Baseball for the Thinking Fan

Login | Register | Feedback

btf_logo
You are here > Home > Baseball Newsstand > Baseball Primer Newsblog > Discussion
Baseball Primer Newsblog
— The Best News Links from the Baseball Newsstand

Monday, September 17, 2018

OTP 2018 September 17: How Brett Kavanaugh explains his baseball ticket debt

Kavanaugh described the baseball tickets as part of a group purchase divided amongst friends and avid Washington Nationals fans. Kavanaugh estimated he has attended “a couple hundred games” over the period of 2005 through 2017, when he purchased four season tickets, and also playoff ticket packages for the four years the Nationals reached the National League playoffs.

“I have attended all 11 Nationals home playoff games in their history,” Kavanaugh noted in his answers. “(We are 3-8 in those games.)”
His rationale for the tickets: “I am a huge sports fan.”

Beyond his baseball fandom, Kavanaugh noted in response to questions that has “not had gambling debts or participated in ‘fantasy’ leagues.”

 

(As always, views expressed in the article lede and comments are the views of the individual commenters and the submitter of the article and do not represent the views of Baseball Think Factory or its owner.)

Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: September 17, 2018 at 09:05 AM | 2479 comment(s) Login to Bookmark
  Tags: nationals, off topic, politics, washington

Reader Comments and Retorts

Go to end of page

Statements posted here are those of our readers and do not represent the BaseballThinkFactory. Names are provided by the poster and are not verified. We ask that posters follow our submission policy. Please report any inappropriate comments.

Page 1 of 25 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›
   1. BDC Posted: September 17, 2018 at 09:06 AM (#5745419)
Ah, it seems like only last week that Brett Kavanaugh's biggest problem was his insatiable desire to see Nationals games …
   2. DavidFoss Posted: September 17, 2018 at 09:09 AM (#5745421)
This is going to be an ugly week.
   3. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: September 17, 2018 at 09:11 AM (#5745422)
A lot of online talk tonight about how Senators Collins and Murkowski both called upon Sen. Al Franken to resign less than a year ago due to his sexual harassment scandal, while also that nothing Franken was accused of approaches the level of abuse being reported about Brett Kavanaugh.


Franken was also a middle aged man, not a teenager. That said, Franken was accountable to his voters, Kavanaugh, if confirmed, will be accountable to no one.
   4. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: September 17, 2018 at 09:13 AM (#5745423)
So - with the accuser now saying she's willing to testify...

1321. The Yankee Clapper Posted: September 16, 2018 at 11:33 PM (#5745349)

To the media? Who? Ford? I didn't read that Ford told the media anything. I heard she told members of Congress and an attorney.


The WaPo story says Ford contacted their tip line. Is it really coincidental that Ms. Ford put herself in the position to inevitably be the reluctantly outted witness? And that the timing just happens to come right before the vote but too late for her story to be pursued during the hearings?


Is there no way to suspend or find a crack in this law that prevents Kavanaugh from testifying in response/in parallel to her testimony?

It seems like a really bad law that prevents Kavanaugh from answering these allegations under oath because he's already testified once.... and setting a date for the judiciary vote in stone by law for Thursday, Sept 20 also seems like a bad idea.
   5. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: September 17, 2018 at 09:17 AM (#5745426)
Is there no way to suspend or find a crack in this law that prevents Kavanaugh from testifying in response/in parallel to her testimony?


I think he could voluntarily withdraw, be re-nominated for the same position, and then testify about that as part of a new round of hearings on the new nomination. Right?
   6. Traderdave Posted: September 17, 2018 at 09:17 AM (#5745427)
Nixon resigned a few weeks before I started first grade, so I have only vague and minute memory of that event.

I asked in the last thread if any of the super annuated Primates remember if Nixon ####### and moaned as loudly and often during Watergate as Trump has/is during Stupid Watergate. The only answer was from the ever-popular and always inimitable Ray, who is actually younger than me, so I ask again if anyone has reliable memory of that.

Anyone?
   7. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: September 17, 2018 at 09:18 AM (#5745428)
Franken was also a middle aged man, not a teenager. That said, Franken was accountable to his voters, Kavanaugh, if confirmed, will be accountable to no one.


He'll be accountable to Jesus.
   8. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: September 17, 2018 at 09:19 AM (#5745431)
Democrats may have more polling upside in House races than GOP

What's important to keep in mind is that district polls at this point in the cycle can underestimate the party benefiting from a wave election.

I went back since the 2006 election and looked at how much the polls from roughly within a month of this point in the cycle performed. (That is, polls completed from about 52 to 82 days before the election.)

The immediate thing that jumps out is the side that has won the national House popular vote has always done better on Election Day than the polls indicate right now. The average overperformance was a little over 3 points.

Democrats did better than their polls in 2006, 2008 and 2012. Republicans did better than their polls indicated in 2010, 2014 and 2016.

The district poll overperformance seems especially large in wave years. Back in 2006, the average district poll had the Democrats trailing by 1.5 points. The result in those districts polled ended up being Democrats winning by 4 points. That's a bias of 5.5 points against the Democrats.


Republicans Are Tripping on Trump’s Coattails

“But while it may delight the narcissistic president that the 2018 midterms are entirely about him, this is precisely what his fellow Republicans were hoping to avoid. With Trump’s support at historic lows — 60% overall disapprove of his performance, including 59% of independents — Republicans scrambling to hold the House and Senate have been struggling in vain to make the election about other issues: tax cuts, Democrats’ personal foibles — anything to avoid the election being about Trump. This has failed, bigly.”


A Moderate Republican Donor Revolt Will Be Part of the Realignment

Ohio’s wealthiest Republican donor, Leslie H. Wexner, has left the party, saying he is fed up with its antics, the Columbus Dispatch reported.

“I’m an independent,” Wexner said at an event for Ohio business leaders Thursday night, noting that he had been a Republican since his college days. “I won’t support this nonsense in the Republican Party.”

Not two years ago, Mr. Klarman, a registered independent, was the biggest donor to the Republican Party in New England.
...
The F.E.C. filings that will come out on Sept. 20 will show that Mr. Klarman is now giving almost exclusively Democrats — and donating far more money than he ever has.


Sounds bad, right? Nope. Everything is great. It is all just fake news being published. And no it is not a surprise that Trumpkins are morons.

Trump Voters Don’t Believe Democrats Can Win House

Key finding: “57% of strong Trump supporters believe it’s unlikely Democrats win the House.”

“This disbelief freaked out Republican strategists who want their voters to be panicked enough to vote in November.”
   9. Davo and his Moose Tacos Posted: September 17, 2018 at 09:32 AM (#5745434)
   10. BDC Posted: September 17, 2018 at 09:42 AM (#5745435)
I asked in the last thread if any of the super annuated Primates remember if Nixon ####### and moaned as loudly and often during Watergate as Trump has/is during Stupid Watergate. The only answer was from the ever-popular and always inimitable Ray, who is actually younger than me, so I ask again if anyone has reliable memory of that.

Anyone?


Traderdave, I was in high school during Watergate – you can probably find 65 people to confirm that, but please don't ask them any of the specifics :)

Anyway, nobody #####es and moans as much as Trump. Nixon had no Twitter account, so it was impossible for him to whine on a Trumpesque scale.

That said, the guy you want to google for Nixonian whining-by-proxy is the 1970s version of the Spiceys, press secretary Ron Ziegler. Ziegler is the one who called Watergate a "third-rate burglary" and referred to various walked-back lies as "inoperative." He did much of Nixon's complaining for him.

   11. PreservedFish Posted: September 17, 2018 at 09:52 AM (#5745439)
Can someone catch me up on OT:P's opinion of the Kavanaugh accusation? I feel like drunken teenage groping should not disqualify a middle-aged man from any job, and there's something troubling about a he said / she said account anyway, but then again, the accusation is really that he attempted a violent rape, so it needs to be investigated.
   12. DavidFoss Posted: September 17, 2018 at 09:55 AM (#5745441)
The only answer was from the ever-popular and always inimitable Ray, who is actually younger than me, so I ask again if anyone has reliable memory of that.

Anyone?


Every once in a while, historian Michael Beschloss will tweet out some newspaper headline from the Watergate Era where Nixon calls the investigation a 'witch hunt', 'asks public to end obsession' and 'get on with the nations business'. If you google image search on 'nixon witch hunt', you'll find several similar newsclippings.

Some of the old press conferences can still be seen. Here is the I am not a crook press conference. You have to Ctrl-F to find that quote, though, as there are a lot of other topics covered in that press conference. Nixon is definitely able to talk longer on a wider range of topics. This jab at the Washington Post seems much more subtle than what Trump would make:

And may I say, too, to my friend from the Washington Post, I like your sport page. [Laughter] And also, be sure Povich [Shirley Povich was a sportswriter and columnist for the Washington Post] isn't paid too much for what I just said then.
   13. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: September 17, 2018 at 09:56 AM (#5745442)
I feel like drunken teenage groping should not disqualify a middle-aged man from any job, and there's something troubling about a he said / she said account anyway,


I tend to agree. I'm with David here. The action taken as a teen may not be disqualifying, but lying about it today (if that's what he's doing) should be.
   14. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: September 17, 2018 at 09:57 AM (#5745443)
Can someone catch me up on OT:P's opinion of the Kavanaugh accusation?


I think ... my guess ... is the median opinion is ...

(1) Way too early to evaluate, but there should be some follow up investigation and time for others to come forward or not.
(2) By itself the incident likely shouldn't disqualify a nominee, but
(3) Lying about the incident now is problematic, especially given the other questionable testimony he has given.

My opinion is the same as it was around ACA repeal. The GOP has the votes to do whatever they want. If they want to vote him in and damn the consequences they most certainly can, so the real question is do they?
   15. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: September 17, 2018 at 09:58 AM (#5745444)
but then again, the accusation is really that he attempted a violent rape, so it needs to be investigated.


Yes, in order to find out if a potential Supreme Court Justice is being truthful today. I expect politicians to lie. I expect judges to be held to a higher standard.
   16. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: September 17, 2018 at 09:59 AM (#5745445)
Traderdave, #6:
I asked in the last thread if any of the super annuated Primates remember if Nixon bitched and moaned as loudly and often during Watergate as Trump has/is during Stupid Watergate. The only answer was from the ever-popular and always inimitable Ray, who is actually younger than me, so I ask again if anyone has reliable memory of that. Anyone?


Nixon's bitchmoans were not as loud nor as frequent, at least not until the tapes came out. It was a different media world in 1973-74. Presumably it helped that Nixon only had five or six or Trump's 850 repulsive character flaws.

However, I already posted this as #32 of last week's thread:
By semi-chance, I'm just finishing up Woodward & Bernstein's "The Final Days." [NO SPOILERS!] This summer's events reminded me that I'd never read it, but I got the book before I'd heard anything about Woodward's just-published one.

Great fun to read about the specific complaints that were made against the Watergate investigation in 1973-74, and the accusations leveled against it. They include:

*The investigation is an excuse for a "fishing expedition";
*Americans shouldn't believe the news, because it's made up;
*Why isn't the DOJ going after John Dean instead? Or Ted Kennedy?;
*At the end of the day, the general public doesn't care about this;
*The investigation itself is the real crime;
*It's more important to find out who's not loyal;
*They're just using this as a pretext to destroy the president;
*We can't believe anonymous attacks made by cowards;
*Innocent lives are being ruined merely because of their association with the president;
*We need to end the investigation because it's dragging on much too long;
*The real problem here is the leaks;
*The investigation is entirely a "partisan witch-hunt."

In November 1973, Nixon's Watergate counsel J. Fred Buzhardt recommended resignation, delivering this frosty assessment of the remaining 3 years of his term as president: "Everything after this is a damage-limiting operation."


As DavidFoss notes in #12, here's the 1973 newspaper front page that's made the rounds this past year or so, that manages to check three typical complaint/alibis in one set of headlines.
   17. bobm Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:00 AM (#5745446)
[12] Trump's much more of a Maury Povich guy.
   18. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:01 AM (#5745447)
Lauren Duca:
It seems to me that when Brett Kavanaugh attempted to deny a 17-year-old immigrant an abortion, he believed that the decisions you make as a minor ought to have lifelong consequences. Let's treat him the same way.
   19. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:01 AM (#5745448)
Every once in a while, historian Michael Beschloss will tweet out some newspaper headline from the Watergate Era where Nixon calls the investigation a 'witch hunt', 'asks public to end obsession' and 'get on with the nations business'. If you google image search on 'nixon witch hunt', you'll find several similar newsclippings.

Some of the old press conferences can still be seen. Here is the I am not a crook press conference. You have to Ctrl-F to find that quote, though, as there are a lot of other topics covered in that press conference. Nixon is definitely able to talk longer on a wider range of topics. This jab at the Washington Post seems much more subtle than what Trump would make:


I recently watched "The Post". I loved how they did the ending, with the sound of Nixon talking to his COS on the phone in his actual voice from the tapes, telling him that from now on, no one from the Washington Post be allowed in the White House, juxtaposed with the Watergate burglary.
   20. Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Griffin (Vlad) Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:06 AM (#5745452)
Presumably it helped that Nixon only had five or six or Trump's 850 repulsive character flaws.


I think it's more that Nixon was smart enough to not show his ass in public quite as often. He was still a paranoid, a drunk, a racist, etc. But he recognized that those weren't attractive traits, and at least attempted to conceal them from the public.
   21. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:14 AM (#5745456)
I expect judges to be held to a higher standard.


This is what is annoying about the "Bill Clinton Whatabout?" and similar things.

On one hand - when it suits him - Clapper and his type talk about qualifications and such as if being a judge were a totally non-partisan affair and we shouldn't talk about partisan considerations when evaluating a judge. Judges are special non-politicians and shouldn't be evaluated as politicians, but rather as judges.

And then we hear all these comparisons to politicians - Al Franken, Bill Clinton to name two examples we have seen - and are implicitly told than this is just a partisan affair and we can and should compare across both groups similarly.

The groups are different. The expectations are different and obviously the accountability to voters is very different. I don't think comparisons to Franken are all that valid, and given the amount of time that has passed and the amount that our culture has changed on these issues I think the Clinton examples are just irrelevant (in any direction) at this point.

That isn't that we can't revisit Franken or Clinton in light of the cultural shifts that have taken place, just they don't apply much if at all to the current SCOTUS issues.
   22. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:15 AM (#5745457)
I think it's more that Nixon was smart enough to not show his ass in public quite as often. He was still a paranoid, a drunk, a racist, etc. But he recognized that those weren't attractive traits, and at least attempted to conceal them from the public.


Yes. Nixon was very smart. Also Nixon was a professional and experienced politician. Trump is very much not. Some folks just love the idea of the amateur politician, but the pros have knowledge and skills the amateurs just don't.
   23. PreservedFish Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:18 AM (#5745458)
Oh please, it's not a veteran/amateur thing, every member of this forum has more self-knowledge and capacity for circumspection than does Trump.
   24. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:20 AM (#5745461)
Chuckles aplenty during Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA)'s "interrogation" of Judge Brett Kavanaugh.

The laughiest part comes at 15:52:
KENNEDY: I can tell from your testimony the last three days, or two days, that high school was, those were formative years for you. [Kavanaugh nods in agreement.] You went to Georgetown Preparatory School?

KAVANAUGH: I did Georgetown Prep. Jesuit High School here. Those were very formative.

KENNEDY: What was it like for you? What were you like? Were you, uh-- [Kavanaugh laughs shortly] Did you ever get in trouble? [Kavanaugh laughs some more, and laughs throughout Kennedy's questioning] Were you more of a John-Boy Walton type or a Ferris Bueller type? These ladies are old enough to understand.

KAVANAUGH: I loved sports, first and foremost. I think that I worked hard at school. I had lots of friends, I've talked a lot about my friends. They've been here, so it was very formative. Uh, and when I think back on it--

KENNEDY: You left out the trouble part. I was waiting for the trouble part.

KAVANAUGH: Right, so that's encompassed under the friends, I think. [laughs]

[next, a sidetrack into talking about his old football coach]

KENNEDY: Okay. That's all I'm gonna get out of you. I understand. All right. Let me yield back...
   25. You Know Nothing JT Snow (YR) Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:20 AM (#5745462)
Let not go overboard
   26. David Nieporent (now, with children) Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:26 AM (#5745467)

The by-his-own-testimony blackout-drunk-while-in-HS friend being his sole character witness on the night in question doesn’t help either.
Uh, you have it backwards. All the people who signed the letter are character witnesses. There is no "night in question," as the accuser has not identified when the incident took place, but it's the accuser who has no witnesses, not Kavanaugh. Condemning Kavanaugh for Judge supporting him because the accuser claimed that Judge was there is just... bizarre.
   27. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:31 AM (#5745470)
Presumably it helped that Nixon only had five or six or Trump's 850 repulsive character flaws.

I think it's more that Nixon was smart enough to not show his ass in public quite as often. He was still a paranoid, a drunk, a racist, etc. But he recognized that those weren't attractive traits, and at least attempted to conceal them from the public.

Nixon had 7 press conferences in 1973 and 2 in 1974. Trump had 1 last year and 3 so far this year. Of course Nixon didn't spend half of his presidency at re-election campaign rallies, so most of his paranoia and derangement didn't take place in front of the TV cameras.

Nixon also had a far longer history of hostility to the press than Trump, dating back to his first election campaign in 1946. His most famous moment along those lines didn't come during Watergate, but at his famous "last press conference" in the aftermath of his loss to Jerry Brown's father in the 1962 California gubernatorial election. But even here, the contrast between Nixon's pointed remarks about the media and Trump's incoherent ramblings is telling. Nixon pretty much lost it at the end, but compared to Trump he comes off like Abraham Lincoln.
   28. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:34 AM (#5745473)
#24: Were you more of a John-Boy Walton type or a Ferris Bueller type?


Ferris Bueller last week:
"They bought it. Incredible. One of the worst performances of my career and they never doubted it for a second."

"A, You can never go too far. B, If I’m gonna get busted, it is not gonna be by a guy like that."


Ferris Bueller 35 years ago:
"Now, I didn’t hit you. I lightly slapped you."

"The question isn't 'What are we going to do?', the question is 'What aren't we going to do?'"
   29. -- Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:34 AM (#5745474)
The allegations are far worse than “drunken teenage groping.” In all these situations people really need to pay attention to the actual things being alleged.

Now it’s possible that the allegations are either not true or are exaggerated. But if they are true, they’re disqualifying. I presumptively believe them, which I think is the right approach.
   30. Traderdave Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:35 AM (#5745475)
So which is most likely outcome?

-Handwriting on wall, nomination withdrawn before vote, Trump blames Democrats despite having a GOP majority
-Pence breaks a 50-50 tie
-Televised testimony, Thomas/Hill 2.0, then confirmed 51-49
-Other
   31. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:37 AM (#5745480)
So which is most likely outcome?

-Handwriting on wall, nomination withdrawn before vote, Trump blames Democrats despite having a GOP majority
-Pence breaks a 50-50 tie
-Televised testimony, Thomas/Hill 2.0, then confirmed 51-49
-Other


Too soon to tell.
   32. Howie Menckel Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:39 AM (#5745483)
the Poteet Strawberry Festival also got disappeared
AUSTIN — History curriculum in Texas remembers the Alamo but could soon forget Hillary Clinton and Helen Keller.

As part of an effort to "streamline" the social studies curriculum in public schools, the State Board of Education voted Friday to adjust what students in every grade are required to learn in the classroom. Among the changes, board members approved the removal of several historical figures, including Clinton and Keller, from the curriculum.

The board also voted to keep in the curriculum a reference to the "heroism" of the defenders of the Alamo, which had been recommended for elimination, as well as Moses' influence on the writing of the nation's founding documents, multiple references to "Judeo-Christian" values and a requirement that students explain how the "Arab rejection of the State of Israel has led to ongoing conflict" in the Middle East......

Barry Goldwater was also removed from this teaching requirement. A work group tasked with the curriculum streamlining also recommended removing evangelist and Baptist pastor Billy Graham, but the state board kept him.
   33. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:39 AM (#5745484)
In all these situations people really need to pay attention to the actual things being alleged.


Oh please. While I agree with the statement, you are the absolute worst poster to be making it. You grossly understate actions or allegations daily, if not hourly, for people you support.
   34. PreservedFish Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:43 AM (#5745487)
Is there a conspiracy theory surrounding Helen Keller? I mean, did she really write that book, or was it all a confabulation by her "nurse?" I'll take my answer off the air.
   35. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:46 AM (#5745488)
On one hand - when it suits him - Clapper and his type talk about qualifications and such as if being a judge were a totally non-partisan affair and we shouldn't talk about partisan considerations when evaluating a judge. Judges are special non-politicians and shouldn't be evaluated as politicians, but rather as judges.

And then we hear all these comparisons to politicians - Al Franken, Bill Clinton to name two examples we have seen - and are implicitly told than this is just a partisan affair and we can and should compare across both groups similarly.


You know as well as everyone else that Clapper's only principle is Republican power.
   36. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:46 AM (#5745489)
Can someone catch me up on OT:P's opinion of the Kavanaugh accusation? I feel like drunken teenage groping should not disqualify a middle-aged man from any job, and there's something troubling about a he said / she said account anyway, but then again, the accusation is really that he attempted a violent rape, so it needs to be investigated.


Well, that's the thing... it would be one thing if the Treasurer of the Keg City Club-100 kegs or bust was drunkenly macking on someone at a party and he tried to get to 2B - and she had to undertake great effort to stop him at 1B... vs he and a friend locking her in a room, pinning her down, turning up the music, and covering her mouth to stifle her screams.

(1) Way too early to evaluate, but there should be some follow up investigation and time for others to come forward or not.
(2) By itself the incident likely shouldn't disqualify a nominee, but
(3) Lying about the incident now is problematic, especially given the other questionable testimony he has given.


I don't know about #2... obviously, it's virtually impossible to prove or disprove the allegation - but if it could be proven? IDK... I'm no stranger to imbibing too much, but if the incident occurred as alleged? Well, we have a statute of limitations for good reason - but I'd some serious problems with that.

   37. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:47 AM (#5745490)
7

Franken was also a middle aged man, not a teenager. That said, Franken was accountable to his voters, Kavanaugh, if confirmed, will be accountable to no one.


He'll be accountable to Jesus.


Alou?
   38. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:48 AM (#5745491)
Oh please, it's not a veteran/amateur thing, every member of this forum has more self-knowledge and capacity for circumspection than does Trump.


Right. It's not that Trump is a bad politician. It's that he's a failure at being human.
   39. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:56 AM (#5745494)
Well, we have a statute of limitations for good reason - but I'd some serious problems with that.


The statute of limitations would prevent him from being prosecuted and sent to prison for an attempted rape in his youth. It has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not he should be elevated to A LIFETIME APPOINTMENT TO THE HIGHEST ####### COURT IN THE LAND.
   40. Traderdave Posted: September 17, 2018 at 10:56 AM (#5745496)
He'll be accountable to Jesus.



Alou?



No, the other Alou brother
   41. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:01 AM (#5745499)
I wonder how many hours of sleep Ronan Farrow has gotten since last week?

Andrea Wolfson, whoever she is, last Friday:
FWIW, a DC lawyer told me this morning he'd been waiting for Kavanaugh's #MeToo moment ... but the story he knew wasn't from high school but a summer clerkship.
   42. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:02 AM (#5745500)
I tend to agree. I'm with David here. The action taken as a teen may not be disqualifying, but lying about it today (if that's what he's doing) should be.


1. Attempted rape should be disqualifying for the Supreme Court, no matter what age it occurred at.

2. But 1 is an opinion. (One that I'm surprised to see disagreement with but that is what it is.) More to the point, the above is sort of the Pete Rose problem. Even had Rose admitted (to Giamatti) that he bet on Reds games, I don't see how that gets him in. Now we have a confession that he bet on Reds games. Yes, admitting responsibility and contrition are positive things, but doing the thing in question should still be disqualifying for the Hall of Fame and (attempted rape in Kavanaugh's case, assuming arguendo that it's true and he admits it) the Supreme Court. (Not that those two institutions are equivalent in importance. It's an analogy.)

I just don't see why people would be more concerned about the lying than the attempted rape in question. Again, I'm not trying to put the guy in jail or punish him. Just send him back to his current job.
   43. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:04 AM (#5745502)
but then again, the accusation is really that he attempted a violent rape, so it needs to be investigated.

Yes, in order to find out if a potential Supreme Court Justice is being truthful today. I expect politicians to lie. I expect judges to be held to a higher standard.


You're being internally inconsistent. "You can't have committed attempted rape" is not a "higher standard."
   44. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:05 AM (#5745503)
I just don't see why people would be more concerned about the lying than the attempted rape in question. Again, I'm not trying to put the guy in jail or punish him. Just send him back to his current job.


When Ray is on the side of the light and the right*...

*rightness. correctness. truth. not "the right" as in the GOP/neofascist elements of our current political swamp
   45. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:07 AM (#5745504)
Oh, great, Sam has shown up.
   46. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:07 AM (#5745505)
The statute of limitations would prevent him from being prosecuted and sent to prison for an attempted rape in his youth. It has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not he should be elevated to A LIFETIME APPOINTMENT TO THE HIGHEST ####### COURT IN THE LAND.


That's what I - perhaps inartfully or inadequately - was saying.
   47. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:09 AM (#5745507)
Oh, great, Sam has shown up.


You should be happy. You're actually correct on this one.
   48. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:12 AM (#5745511)
Now I'll have to re-evaluate.
   49. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:13 AM (#5745512)
Oh please, it's not a veteran/amateur thing, every member of this forum has more self-knowledge and capacity for circumspection than does Trump.


Right. It's not that Trump is a bad politician. It's that he's a failure at being human.


You guys realize that multiple things can contribute to something right? Life it not a world of black/white and single causes for everything.

Trump is a terrible human being with many, many character flaws, more than even Tricky Dick. AND (this does not negate the first primary point) Nixon was way smarter than Trump could ever be. AND (again this does not negate EITHER previous point) Nixon was an experienced and professional politician and not like Trump in that regard.

Weirdly you guys seem to imagine that adding the third point is some sort of effort to cover up the first. It is not. Many things can be true all at once. I promise.
   50. BDC Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:14 AM (#5745514)
I just don't see why people would be more concerned about the lying than the attempted rape in question


The attempted rape would be when he was 17 and drunk. The lying would be when he's 53 and cynically trying to stonewall his way into the highest position of trust in the country.

If true, there is no way to make the incident at 17 a good thing, but there would be lots of ways of seeing redemption afterwards as a good thing. But they've been closed off now. Either it never happened, and Kavanaugh is greatly maligned, or he's a really bad guy indeed.
   51. Joe Bivens is NOT a clueless numpty Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:14 AM (#5745515)
I wonder what, if he has one, is Kavanaugh's record on cases that involve sexual assault?
   52. Joe Bivens is NOT a clueless numpty Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:16 AM (#5745517)
Now I'll have to re-evaluate.


Wouldn't that involve extensive reprogramming with lots of down time?
   53. PreservedFish Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:20 AM (#5745520)
Trump is a terrible human being with many, many character flaws, more than even Tricky Dick. AND (this does not negate the first primary point) Nixon was way smarter than Trump could ever be. AND (again this does not negate EITHER previous point) Nixon was an experienced and professional politician and not like Trump in that regard.


Here's what I objected to. Nixon was smart enough to hide some of his character flaws. Great. Good for him. That's not hard-won wisdom from a lifetime of political experience, it's just something that mature adults do. I bet that Cynthia Nixon is better at this than Trump is too.
   54. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:21 AM (#5745521)
If true, there is no way to make the incident at 17 a good thing, but there would be lots of ways of seeing redemption afterwards as a good thing. But they've been closed off now. Either it never happened, and Kavanaugh is greatly maligned, or he's a really bad guy indeed.


Right. He's all in now. Had he come clean and expressed regret, begged forgiveness, etc, he may have survived. Now, if it happened, he's a lying rapist and not only should not be confirmed, but impeached from his current position as well.
   55. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:22 AM (#5745523)
I bet that Cynthia Nixon is better at this than Trump is too.


Otis Nixon too.
   56. PreservedFish Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:23 AM (#5745524)
What if Kav just groped her and the "attempted rape" thing is badly exaggerated? What would you say about it?
   57. Traderdave Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:25 AM (#5745528)
If true, there is no way to make the incident at 17 a good thing, but there would be lots of ways of seeing redemption afterwards as a good thing. But they've been closed off now. Either it never happened, and Kavanaugh is greatly maligned, or he's a really bad guy indeed.


Right. He's all in now. Had he come clean and expressed regret, begged forgiveness, etc, he may have survived. Now, if it happened, he's a lying rapist and not only should not be confirmed, but impeached from his current position as well.


This isn't smoking weed or shoplifting on a dare or some such other teenage indiscretion, it's attempted rape. That cannot be explained away as "well, I was young and irresponsible." He has no choice but to deny and could never have come clean if it is/was true. If he admits at all, even with qualifiers, his career and his life as he knows it is over.
   58. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:28 AM (#5745531)
What if Kav just groped her and the "attempted rape" thing is badly exaggerated? What would you say about it?


Is your argument "what if ##### set him up?"
   59. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:29 AM (#5745533)
If true, there is no way to make the incident at 17 a good thing, but there would be lots of ways of seeing redemption afterwards as a good thing.


A good thing, sure, but not a "Welcome to the Supreme Court" good thing.
   60. The usual palaver and twaddle (Met Fan Charlie) Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:31 AM (#5745534)
42

1. Attempted rape should be disqualifying for the Supreme Court, no matter what age it occurred at.

2. But 1 is an opinion. (One that I'm surprised to see disagreement with but that is what it is.) More to the point, the above is sort of the Pete Rose problem. Even had Rose admitted (to Giamatti) that he bet on Reds games, I don't see how that gets him in. Now we have a confession that he bet on Reds games. Yes, admitting responsibility and contrition are positive things, but doing the thing in question should still be disqualifying for the Hall of Fame and (attempted rape in Kavanaugh's case, assuming arguendo that it's true and he admits it) the Supreme Court. (Not that those two institutions are equivalent in importance. It's an analogy.)

I just don't see why people would be more concerned about the lying than the attempted rape in question. Again, I'm not trying to put the guy in jail or punish him. Just send him back to his current job.



This. Every last word, syllable and punctuation mark.
   61. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:34 AM (#5745537)
What if Kav just groped her and the "attempted rape" thing is badly exaggerated? What would you say about it?


IDK - hard to see how an alternate explanation (if we assume the underlying setting and other items - turning up the music, etc) would be mitigating/possible.

I mean - this seems like it's got to be either 1)a wholly false accusation, or 2)it's that bad.

I.e., "Yes, we cornered in her a room, turned up the music, but we were just grabbing boobs - never gonna to actually penetrate" doesn't make it any better.

   62. Misirlou doesn't live in the restaurant Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:36 AM (#5745538)
Again, I'm not trying to put the guy in jail or punish him. Just send him back to his current job.


Shouldn't attempted rape be a disqualified for any lifetime federal judicial appointment? Or should there be a different standard between giving someone the job and removing someone from the job. Had these allegation come to light next year, after he was confirmed, and proven true, would you support impeachment?
   63. PreservedFish Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:42 AM (#5745541)
Is your argument "what if ##### set him up?"


I'm not making an argument, just wondering aloud. It's obviously possible that Kav was being a drunken preppy dumbass, and grabbed some titty, but that the story we hear today about a violent attempted rape is exaggerated, either for calculated political effectiveness or because the accuser's memory is fallible or any other reason. Suppose you were Kav and you knew that you acted inappropriately but you also know that you didn't act THAT inappropriately. What can you do? How do you address this accusation?
   64. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:44 AM (#5745543)
The attempted rape would be when he was 17 and drunk. The lying would be when he's 53 and cynically trying to stonewall his way into the highest position of trust in the country.

If true, there is no way to make the incident at 17 a good thing, but there would be lots of ways of seeing redemption afterwards as a good thing. But they've been closed off now. Either it never happened, and Kavanaugh is greatly maligned, or he's a really bad guy indeed.


Also, the situation we have now is from a long time ago. Memory is not reliable and the whole situation has enough caveats - age, alcohol, different time and place - that I think any current lies mean more than a long ago past.

That could all change, with the uncovering of more information. It is an unfortunate fact that these things take time, and over time the truth does seem to come more clear. Obviously we can't wait forever, but more time to check some things and also to allow others to come forward seems appropriate.

Note: I wouldn't need more time. I would be a no vote based on everything I know now, and I am sure some Clapper-types would be a yes vote almost no matter what. But there are those in the middle that should have more time before making a decision for a lifetime appointment.
   65. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:47 AM (#5745547)
What can you do? How do you address this accusation?


Tell the truth. In my life it is usually better to tell the truth early and often. If the truth is he acted like a drunk teenager at a party and not a rapist, then say that.
   66. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:48 AM (#5745548)
Suppose you were Kav and you knew that you acted inappropriately but you also know that you didn't act THAT inappropriately. What can you do? How do you address this accusation?


To be honest, I have a hard time with this thought experiment. I can mind-palace myself into a lot of what-if scenarios, but even semi-sort-of-not-quite-rape-rape-just-grabbing-her-tits-ya-know? is still somewhat out of my range. I have a hard time believing that's a common thing, even with men of our generation or prior.
   67. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:49 AM (#5745549)
Shouldn't attempted rape be a disqualified for any lifetime federal judicial appointment? Or should there be a different standard between giving someone the job and removing someone from the job.

It was over incidents of conflict of interest rather than attempted rape, but Abe Fortas got filibustered out of a promotion from Associate Justice to Chief Justice, and then later was forced to resign from the Supreme Court altogether. Just a hunch, but I suspect if Kavanaugh doesn't make it to the Supreme Court he's not going to keep his current job for long.
   68. The Yankee Clapper Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:50 AM (#5745550)
The statute of limitations would prevent him from being prosecuted and sent to prison for an attempted rape in his youth. It has no bearing whatsoever on whether or not he should be elevated to A LIFETIME APPOINTMENT TO THE HIGHEST ####### COURT IN THE LAND.

No, the reasoning that justifies a Statute of Limitations is also applicable outside of criminal or civil law. A Statute of Limitations recognizes that at some point it is unfair to require people to defend themselves against stale claims when evidence may have been lost, memories faded, and witnesses no longer available. The law recognizes that those with valid claims should pursue them with reasonable diligence, and similar logic suggests some skepticism is appropriate when someone only belatedly raises claims that could have been raised earlier. Long dormant claims are easier to fabricate and more difficult to defend. That is especially true of claims that are so lacking in detail that they might even have been crafted so as to make rebuttal impossible. You don't have to worry much about an alibi upending your accusation if you don't provide even an approximate date for the occurrence. Hard to contradict your claims of an unauthorized party if you don't even say where it allegedly happened.
   69. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:54 AM (#5745553)
Suppose you were Kav and you knew that you acted inappropriately but you also know that you didn't act THAT inappropriately. What can you do? How do you address this accusation?

Tell the truth. In my life it is usually better to tell the truth early and often. If the truth is he acted like a drunk teenager at a party and not a rapist, then say that.

That might have worked if he'd said that when the accusation first surfaced, but after repeated denials he's pretty much stuck in zugzwang, unable to do anything but sit tight and hope that Ford eventually discredits herself.
   70. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:56 AM (#5745554)
That might have worked if he'd said that when the accusation first surfaced, but after repeated denials he's pretty much stuck in zugzwang, unable to do anything but sit tight and hope that Ford eventually discredits herself.


There's no real reason to assume Ford would need to "eventually discredit herself." This is the post-Trumpian world. Just lying over and over again, even if it's obviously lies, has been proven effective.
   71. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: September 17, 2018 at 11:57 AM (#5745556)
I'm not making an argument, just wondering aloud. It's obviously possible that Kav was being a drunken preppy dumbass, and grabbed some titty, but that the story we hear today about a violent attempted rape is exaggerated, either for calculated political effectiveness or because the accuser's memory is fallible or any other reason. Suppose you were Kav and you knew that you acted inappropriately but you also know that you didn't act THAT inappropriately. What can you do? How do you address this accusation?


I just cannot see a middle ground - i.e., the confined space of a room and him on top of her is either true or it's not true.

There's just no way that can have a mitigating explanation... It's either got to be entirely false - there was no room, she wasn't confined, and whatever didn't happen or - it's true enough that the 'whatever' doesn't matter.



   72. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:03 PM (#5745559)
That might have worked if he'd said that when the accusation first surfaced, but after repeated denials he's pretty much stuck in zugzwang, unable to do anything but sit tight and hope that Ford eventually discredits herself.

There's no real reason to assume Ford would need to "eventually discredit herself." This is the post-Trumpian world. Just lying over and over again, even if it's obviously lies, has been proven effective.


In this case, who are you talking about, Ford or Kavanaugh?
   73. Mellow Mouse, Benevolent Space Tyrant Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:04 PM (#5745560)
I just cannot see a middle ground - i.e., the confined space of a room and him on top of her is either true or it's not true.


The problem is after so many years and with alcohol involved ... we have a situation where we likely can't know the truth. (Edit: Can't is too strong, but likely won't).
   74. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:08 PM (#5745561)
Re: #68--
Yankee Clapper's whining about the unavailability of relevant information in the Brett Kavanaugh confirmation process. And insinuating that the failure to provide that information is a deliberate political act that takes advantage of the pace of the confirmation process. Which is egregiously unfair to one side. Marvelous stuff.

Meanwhile, add Sen. Murkowski to the "we can delay the vote" brigade.
   75. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:13 PM (#5745564)
Again, I'm not trying to put the guy in jail or punish him. Just send him back to his current job.

Shouldn't attempted rape be a disqualified for any lifetime federal judicial appointment?


Yes, if I were king, but I'm happy to follow whatever systems are in place in this case.

So I should clarify my quoted answer above. My above comment assumes that we basically end up with what we have now: a credible accusation of attempted rape, something that meets a reasonable suspicion standard, but something that falls far short of being proven.

If it's proven that changes the ballgame and I would follow whatever systems and requirements are in place for federal judges as far as character and fitness goes.
   76. PreservedFish Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:16 PM (#5745566)
I just cannot see a middle ground - i.e., the confined space of a room and him on top of her is either true or it's not true.


Maybe it wasn't as confined as she remembers. Maybe Kavanaugh was yukking it up. Maybe she was drunk too. Maybe "pinning" her to the bed was really an alcoholic stumble and flop. Maybe drunk Kav thought he was making a smooth move. There are so many possibilities.
   77. Ray (CTL) Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:17 PM (#5745567)
I'm not making an argument, just wondering aloud. It's obviously possible that Kav was being a drunken preppy dumbass, and grabbed some titty, but that the story we hear today about a violent attempted rape is exaggerated, either for calculated political effectiveness or because the accuser's memory is fallible or any other reason. Suppose you were Kav and you knew that you acted inappropriately but you also know that you didn't act THAT inappropriately. What can you do? How do you address this accusation?


Going along with the hypo.... (1) Tell the truth about what happened and let the chips fall where they may, or (more preferably) (2) tell the truth and then for the good of the country withdraw, or (3) if you can't bring yourself to admit it, just withdraw.
   78. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:17 PM (#5745568)
In this case, who are you talking about, Ford or Kavanaugh?


Kavanaugh. The GOP and the American right have been crystal clear on this recently. They lie big and lie often. And they don't give a single iota of a #### about sexual assault.
   79. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:17 PM (#5745569)
CNN reporting that Republican Senate leadership is trying to avoid a public hearing. So we're already up to stage #3: bargaining.
   80. PreservedFish Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:19 PM (#5745571)
Is there already speculation on who Trump would name in Kavanaugh's stead? Another boring white Federalist GOP-lifer guy? Or just to troll America, someone even more extreme? I mean I hardly think he's going to call on Merrick Garland.
   81. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:21 PM (#5745572)
A Jeanine Pirro nomination should shut those girlies' yaps up.
   82. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:21 PM (#5745573)

Sen. Susan Collins

@SenatorCollins

Professor Ford and Judge Kavanaugh should both testify under oath before the Judiciary Committee.
12:03 PM - Sep 17, 2018
   83. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:22 PM (#5745574)
Maybe it wasn't as confined as she remembers. Maybe Kavanaugh was yukking it up. Maybe she was drunk too. Maybe "pinning" her to the bed was really an alcoholic stumble and flop. Maybe drunk Kav thought he was making a smooth move. There are so many possibilities.


1. Bedrooms generally have one door. Two boys, one girl. The door was either closed and they were intimidating her, or not.

2. A man who's idea of "yukking it up" can be reasonably construed as attempted rape has no business on the SCOTUS.

3. A woman being drunk does not make attempting to rape her defensible, or her fault.

4. See #1. If the first element of the accusation is true - two drunk teen boys corral and trap a teen girl in a bedroom at a party - there is zero reason to believe they were "yukking it up" or the "pinning" was a drunken "stumble." In point of fact, it's far more reasonable to assume they saw nothing wrong with their actions and very likely it wasn't the first time they'd played that game.
   84. BDC Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:23 PM (#5745576)
Another boring white Federalist GOP-lifer guy?


There's got to be a pretty much endless supply of them.

And most of them seem to be personally blameless. The right fears that the Democrat slander mill can #MeToo anybody, but I don't remember Gorsuch, Alito, or Roberts having any problems on that score.
   85. DCA Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:25 PM (#5745578)
I don't think it's possible for it to be proven/disproven.

The thing that will sink Kavanaugh will be if additional accusers now come out of the woodwork.

If no one else comes forward, my guess is that he probably weathers the storm and is confirmed 51-50 ... Collins and Murkowski are probably campaigning behind the scenes for one "no" permission.
   86. PreservedFish Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:27 PM (#5745580)
83 - are you saying that there's no possible way that Ford is exaggerating or simply incorrect about what occurred? That's an absurd statement. Memory is fallible, anyone can be wrong about anything.

1. Bedrooms generally have one door. Two boys, one girl. The door was either closed and they were intimidating her, or not.

Or something in between. Two boys and a girl actually can enter a room together without intimidation occurring.

"A man who's idea of "yukking it up" can be reasonably construed as attempted rape has no business on the SCOTUS."

My contention is that she might be unreasonably construing. (Emphasis on "might," by the way, it's not like I am a big Kav fan)

3. A woman being drunk does not make attempting to rape her defensible, or her fault.


Of course not, but it makes her account less reliable.

   87. BrianBrianson Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:27 PM (#5745581)
More or less the same - if it was just Kava..., and he didn't turn up the radio ... then maybe there's a "yeah, he cornered her in a room, and seemed menacing, but there was nothing explicit - maybe it wasn't intentional?, nothing came of it ..." scenario where he could say "Oh, drunk misunderstanding, non-apology, etc." and skate by okay with an (R) senate.

Hard to see how that's the case here.
   88. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:28 PM (#5745582)
Collins and Murkowski are probably campaigning behind the scenes for one "no"


I'm sure they'd be welcome to caucus with the Dems as "I" if they wanted to have a spine.
   89. Zonk just has affection for alumni Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:29 PM (#5745584)
Maybe it wasn't as confined as she remembers. Maybe Kavanaugh was yukking it up. Maybe she was drunk too. Maybe "pinning" her to the bed was really an alcoholic stumble and flop. Maybe drunk Kav thought he was making a smooth move. There are so many possibilities.


IDK, just not seeing it -- I actually didn't read the letter until just now, but in her letter she says that she was on her way to the bathroom and was pushed into the bedroom. So - that either happened or it didn't (and if it didn't, sure - it all falls apart) - but if it did, well, it's confined.

I'm drawing on my own experiences with inebriation here - it's not possible to drunkenly stumble onto pinning someone... excepting, of course, two drunken friends rasslin. I'm well familiar with the loss of motor control that comes with excessive drinking - and I don't see any innocent or accidental one a drunken fellow can inadvertently 'pin' a woman.

I've also had my experiences with believing that - in my drunken state - I'm "smoother" than I am... but they've generally involved approaching women at bars, parties, etc - and getting some form "ewww" or "uh, yeah - I have a boyfriend" or "Go elsewhere" (they've also occasionally involved successes, but none of those successes involved 'stumbling' onto someone...).

I'm going to stick with the idea that either it's 99% made up - or - the details leave no room for a not-a-problem...

Dear Senator Feinstein;
I am writing with information relevant in evaluating the current nominee to the Supreme Court.
As a constituent, I expect that you will maintain this as confidential until we have further opportunity to speak.
Brett Kavanaugh physically and sexually assaulted me during high school in the early 1980's. He conducted these acts with the assistance of REDACTED.
Both were one to two years older than me and students at a local private school.
The assault occurred in a suburban Maryland area home at a gathering that included me and four others.
Kavanaugh physically pushed me into a bedroom as I was headed for a bathroom up a short stair well from the living room. They locked the door and played loud music precluding any successful attempt to yell for help.
Kavanaugh was on top of me while laughing with REDACTED, who periodically jumped onto Kavanaugh. They both laughed as Kavanaugh tried to disrobe me in their highly inebriated state. With Kavanaugh's hand over my mouth I feared he may inadvertently kill me.
From across the room a very drunken REDACTED said mixed words to Kavanaugh ranging from "go for it" to "stop."
At one point when REDACTED jumped onto the bed the weight on me was substantial. The pile toppled, and the two scrapped with each other. After a few attempts to get away, I was able to take this opportune moment to get up and run across to a hallway bathroom. I locked the bathroom door behind me. Both loudly stumbled down the stair well at which point other persons at the house were talking with them. I exited the bathroom, ran outside of the house and went home.
I have not knowingly seen Kavanaugh since the assault. I did see REDACTED once at the REDACTED where he was extremely uncomfortable seeing me.
I have received medical treatment regarding the assault. On July 6 I notified my local government representative to ask them how to proceed with sharing this information . It is upsetting to discuss sexual assault and its repercussions, yet I felt guilty and compelled as a citizen about the idea of not saying anything.

I am available to speak further should you wish to discuss. I am currently REDACTED and will be in REDACTED.
In confidence, REDACTED.


Either the entirety - or enough to be close enough to entirety - of this accusation is false, or, it's bad enough.

There's really no room for middle ground that I can find.
   90. JL72 Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:30 PM (#5745585)
That could all change, with the uncovering of more information. It is an unfortunate fact that these things take time, and over time the truth does seem to come more clear. Obviously we can't wait forever, but more time to check some things and also to allow others to come forward seems appropriate.


It also seems to me to be an issue of fairness to Kavanaugh to have this investigated. Without that, he ends up confirmed (presumably) with this hanging over him. Understanding that this could be the ultimate result even with some investigation, at least he has the chance to be exonerated (if he is in fact innocent). No investigation does him no favors in that way.

I have no idea who to believe, and if the worst is true, I do think it is disqualifying. But with an actual accusation now out there, both she and he deserve their chance to be heard.

   91. Joe Bivens is NOT a clueless numpty Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:30 PM (#5745586)
Maybe she was drunk too.


Not according to her attorney. She had one beer.
   92. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:31 PM (#5745588)
83 - are you saying that there's no possible way that Ford is exaggerating or simply incorrect about what occurred?


I really don't see one here, given the details of the accusation. If any of them are true, it more or less pulls the pin out and everything else avalanches to a pretty clear, premeditated attempt to rape the girl.
   93. Gonfalon Bubble Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:34 PM (#5745590)
More than 200 women have signed a letter beginning "We believe Dr. Blasey Ford and are grateful that she came forward to tell her story," adding that her account “is all too consistent with stories we heard and lived while attending Holton. Many of us are survivors ourselves.” The women are classmates and alumnae of Dr. Ford's high school.
   94. Joe Bivens is NOT a clueless numpty Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:34 PM (#5745591)
The only thing that troubles me is that she says she doesn't remember the exact year it happened. By the time you're 16 (or 17), you'd remember a traumatic event like this without any trouble. Teenage years are milestone years. We remember when we got our license. When we graduated. When we were sexually assaulted.

Unless she'd been assaulted numerous times.
   95. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:35 PM (#5745592)
83 - are you saying that there's no possible way that Ford is exaggerating or simply incorrect about what occurred?


It's also worth noting that Blasey-Ford's narrative has absolutely NONE of the elements common in false accusations.
   96. PreservedFish Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:39 PM (#5745593)
I really don't see one here, given the details of the accusation. If any of them are true, it more or less pulls the pin out and everything else avalanches to a pretty clear, premeditated attempt to rape the girl.

"I remember Willie Mays breaking up Sandy Koufax's no-hitter in the 9th with an inside-the-park homer in 1964."
"Uh, I checked retrosheet, and the only thing that's even close to this was Orlando Cepeda, in 1963, hitting a triple in the 7th."
   97. JL72 Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:40 PM (#5745594)
“is all too consistent with stories we heard and lived while attending Holton. Many of us are survivors ourselves.”


But that letter (at least the version I saw) is ambiguous as to what "stories" it is referring to - those involving Kavanaugh specifically, or these types of actions generally?
   98. ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:41 PM (#5745595)
Another boring white Federalist GOP-lifer guy?

There's got to be a pretty much endless supply of them.

And most of them seem to be personally blameless. The right fears that the Democrat slander mill can #MeToo anybody,



Their much more rational fear is that by the time the next nominee's name is put forward, Mitch McConnell might well be the minority leader, and that those red state Democrats will have 6 years rather than 6 weeks to weather out any repercussions from a "no" vote.
   99. The Interdimensional Council of Rickey!'s Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:44 PM (#5745598)
"I remember Willie Mays breaking up Sandy Koufax's no-hitter in the 9th with an inside-the-park homer in 1964."
"Uh, I checked retrosheet, and the only thing that's even close to this was Orlando Cepeda, in 1963, hitting a triple in the 7th."


Yes. Memory is fallible. Some of the details are probably mistaken and out of order. But this isn't a casual remembrance of a baseball game you watched as a 12 year old. And I am not terribly interested in stretching and bending reality out of shape in order to what-if away a credible rape accusation against a man a hair's breadth away from a lifetime appointment to an unanswerable position of utmost authority and power.

Regardless, his defense is not "she's misremembering that." His defense is \"##### be lying." So, either she's completely fabricated the entire event, per his argument, or she has not. If she has not, she has the benefit of doubt on the narrative of the event he says never occurred at all.
   100. BrianBrianson Posted: September 17, 2018 at 12:47 PM (#5745599)
Yeah, unless it's specifically relevant to the context, I doubt I could precisely time a story to better than "undergrad", "high school", etc. Maybe the story would have details that'd let me pin it down, better, maybe not. If it was something I'd tried to put behind me, it'd be extra easy to loose the context.
Page 1 of 25 pages  1 2 3 >  Last ›

You must be Registered and Logged In to post comments.

 

 

<< Back to main

News

All News | Prime News

Old-School Newsstand


BBTF Partner

Dynasty League Baseball

Support BBTF

donate

Thanks to
Infinite Yost (Voxter)
for his generous support.

Bookmarks

You must be logged in to view your Bookmarks.

Hot Topics

NewsblogLEAGUE CHAMPION SERIES OMNICHATTER! for the 2018 Playoffs!
(891 - 11:07pm, Oct 15)
Last: Lassus

NewsblogOT - NBA Thread (2018-19 season kickoff edition)
(472 - 11:00pm, Oct 15)
Last: PASTE, Now with Extra Pitch and Extra Stamina

NewsblogProjecting the composition of A's bullpen in 2019
(5 - 10:58pm, Oct 15)
Last: Hecubot

NewsblogOTP 2018 October 15: The shift in focus from sport to politics
(113 - 10:58pm, Oct 15)
Last: ERROR---Jolly Old St. Nick

NewsblogPrimer Dugout (and link of the day) 10-15-2018
(17 - 10:54pm, Oct 15)
Last: Sweatpants

NewsblogCatch-All Pop Culture Extravaganza (October 2018)
(253 - 10:35pm, Oct 15)
Last: Morty Causa

Gonfalon CubsNow what?
(99 - 10:12pm, Oct 15)
Last: What did Billy Ripken have against ElRoy Face?

NewsblogRed Sox exorcise their postseason demons to beat Astros and even ALCS
(8 - 10:08pm, Oct 15)
Last: My name is Votto, and I love to get blotto

NewsblogESPN: Olney: Pine tar in the postseason could put MLB in a sticky situation
(17 - 9:06pm, Oct 15)
Last: Bote Man

NewsblogUmpire Joe West Hit By Throw From Red Sox Catcher Christian Vazquez
(32 - 9:05pm, Oct 15)
Last: Cris E

NewsblogAll jokes aside, Bob Uecker seriously loves baseball
(43 - 6:32pm, Oct 15)
Last: spycake

NewsblogOT: Soccer Thread (2018-19 season begins!)
(984 - 5:43pm, Oct 15)
Last: AuntBea calls himself Sky Panther

NewsblogOTP 2018 October 8: Hugh Jackman's 'The Front Runner' Confronts The Political Conundrum Of Our Time
(1559 - 3:33pm, Oct 15)
Last: Zonk just has affection for alumni

Hall of Merit2019 Hall of Merit Ballot Discussion
(165 - 3:27pm, Oct 15)
Last: Bleed the Freak

NewsblogOT - 2018 NFL thread
(55 - 3:03pm, Oct 15)
Last: McCoy

Page rendered in 0.7421 seconds
46 querie(s) executed