|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
There is no reason why the House shouldn’t also be able to review that FBI report.
|
On October 07 2018 10:52 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2018 10:34 iamthedave wrote:On October 07 2018 08:51 Introvert wrote:On October 07 2018 08:46 iamthedave wrote:On October 07 2018 08:29 Emnjay808 wrote:On October 07 2018 08:25 Introvert wrote:On October 07 2018 08:23 Nebuchad wrote:On October 07 2018 08:15 Emnjay808 wrote:
Can someone tldr me what’s happening to Professor Ford? Surely she will be held accountable for these accusations. BK and his family now has to live with this.
If someone accused my dad of rape and their only proof was that they went to the same college. I would call for their fucking head. You would call for their fucking head? Are you okay? Your sentence doesn't even imply that the hypothetical person is lying. Actually, the implication is that his dad is obviously innocent. My dad is guilty or innocent. What other implication would I choose, given that all the accuser can prove is that they went to the same school? The issue with your question should be pretty obvious but I'll spell it out for you: A lack of evidence of Kavanaugh's guilt does not prove that Ford was lying. Her testimony remains credible, and the FBI investigation didn't turn over a lot of stones that she specifically asked them to (she named multiple witnesses she claims can corroborate her claims that were never interviewed). So... nothing's going to happen to her, without a proper investigation that could determine she was a political actor who lied. That investigation isn't going to happen because the truth is THE LAST thing the Republicans want. But don't worry, I'm sure she'll continue to receive death threats for years, your thirst for vengeance will not go unslaked. And as Plansix said, nobody was doubting that she was attacked in the first place. If she mis-named Brett, that's a different matter, but she went on record with a therapist six years ago saying it was him so... faulty memory or no, she genuinely believes it was him. As Mr. Kavanaugh himself has aptly demonstrated, a faulty memory is no crime. Kind of important factual correction. She did not him name in in the therapists notes, in fact the notes don't match the story she told in the letter (she blames the therapist). She says she told her husband in 2012. I don't believe she used his name again until 2016 or later. Fair point. Nonetheless, it seems obvious she genuinely believes it was him, they did go to the same place so she may well have been familiar with him, it's obvious he was active in the party scene so they likewise were probably vaguely acquainted. There's more than enough there to explain why she might be mistaken (maybe her actual attacker just happened to look a lot like Kavanaugh way back then, for example). And even if that doesn't convince you personally, the only way to get to the bottom of it is a full FBI investigation that the GOP is absolutely not going to request just in case it turns over some stones on Kavanaugh that flip the whole thing around, which is still a possibility, and honestly far more likely than discovering that Ford was paid by big money Democrat donors (even if you are generous and put the chances of that at less than 10%, it's still less likely that it turns out the whole thing was a Democrat hit job).. I only plan to say this a few more times, but she named everyone she thought was there. No one remembers it. That's all there is. The one date on the calendar that everyone was obsessed with isn't even right by her own admission (and they talked to those people). There is no one left to talk to. edit: and I think Ford did herself no good by accepting Feinstein's recommendation for a lawyer, a person well known in Democrat partisan circles. why should the FBI go further. If there was a tantilizing lead from somewhere, we would have heard about it from people who read the report. Given the speed at which Democrats dumped the contents entirely (over 1000 pages) it seems like that the report they did do revealed nothing, not even more leads.
This continues to ignore a pretty basic fact: to her it was one of the most memorable nights of her life while to the others it was drinking party no. 1817. Nobody remembering is far from dispositive.
|
On October 07 2018 09:34 BisuDagger wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2018 09:05 Simberto wrote:On October 07 2018 08:43 Plansix wrote:
Nothing will happen to Ford. Just like nothing happens to people who pick the wrong person in a line up. No one doubts she was sexual assaulted, they just doubt Kavanaugh did it. I'd like to clarify that "nothing" in this case means "She is going to regularly receive death threats to herself and her family, and whatever else nastiness the right and left-wing sewer part of the internet can come up with to punish a women who dared to speak up against one of their leaders, which will produce a lot of hardship for her for the next decade or so." Please don't act like this is a one sided thing after what happened to Rand Paul. We cannot condone either sides for the violence. I fixed your quote in my post to be more fair.
While I agree with your point, wasn't the Rand Paul incident just a spat with a neighbor over their lawn or something? If I recall correctly Rand himself said that it was nothing political.
Or are you referring to another Rand Paul incident I'm not aware of?
|
On October 07 2018 13:43 On_Slaught wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2018 10:52 Introvert wrote:On October 07 2018 10:34 iamthedave wrote:On October 07 2018 08:51 Introvert wrote:On October 07 2018 08:46 iamthedave wrote:On October 07 2018 08:29 Emnjay808 wrote:On October 07 2018 08:25 Introvert wrote:On October 07 2018 08:23 Nebuchad wrote:On October 07 2018 08:15 Emnjay808 wrote:
Can someone tldr me what’s happening to Professor Ford? Surely she will be held accountable for these accusations. BK and his family now has to live with this.
If someone accused my dad of rape and their only proof was that they went to the same college. I would call for their fucking head. You would call for their fucking head? Are you okay? Your sentence doesn't even imply that the hypothetical person is lying. Actually, the implication is that his dad is obviously innocent. My dad is guilty or innocent. What other implication would I choose, given that all the accuser can prove is that they went to the same school? The issue with your question should be pretty obvious but I'll spell it out for you: A lack of evidence of Kavanaugh's guilt does not prove that Ford was lying. Her testimony remains credible, and the FBI investigation didn't turn over a lot of stones that she specifically asked them to (she named multiple witnesses she claims can corroborate her claims that were never interviewed). So... nothing's going to happen to her, without a proper investigation that could determine she was a political actor who lied. That investigation isn't going to happen because the truth is THE LAST thing the Republicans want. But don't worry, I'm sure she'll continue to receive death threats for years, your thirst for vengeance will not go unslaked. And as Plansix said, nobody was doubting that she was attacked in the first place. If she mis-named Brett, that's a different matter, but she went on record with a therapist six years ago saying it was him so... faulty memory or no, she genuinely believes it was him. As Mr. Kavanaugh himself has aptly demonstrated, a faulty memory is no crime. Kind of important factual correction. She did not him name in in the therapists notes, in fact the notes don't match the story she told in the letter (she blames the therapist). She says she told her husband in 2012. I don't believe she used his name again until 2016 or later. Fair point. Nonetheless, it seems obvious she genuinely believes it was him, they did go to the same place so she may well have been familiar with him, it's obvious he was active in the party scene so they likewise were probably vaguely acquainted. There's more than enough there to explain why she might be mistaken (maybe her actual attacker just happened to look a lot like Kavanaugh way back then, for example). And even if that doesn't convince you personally, the only way to get to the bottom of it is a full FBI investigation that the GOP is absolutely not going to request just in case it turns over some stones on Kavanaugh that flip the whole thing around, which is still a possibility, and honestly far more likely than discovering that Ford was paid by big money Democrat donors (even if you are generous and put the chances of that at less than 10%, it's still less likely that it turns out the whole thing was a Democrat hit job).. I only plan to say this a few more times, but she named everyone she thought was there. No one remembers it. That's all there is. The one date on the calendar that everyone was obsessed with isn't even right by her own admission (and they talked to those people). There is no one left to talk to. edit: and I think Ford did herself no good by accepting Feinstein's recommendation for a lawyer, a person well known in Democrat partisan circles. why should the FBI go further. If there was a tantilizing lead from somewhere, we would have heard about it from people who read the report. Given the speed at which Democrats dumped the contents entirely (over 1000 pages) it seems like that the report they did do revealed nothing, not even more leads. This continues to ignore a pretty basic fact: to her it was one of the most memorable nights of her life while to the others it was drinking party no. 1817. Nobody remembering is far from dispositive. F
Read the post I am addressing. It's about the FBI; if no one remembers, what more can they do? Everyone wanted their Anita Hill-like investigation, they got it.
|
On October 07 2018 14:00 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2018 13:43 On_Slaught wrote:On October 07 2018 10:52 Introvert wrote:On October 07 2018 10:34 iamthedave wrote:On October 07 2018 08:51 Introvert wrote:On October 07 2018 08:46 iamthedave wrote:On October 07 2018 08:29 Emnjay808 wrote:On October 07 2018 08:25 Introvert wrote:On October 07 2018 08:23 Nebuchad wrote:On October 07 2018 08:15 Emnjay808 wrote:
Can someone tldr me what’s happening to Professor Ford? Surely she will be held accountable for these accusations. BK and his family now has to live with this.
If someone accused my dad of rape and their only proof was that they went to the same college. I would call for their fucking head. You would call for their fucking head? Are you okay? Your sentence doesn't even imply that the hypothetical person is lying. Actually, the implication is that his dad is obviously innocent. My dad is guilty or innocent. What other implication would I choose, given that all the accuser can prove is that they went to the same school? The issue with your question should be pretty obvious but I'll spell it out for you: A lack of evidence of Kavanaugh's guilt does not prove that Ford was lying. Her testimony remains credible, and the FBI investigation didn't turn over a lot of stones that she specifically asked them to (she named multiple witnesses she claims can corroborate her claims that were never interviewed). So... nothing's going to happen to her, without a proper investigation that could determine she was a political actor who lied. That investigation isn't going to happen because the truth is THE LAST thing the Republicans want. But don't worry, I'm sure she'll continue to receive death threats for years, your thirst for vengeance will not go unslaked. And as Plansix said, nobody was doubting that she was attacked in the first place. If she mis-named Brett, that's a different matter, but she went on record with a therapist six years ago saying it was him so... faulty memory or no, she genuinely believes it was him. As Mr. Kavanaugh himself has aptly demonstrated, a faulty memory is no crime. Kind of important factual correction. She did not him name in in the therapists notes, in fact the notes don't match the story she told in the letter (she blames the therapist). She says she told her husband in 2012. I don't believe she used his name again until 2016 or later. Fair point. Nonetheless, it seems obvious she genuinely believes it was him, they did go to the same place so she may well have been familiar with him, it's obvious he was active in the party scene so they likewise were probably vaguely acquainted. There's more than enough there to explain why she might be mistaken (maybe her actual attacker just happened to look a lot like Kavanaugh way back then, for example). And even if that doesn't convince you personally, the only way to get to the bottom of it is a full FBI investigation that the GOP is absolutely not going to request just in case it turns over some stones on Kavanaugh that flip the whole thing around, which is still a possibility, and honestly far more likely than discovering that Ford was paid by big money Democrat donors (even if you are generous and put the chances of that at less than 10%, it's still less likely that it turns out the whole thing was a Democrat hit job).. I only plan to say this a few more times, but she named everyone she thought was there. No one remembers it. That's all there is. The one date on the calendar that everyone was obsessed with isn't even right by her own admission (and they talked to those people). There is no one left to talk to. edit: and I think Ford did herself no good by accepting Feinstein's recommendation for a lawyer, a person well known in Democrat partisan circles. why should the FBI go further. If there was a tantilizing lead from somewhere, we would have heard about it from people who read the report. Given the speed at which Democrats dumped the contents entirely (over 1000 pages) it seems like that the report they did do revealed nothing, not even more leads. This continues to ignore a pretty basic fact: to her it was one of the most memorable nights of her life while to the others it was drinking party no. 1817. Nobody remembering is far from dispositive. F Read the post I am addressing. It's about the FBI; if no one remembers, what more can they do? Everyone wanted their Anita Hill-like investigation, they got it.
Fair enough, but my point still stands.
|
On October 07 2018 09:55 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2018 09:05 Simberto wrote:On October 07 2018 08:43 Plansix wrote:
Nothing will happen to Ford. Just like nothing happens to people who pick the wrong person in a line up. No one doubts she was sexual assaulted, they just doubt Kavanaugh did it. I'd like to clarify that "nothing" in this case means "She is going to regularly receive death threats to herself and her family, and whatever else nastiness the right-wing sewer part of the internet can come up with to punish a women who dared to speak up against one of their leaders, which will produce a lot of hardship for her for the next decade or so." Maybe she can just move to a foreign country and live off the $568,871 she received in GofundMe donations? Honestly i think she will be forgotten pretty quickly now.
That's just for the one account, all together she has made over a million dollars.
Add another few million in book deals, future speaking fees / being used as a pawn in Democrat fundraisers and she is set for life.
edit: How much she got 'off the books' for doing this by the Democrats+Allies is anybodies guess
|
On October 07 2018 11:26 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2018 08:15 Emnjay808 wrote:
Can someone tldr me what’s happening to Professor Ford? Surely she will be held accountable for these accusations. BK and his family now has to live with this.
If someone accused my dad of rape and their only proof was that they went to the same college. I would call for their fucking head. She did nothing wrong.
Are you seriously suggesting every person who comes with accusations that can't be proved should be held accountable? That is pretty much prohibiting people from ever reporting sexual crimes! Even if you see someone steal your car, but the car is never found so the person is not convicted, the guy can say "you ruined my life."
The whistleblower should be protected. Ford went through a lot for what she thought was right.
|
was there CCTV/Security footage of the car being stolen by said person? did anyone else see it happen? was it 37 years ago and your just reporting it now?
Maybe a better question is, at what point should someone ever be in trouble for falsely accusing someone else?
|
On October 07 2018 16:08 Taelshin wrote:
was there CCTV/Security footage of the car being stolen by said person? did anyone else see it happen? was it 37 years ago and your just reporting it now?
Maybe a better question is, at what point should someone ever be in trouble for falsely accusing someone else?
It is often hard to conclusively prove a negative. I accuse you of killing my dad. He is still alive, so that was possible to disprove.
If he died and the coroners report is inconclusive or done quickly since no foul play was suspected at the time, how do you prove you didn't do it? You would never ever be convicted for it since there is no evidence but it would be hard to prove 100% false. So how should I be punished when I "honestly" think you did it and it isn't possible to prove it didn't happen? You just didn't have a motive and there is no proof so you can't be convicted.
At worst I could be judged to have delusions and put into psychiatric care. There would be no manhunt or investigation since it isn't probable. If you have no alibi and was in the same area at the time of death. Then you might even be investigated since it could have happened. Which is when I guess you could try for a civil suit afterwards.
---
As I see it there are two ways to look at it. Anybody can accuse anybody and if reasonable it should be investigated. Protecting the one doing the accusing if there is risk to their life. As it currently is. It isn't fun spending the effort for this and many times the accuser is not treated well currently, see current Ford case.
Secondly, if accusing somebody you face a risk of punishment that is proportional to the punishment somebody accused would face. In this case nobody would ever accuse influential people or organised crime since the risk of them not being convicted is too high.
I personally prefer the first case. Even though I had a friend accused for rape that he didn't commit. Investigation found it false due to him not being at the location (sloppy accusation) but it was still the right way to handle it.
|
On October 07 2018 16:08 Taelshin wrote:
was there CCTV/Security footage of the car being stolen by said person? did anyone else see it happen? was it 37 years ago and your just reporting it now?
Maybe a better question is, at what point should someone ever be in trouble for falsely accusing someone else?
Eh... I said he could not be convicted=there would be no security footage. Your word against theirs.
About the false accusations, there are cases where it makes sense, but it should be just as difficult to prove as the action itself: If you have footage of people throwing themselves at card to sue them for reckless driving etc.
About the sexual crimes, the women who accept "silence money" do their fellow accusers no favours, as they question the motivations of others. Some of these cases look more like a very expensive form of luxury prostitution...
|
On October 07 2018 10:52 Introvert wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2018 10:34 iamthedave wrote:On October 07 2018 08:51 Introvert wrote:On October 07 2018 08:46 iamthedave wrote:On October 07 2018 08:29 Emnjay808 wrote:On October 07 2018 08:25 Introvert wrote:On October 07 2018 08:23 Nebuchad wrote:On October 07 2018 08:15 Emnjay808 wrote:
Can someone tldr me what’s happening to Professor Ford? Surely she will be held accountable for these accusations. BK and his family now has to live with this.
If someone accused my dad of rape and their only proof was that they went to the same college. I would call for their fucking head. You would call for their fucking head? Are you okay? Your sentence doesn't even imply that the hypothetical person is lying. Actually, the implication is that his dad is obviously innocent. My dad is guilty or innocent. What other implication would I choose, given that all the accuser can prove is that they went to the same school? The issue with your question should be pretty obvious but I'll spell it out for you: A lack of evidence of Kavanaugh's guilt does not prove that Ford was lying. Her testimony remains credible, and the FBI investigation didn't turn over a lot of stones that she specifically asked them to (she named multiple witnesses she claims can corroborate her claims that were never interviewed). So... nothing's going to happen to her, without a proper investigation that could determine she was a political actor who lied. That investigation isn't going to happen because the truth is THE LAST thing the Republicans want. But don't worry, I'm sure she'll continue to receive death threats for years, your thirst for vengeance will not go unslaked. And as Plansix said, nobody was doubting that she was attacked in the first place. If she mis-named Brett, that's a different matter, but she went on record with a therapist six years ago saying it was him so... faulty memory or no, she genuinely believes it was him. As Mr. Kavanaugh himself has aptly demonstrated, a faulty memory is no crime. Kind of important factual correction. She did not him name in in the therapists notes, in fact the notes don't match the story she told in the letter (she blames the therapist). She says she told her husband in 2012. I don't believe she used his name again until 2016 or later. Fair point. Nonetheless, it seems obvious she genuinely believes it was him, they did go to the same place so she may well have been familiar with him, it's obvious he was active in the party scene so they likewise were probably vaguely acquainted. There's more than enough there to explain why she might be mistaken (maybe her actual attacker just happened to look a lot like Kavanaugh way back then, for example). And even if that doesn't convince you personally, the only way to get to the bottom of it is a full FBI investigation that the GOP is absolutely not going to request just in case it turns over some stones on Kavanaugh that flip the whole thing around, which is still a possibility, and honestly far more likely than discovering that Ford was paid by big money Democrat donors (even if you are generous and put the chances of that at less than 10%, it's still less likely that it turns out the whole thing was a Democrat hit job).. I only plan to say this a few more times, but she named everyone she thought was there. No one remembers it. That's all there is. The one date on the calendar that everyone was obsessed with isn't even right by her own admission (and they talked to those people). There is no one left to talk to. edit: and I think Ford did herself no good by accepting Feinstein's recommendation for a lawyer, a person well known in Democrat partisan circles. why should the FBI go further. If there was a tantilizing lead from somewhere, we would have heard about it from people who read the report. Given the speed at which Democrats dumped the contents entirely (over 1000 pages) it seems like that the report they did do revealed nothing, not even more leads.
I think the point went zooming over your head.
I've been addressing the question of what happens to Dr. Ford, and why nothing will, because a few posters were asking if she'll face charges or the like. The only way negative consequences could come back on Ford is with a full FBI investigation to determine if she's a political operative. You're still stuck on defending Kavanaugh, which is irrelevant at this point.
On October 07 2018 16:08 Taelshin wrote:
was there CCTV/Security footage of the car being stolen by said person? did anyone else see it happen? was it 37 years ago and your just reporting it now?
Maybe a better question is, at what point should someone ever be in trouble for falsely accusing someone else?
The same time that someone should be in trouble for being accused; when they're proven to be guilty.
I think Conservatives are missing that while the FBI report vindicated Kavanaugh it didn't implicate Ford. This crime, if it happened, is simply lost to history. The truth of it, or not, exists now solely in Dr. Ford, and there's no way to prove it one way or the other. Unless the GOP want to launch a full FBI investigation to try and find out every little detail and MAYBE find something that suggests Ford made it all up (at most it's likely to suggest she was mistaken about the identity of her attacker since it's never been in doubt she was attacked) there is zero legal grounds for there to be blowback on her for this. She made an accusation that she believed to be genuine. There's no fault in happening to be wrong.
EDIT: Also, fuck Trump for mocking Ford publically at a rally recently. All that's going to do is galvanise the abuse she's getting. Be nice if the principled Conservatives who found her testimony credible could stand up and condemn the President for what he did.
No takers?
Shocking.
|
There are three separate accusations, and there is much circumstantial evidence to advance the view of BK as a frat boy drunk rapist. There is no reason to believe Ford was lying and conservatives have basically said that it didn’t matter if BK was guilty or not. The desire to punish Ford has nothing to do with integrity of the process, it’s just the garden variety impulse to abuse power and crush your enemies. There is no need to talk of false accusations or to entertain that possibility, that’s just conceding to these dishonest arguments by the same GOP politicians that probably all have sexually assaulted people themselves and who will certainly send more of their daughters to clerk for Kavanaugh even privately believing he committed those acts.
|
On October 07 2018 17:33 Grumbels wrote:
There are three separate accusations, and there is much circumstantial evidence to advance the view of BK as a frat boy drunk rapist. There is no reason to believe Ford was lying and conservatives have basically said that it didn’t matter if BK was guilty or not. The desire to punish Ford has nothing to do with integrity of the process, it’s just the garden variety impulse to abuse power and crush your enemies. There is no need to talk of false accusations or to entertain that possibility, that’s just conceding to these dishonest arguments by the same GOP politicians that probably all have sexually assaulted people themselves and who will certainly send more of their daughters to clerk for Kavanaugh even privately believing he committed those acts.
Fratboy drunk? Yes.
It's a big jump to rapist. There's a lot of the first two in the world, (thankfully) far fewer of the latter. And you're going a bit far with the other accusations. It's highly unlikely many, if any, of the GOP have sexually assaulted anyone (unless you think all the Democrats did as well? Their power is just as abusable, after all)
The accusations are dishonest, yes, and it's motivated by revenge rather than integrity, but given the extremely high profile of the accusations themselves and how insanely partisan and aggressive the party warfare has grown, some cursory investigation to be sure the accusations were made in good faith is a sensible step to take.
I do think that enough of the GOP are worried one of them might be true that they aren't going to request that investigation, however, because the only way to check if the accusations are true is, essentially, to continue the Kavanaugh investigation, albeit with a different focus.
The problem of course is that it's far more likely that further investigation is just going to reveal the same amount of not much at all, and be a general waste of time beyond providing a little confidence that nobody did anything in bad faith. Only... nobody would believe it.
|
The only way would be to somehow make BK or his buddy confess the assault, which would not happen ofc.
I am more concerned that he obviously lied under oath, failed/refused to answer important questions, is obviously partisan the GOP tried to hide documents about his past. There are tonnes of things the DEMs will use for years to come, and the Ford testemony is just one of them.
BK was obviously voted in for being the most useful candidate, not the best. Hillary Clinton would be less partisan in the SCOTUS partisan than this guy!
Look forward to decades of democratic detoriation, as the SCOTUS gives free reign to Gerrymandering, hindering DEM majority groups to vote, widening the floodgates for donations (corruption in system) and so forth.
But as long as priviliges are maintained, that is fine, right?
|
Bisutopia19371 Posts
On October 07 2018 13:51 Dromar wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2018 09:34 BisuDagger wrote:On October 07 2018 09:05 Simberto wrote:On October 07 2018 08:43 Plansix wrote:
Nothing will happen to Ford. Just like nothing happens to people who pick the wrong person in a line up. No one doubts she was sexual assaulted, they just doubt Kavanaugh did it. I'd like to clarify that "nothing" in this case means "She is going to regularly receive death threats to herself and her family, and whatever else nastiness the right and left-wing sewer part of the internet can come up with to punish a women who dared to speak up against one of their leaders, which will produce a lot of hardship for her for the next decade or so." Please don't act like this is a one sided thing after what happened to Rand Paul. We cannot condone either sides for the violence. I fixed your quote in my post to be more fair. While I agree with your point, wasn't the Rand Paul incident just a spat with a neighbor over their lawn or something? If I recall correctly Rand himself said that it was nothing political. Or are you referring to another Rand Paul incident I'm not aware of?
This is a letter from Rand Paul's wife discussing the incident and more. It's really sad to read. I can only find the full version on Facebook so here's a link to it.
+ Show Spoiler +
|
On October 07 2018 16:08 Taelshin wrote:
was there CCTV/Security footage of the car being stolen by said person? did anyone else see it happen? was it 37 years ago and your just reporting it now?
Maybe a better question is, at what point should someone ever be in trouble for falsely accusing someone else?
When there is evidence that they accused someone out of malice or intentionally lied. The accuser is presumed innocent just like the person they accused is presumed innocent.
|
On October 07 2018 23:17 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2018 16:08 Taelshin wrote:
was there CCTV/Security footage of the car being stolen by said person? did anyone else see it happen? was it 37 years ago and your just reporting it now?
Maybe a better question is, at what point should someone ever be in trouble for falsely accusing someone else? When there is evidence that they accused someone out of malice or intentionally lied. The accuser is presumed innocent just like the person they accused is presumed innocent.
And secondarily, anyone who isn't completely divorced from reality can recognise the potential optics backfire of a bunch of old white powerful men trying to criminalise a sexual assault survivor for the crime of speaking up, which is exactly how it'd be spun if the investigation came back all clear (which it probably would).
Doing the necessary digging to determine whether or not Ford's actions are prosecutable is a minefield, especially given the rabidity of right wing media, the almost certain intensification of abuse Ford's already receiving, and the equal strengthening of the aforementioned awful optics and narrative.
I think it's worth doing, because your politics is - somehow - going to get into an even darker place if 'accuse people of sexual assault' becomes the new political go-to as what's-his-face implied, but the effort of doing that investigation seems redundant when the beermeister is now a lifetime supreme court judge and the GOP has everything it wanted anyway, just with a bit more squirming than they'd have liked.
|
On October 07 2018 23:34 iamthedave wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2018 23:17 Plansix wrote:On October 07 2018 16:08 Taelshin wrote:
was there CCTV/Security footage of the car being stolen by said person? did anyone else see it happen? was it 37 years ago and your just reporting it now?
Maybe a better question is, at what point should someone ever be in trouble for falsely accusing someone else? When there is evidence that they accused someone out of malice or intentionally lied. The accuser is presumed innocent just like the person they accused is presumed innocent. And secondarily, anyone who isn't completely divorced from reality can recognise the potential optics backfire of a bunch of old white powerful men trying to criminalise a sexual assault survivor for the crime of speaking up, which is exactly how it'd be spun if the investigation came back all clear (which it probably would). Doing the necessary digging to determine whether or not Ford's actions are prosecutable is a minefield, especially given the rabidity of right wing media, the almost certain intensification of abuse Ford's already receiving, and the equal strengthening of the aforementioned awful optics and narrative. I think it's worth doing, because your politics is - somehow - going to get into an even darker place if 'accuse people of sexual assault' becomes the new political go-to as what's-his-face implied, but the effort of doing that investigation seems redundant when the beermeister is now a lifetime supreme court judge and the GOP has everything it wanted anyway, just with a bit more squirming than they'd have liked.
"They're a false causer" is just the female pointed version of "You're just playing the race card."
|
On October 07 2018 19:56 BisuDagger wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2018 13:51 Dromar wrote:On October 07 2018 09:34 BisuDagger wrote:On October 07 2018 09:05 Simberto wrote:On October 07 2018 08:43 Plansix wrote:
Nothing will happen to Ford. Just like nothing happens to people who pick the wrong person in a line up. No one doubts she was sexual assaulted, they just doubt Kavanaugh did it. I'd like to clarify that "nothing" in this case means "She is going to regularly receive death threats to herself and her family, and whatever else nastiness the right and left-wing sewer part of the internet can come up with to punish a women who dared to speak up against one of their leaders, which will produce a lot of hardship for her for the next decade or so." Please don't act like this is a one sided thing after what happened to Rand Paul. We cannot condone either sides for the violence. I fixed your quote in my post to be more fair. While I agree with your point, wasn't the Rand Paul incident just a spat with a neighbor over their lawn or something? If I recall correctly Rand himself said that it was nothing political. Or are you referring to another Rand Paul incident I'm not aware of? This is a letter from Rand Paul's wife discussing the incident and more. It's really sad to read. I can only find the full version on Facebook so here's a link to it. + Show Spoiler +
Rand Paul's wife seems to be the only one that thinks that attack was at all related to politics and I can't find any evidence at all to support that view, feel free to post it if you can find some tho.
|
On October 08 2018 01:31 ThaddeusK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2018 19:56 BisuDagger wrote:On October 07 2018 13:51 Dromar wrote:On October 07 2018 09:34 BisuDagger wrote:On October 07 2018 09:05 Simberto wrote:On October 07 2018 08:43 Plansix wrote:
Nothing will happen to Ford. Just like nothing happens to people who pick the wrong person in a line up. No one doubts she was sexual assaulted, they just doubt Kavanaugh did it. I'd like to clarify that "nothing" in this case means "She is going to regularly receive death threats to herself and her family, and whatever else nastiness the right and left-wing sewer part of the internet can come up with to punish a women who dared to speak up against one of their leaders, which will produce a lot of hardship for her for the next decade or so." Please don't act like this is a one sided thing after what happened to Rand Paul. We cannot condone either sides for the violence. I fixed your quote in my post to be more fair. While I agree with your point, wasn't the Rand Paul incident just a spat with a neighbor over their lawn or something? If I recall correctly Rand himself said that it was nothing political. Or are you referring to another Rand Paul incident I'm not aware of? This is a letter from Rand Paul's wife discussing the incident and more. It's really sad to read. I can only find the full version on Facebook so here's a link to it. + Show Spoiler + Rand Paul's wife seems to be the only one that thinks that attack was at all related to politics and I can't find any evidence at all to support that view, feel free to post it if you can find some tho.
In fact, the judge who oversaw the case, Marianne Battani, expressly found that the attack wasn't about politics and was instead little more than a dispute between neighbors.
“The court does not believe you did this because of Sen. Paul’s political positions or political work,” Battani said to Boucher. “I see this as strictly a dispute between neighbors ... it’s an unfortunate incident that should not have happened. There were other ways to resolve it, and as far as the attack (Paul) was certainly an innocent victim.”
Source
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
