats, and Republicans, all corrupt ********.
Look at the men=victims card playing Super is doing.
well, don't you think that it really is unconvincing and the whole rhetoric of Ford is appealing to those of the "feels" as opposed to the "reals?
I'm not convinced someone that cries at calendars becuse his dad ( who is alive) started telling ( when Bret was 15) what he did the previous year using a calendar he kept is the best person to decide what is and isn't law in the US for the rest of his life.
I guess that is how I feel though. as an outside observer.
also the "well DID YOU !?" reply to some questions was weird, and people coming out saying "actually he did drink too much and hes an angry drunk" makes me question his honesty.
Yeah, his behaviour and demeanour was at times odd to put it mildly.
I can't help but find it unsettling though that a false accusation can cause so much havoc and political division (which is already at a pretty dangerous level) where private info of a person goes public and his reputation is forever jeopardized. Like, even if he cleared his name, after all the sh** that has been brought up, could anyone treat him seriously in the role that he is to play in the judicial system? And doesn't this raise the question of how these kind of things affect the very nature of the systems that we built? (I use the "we" since I thing similar kind of cause can or would happen in Europe or maybe even in my country.)
This also forces us to question the way our systems let such people into power. the fact that through false accusations with political agendas we uncover personal and psychological qualities that are incompattible with a profession of high requirements is very disturbing. The political arena is becoming more and more of a spectacle, and it's getting dangerous since the more people are aware of that even subconciously, the more they'll abuse it for their political or ideological agenda.
Overall I do think that he's not the best candidate for the job, but I'm no american and a country that had Bush and Trump as president has a very "peculiar" idea of competence in my book.
IS it though? rushing an investigation just so conservatives can say "the investigation turned up nothing" sounds dicey.
also most politics in the Netherlands is boring as it should be.
- To clarify a bit, this was an investigation or a background check for a job requirement... not a criminal investigation sadly. Even if corroborating or dead to rights evidence was uncovered it would simply sway or not sway his appointment but would never result in criminal prosecution for the "accusation" buttttt could result in purgery for lying under oath which is the rub.
p.s. This whole spectacle has not improved the already lack of passion from younger potential voters specifically... Those that were already disenfranchised are more so and those on the fence are not swayed to be more involved or have faith in the process.
Most people already decided who they thought was telling the truth BK or Ford... and the findings from the committee or FBI would not likely change that since they could just claim cover up or set up if the ruling went against their initial "feeling"
The pre-confirmation hearings/investigation was all a farce, so that the sheeple would see an effort was made. It was as all just as much of a sham as was the concerted effort to discredit Kav in the first place. Sham is over, move along baaaaa baaaaa.
lol you guys are retards. It's sickening that you will go to bat for a rich white rapist because he's got political connections on your side.
Lol. You say "rich white rapist" as if you are talking about someone who had been caught having ***** someone is the same as me calling you a Firking moron just because 100 people have called you that in the past. Surely you aren't a complete moron and can see what im saying, right?
it's this kind of appeal to emotionality which I find disconcerting in the far left. Like, who exactly got political connection here, and on what side? lol
As far as I'm know, we're just random people with different views discussing politics.
@davre means that he is expected to be a conservative judge.
Also, many conservatives have said they wouldn't care if he was guilty of **** because it's more important that he is on the SC.
Of course, it's more common to just not believe Ford, which is far less problematic.
Anyway, for me, while we will probably never know if Ford was telling the truth about her accusation (though statistically it is likely), it's pretty obvious Kav was lying on multiple occasions, and I wish more people on the right cared about that instead of pretending otherwise.
Yeah i've seen people say/write;
"Doesn't matter as long as he outlaws abortion"
but if you outlaw abortion only outlaws will have abortions so :/
Nobody's coming for your abortions. We just want common-sense abortion control.
we must get all the abortions now before the goverment limmits who can get abortions, how would you feel if a person broke into your house and has an abortion while you have no abortion to defend yourself?
Gerry, I accuse you of a ****, at a party, that happened 35 years ago, I don't know where, when, or who was there, the people I think were there and will back up my story have no recollection whatsoever. To prison with you gerry.
Do you understand now ? I'm all for people going to jail when the are piece of Bane Shift, but to throw people in jail, before proving they are guilty is insane. Saying people are guilty with no proof, sets a very dangerous precedent for politics and society in the United States.
I could give a Firk if he was conservative or democrat, if she had any shred of proof, I'd say throw his ass in prison forever. She literally had no evidence, nobody to back up her story, and doesn't know where or when, the only thing corroborating her story was 35 years ago at a party. Let's say he was found guilty, now how many more women will start accusing men and ruining their lives without any proof or evidence ?
Also this man went through how many background checks when he first joined as a judge, why is it just now he's being accused, makes you wonder. He had 100's of people come out women, and men, saying he was a great guy and speaking of his high character.
As far as him getting emotional and irrational in the court room, you better believe i'd be frigging furious when someone is trying to ruin your life, and your families with no credible evidence.
It honestly scares me that you can't see that. and thank god you don't live in the United States where rational thought takes precedence over feelings.
Were two steps away from mob rule in this country, sorry i'm against that I guess. It gets old when your only counter argument is something race related, anti-gay,anti-race etc. and it kind of just proves the point of conservatives, their are no talking points for you guys, just cheap used up punch lines.
If you wanted my honest opinion, if he did it and their is evidence and she had people to back up her story, i'd love for his ass to go to prison, wrong is wrong no matter the color of your skin or how much money you have. Typically with big powerful offenders like this, their is repeat instances, not just one.
I'm not a conservative or a democrat, but all this Bane Shift based around emotions instead of fact is tipping me towards being a conservative.
Get over your reactionary biases, do some research, and you will find the following things about ****:
It is a crime of power and control, not necessity. A thief justifies their crime on the basis that they need it. A rapist justifies their crime on the basis that their desire is more valuable than their victim's autonomy and self-worth. Every time the court of law (in this case a three-day investigation that was given boundaries by people who were invested in a specific outcome) or the court of public opinion take a side against the victim, they perpetuate this justification.
It is difficult to provide evidence of the crime by its nature. From a forensic perspective, the aftermath of a pair of lovers having consensual sex after they've had a bit too much to drink, and the aftermath of a person forcing themselves on another after they've had too much to drink is exactly the same. A crime has occurred in the second case but it cannot be proven without direct witnesses. Most sex does not have witnesses.
**** is severely underreported. Women tend not to come forward with their allegations because they know they will be judged. If the accused is rich and/or famous, their fans will send the victim death threats. One of their sexual encounters will be all over the news. People will tell them they deserved to be *****. Most of the time, this personal cost comes with no benefit on account of **** being incredibly difficult to prove. **** victims coming forward decades after the fact is not extraodinary. **** victims coming forward at all is.
Nobody but Kavanaugh and his accusers can prove whether a **** occurred. There could never be any smoking gun evidence. What there is, however, is a lot of circumstantial evidence that teenage Kavanaugh drank a lot, was full of testosterone, saw women as conquests, and came from a well-connected family. Take away the name and that is the profile of an entitled individual who is capable of ****. His victims' testimony, and his own calendar, show that they ran in the same circles and were at the same parties. This is not proof of guilt, but it's enough to show that their claims should be taken seriously.
So when you call these things "false accusations" when there is no way to prove that it never happened. You are not on the side of logic and rationality. You are on the side of wishful thinking. You have made a choice that you would rather believe that a specific politician is pure and just than that he could have ***** multiple women. That is a value judgement based on emotion, ideological convenience, and a high tolerance for propaganda. The result of this stance is that an actual investigation will never take place. If the accusers have lied, they will not waste their money on legal fees only to be rebuffed. If the accusations are true, several women get to look at their rapist's face in the paper and be reminded that he's better than they are.
So when I call you a ******, or scum, or accuse you of having some kind of ****ed up issues with women. It's not an appeal to emotion, it's the only logical conclusion that I can come up with for those who cheer for the tidy cover-up of a significant criminal allegation and uncritically assume the accusation is false because it would be inconvenient to believe otherwise.
Separate names with a comma.