Politics/Slapfights - Ancient history to modern day!

[Raga]

A follow-up to the conservative rag rumors I was posting about earlier. Apparently, the issue is that Diane Feinstein passive aggressively stated she had "no way of knowing" if Ford would show up for questioning if outside counsel was involved (read if I don't get the spectacle of Ford being interrogated by a bunch of heartless old white dudes to milk).

Seems to be petulance and nothing more. I doubt it means anything.

Addendum:

Actually, it looks like Ford *is* totally complaining about it:

https://twitter.com/seungminkim/status/ ... 9226778624

1. That she is apparently not getting a treatment analogous to investigation into the Iran-Contra scandal or the Watergate scandal, as if this investigation is even in the same ballpark as those.

2. That she isn't being questioned by the committee itself and is instead being questioned by an outside counsel who is an experienced sex crimes prosecutor. (And she does know the prosecutor is female as she explicitly refers to her as "she" so it's not some "I don't want to be interrogated by some random dude" trauma.)

[Vol]

Barrett wouldn't fly, a few GOP votes are contingent on Kavanaugh probably not going along with overturning Roe v Wade. One's that lady senator they have who seems more a Blue Dog than anything. It's not quite time for that fight yet, but Ginsberg looks like she's staying alive day to day at this point, and if she goes, that's going to be the real nasty one.

Apparently an unnamed man is speaking to the judiciary committee about how he might be the one who forced himself on Ford back then. I cannot find a real source on that, so it's only a rumor right now.

[Sinekein]

Eh? I'm not talking about Viking raids in general. I'm talking about that specific period when England was basically partitioned between the Anglo-Saxons and the Vikings and they fought each other. When there was high indignation not just of Viking raiding but of Viking settlement. There's various early kings of Britain regarded as saints and heroes specifically because they drove away the Vikings.

The Vikings were coastal raiders, and were heathens. The Saxons had adopted christianity and lived sedentary lives with cattle herding being one of their main activities. Those were two different ways of living. It was a cultural shock, but it was also one between two different economical societies which both were tightly related not to the history of the populations (...because Saxons had very much started as pirates, pillagers and raiders themselves, which allowed them to settle in england) but to the location they were living in.

The previously mentioned difference between England and France had nothing to do with "culture" or "tradition". France is simply more fertile when it comes to cultivate crops, while England's landscape and climate make cattle herding much more favorable. Those are the elements that eventually cause the cultural differenciations, not the other way around in my opinion.

Also, I'm nowhere insisting that class struggle (which is really just shorthand for fighting over resources when it comes down to it) doesn't matter. Think of the fertile valley hypothesis which is basically that adversity is the chief thing that drives change. If people live in a fertile, isolated valley where all their needs are met and there's no overpopulation, there is pretty much no incentive to invent things or leave or wage war. But since fertile valleys are actually mythical and there's always pressure for external expansion at some point, you have to make decisions about who you fight and who you don't. Who you ally with. Who you raid. Some of that decision making is based on realpolitik considerations of other people's strength. But kinship is another huge component.

My point is that kinship might look today like it's ethnicity or race-related, but that it can often be traced back to class differences that evolved over the course of decades/centuries/millenia. Culture is built around the resources at your disposal. The very "aggressive" Nordic Pantheon fits Vikings well, because it emerged from their culture which happened to develop in a location where deities such as Ceres or Epona, who rule over fertility, make little sense. They had to deal with a harsh climate, which meant that the best course of action was to take those resources from more prosperous lands, instead of trying and turning Sweden and Denmark into new fertile Crescents.

Those are the differences which in time end up in different cultures, ethnicities, or, due to a lack of crossbreeding, "races".

[Vol]

Watched the Ford hearing, more or less half-listening. The GOP prosecutor mostly got her to clarify the events before and after the alleged assault, where the house was, who was there, who she told, when she told them, the letter, who's paying her bills, the multiple 6 figure GoFundMe's that have sprung up from nowhere for her, etc. The Dems gave her 5 minute breaks by fluffing and creating sound bites. Not much actual information came out, but Fox immediately started preaching doom, so I'm wondering if that, and the way the GOP instantly ended the hearing without any more questions once the prosecutor was done, means they're going to throw Kavanaugh to the sharks. They do lack balls, as I say.

[Raga]

I'm listening on the radio and Kavanaugh has got the waterworks going. It's really hard to tell from just sound if he's just putting on a big show or if its legit.

[Vol]

It's legit, he's rather emotional, and not just at the movie moments.

Took a look at Twitter just now, and he's getting mocked roundly for that. Stoic masculinity isn't toxic after all, it seems, it's what men should stand by.

[Mobius_118]

Kavanaugh has probably never had his shit challenged. He's used to getting his way, so all of this coming to light is making him one emotional little shit.

The thing is, he's already lied under oath as it is, so why he's still an option for Supreme Court Justice can be explained away by the GOP setting themselves up for more power and control, regardless of legality.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Mobius. You are without a doubt the most partisan retard I've ever seen.

Which is impressive because there's an awful lot of them on the internet. Every single Media narrative you buy. Every single one. Even when they contradict earlier narratives. You are the perfect cultist. The Grade A outrage puppet.

Thank you for giving our President another 4 years in office.

[Sinekein]

Mobius. You are without a doubt the most partisan retard I've ever seen.

Takes one to know one, eh?

@Kavanaugh: apparently he yelled at Sen. Feinstein - I can't get a live from Europe, as it's not being broadcasted. I have nothing against him being emotional, I can totally understand the pressure he's under, but dude is auditioning for the Supreme Court, he should be able to at least keep his nerves in check. And again, not talking about crying, that's human. You're a SCOTUS candidate, you should have composure.

[Vol]

Live stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2DwnF30KASY

I will agree that he should tamp down his emotions. Yes, he's been accused of being a serial rapist, his reputation is ruined forever regardless, and he might lose the job he worked for his entire life, but still. Taking that kind of emotional storm on the chin and finding your center is important for a seat on the highest court.

[Raga]

He didn't yell at her. He answered a question she asked him like three times and got more forceful with each answer.

[Raga]

I think the emotion actually helps him. He seems genuinely indignant which is what you'd expect from an innocent dude.

At the end of the day, this all boils down to "Who do you believe more?" Emotional appeal is like 85% of what's going on here.

[Mobius_118]

Mobius. You are without a doubt the most partisan retard I've ever seen.

Which is impressive because there's an awful lot of them on the internet. Every single Media narrative you buy. Every single one. Even when they contradict earlier narratives. You are the perfect cultist. The Grade A outrage puppet.

Thank you for giving our President another 4 years in office.

Wait, so knowing that Kavanaugh lied under oath is partisan now? Or that his multiple accusers need to be heard? That rape has no statute of limitations?

Boy, you have some serious issues if US law chaps your ass. He's unqualified. He's broken the law. That should be it, but noticing the GOP ramming his nomination through despite all of his law breaking? That's not partisan. That's thinking for myself.

The best part is, since you directly benefit from all of the bullshit going on with the GOP, you are an extreme partisan wingnut.

I think the emotion actually helps him. He seems genuinely indignant which is what you'd expect from an innocent dude.

At the end of the day, this all boils down to "Who do you believe more?" Emotional appeal is like 85% of what's going on here.

His emotion should have no sway. He lied under oath and has 4 accusers who should have their claims investigated.

[Sinekein]

Ooookay...so that Mark Judge whom Christine Ford places in the same room during the assault, wrote a book for his recovery from addiction process, in which a character named "Kavanaugh" is a drunk and regularly blacks out due to alcohol consumption?

Like, for real? He could pick from tens of thousands of last names but picked "Kavanaugh"?

[Raga]

He lied under oath and has 4 accusers who should have their claims investigated.

What would they investigate? There's not going to be photos or forensics or newspaper articles except to the order of "this proves these teenagers drank at parties in the 80s." Everything would still be 100% based on what a bunch of witnesses say.

[Mobius_118]

His calendar defense crumpled quickly.

There's Beyond a Reasonable Doubt, in which the Judge and/or jury, depending on if it's a bench or trial jury, will gather the testimony of all the witnesses, gather up what evidence is available, the prosecutor will examine, cross examine, do it all over again, along with the defense who'll try to discredit the accusers. All witnesses will have attempts to be impeached. Jury will deliberate, then the Judge will hand down the law.

And this is why it's hard to make a case of sexual assault from the 80's stick. Here's the thing, there's more than one accuser. That strengthens credibility for the victims. Kavanaughs list of people saying he did not do those things, some 63 people, came out the day after Ford made her accusation. That creates doubt because why have the list prepped? Just in case?

Anything and everything can be used the Prosecutor and the Defense to make or break a case. Kavanaugh already has enough on him to deny his nomination due to just lying to Congress, which can put you in jail. This would put him in prison.

Then again this administration is full of sexual predators. The trump has 20 allegations against him. Seems to be no surprise to anyone that sexual predation is viewed as a positive aspect in this current time.

[Raga]

There's definitely some "rally the base" going on here. Some "look various Republican senators, vote for me or be voted out."

[Mobius_118]

There always is. I find it hilarious that I get accused of being partisan when the GOP is straight up breaking the law to get their way, in blatant, obvious ways that even dipshits like GAC can see. I say can see, but won't acknowledge, because lololololfuckyoulibfags.

[Mobius_118]

I still stand by this: If he's innocent, then why is he so adamant about not being investigated? As a soon to be minted Peace Officer, I find that to be quite curious and worth exploring.

[Sinekein]

That's what I wondered too. When a Dem Senator asked about his former pal Mark Judge, he could have simply said "yes, I would have liked him to be here so that he can exonerate me". If you are innocent, you trust due process.

I honestly wonder if they could not both be saying the truth, in a way. If he indeed got drunk, considering those were the Eighties and that in that time the treatment of women was, eh, lackluster? then it wouldn't be that outlandish for him to have entirely forgotten about that, because he was a wee bit tipsy and this bro stuff was the kind of joke you forgot about during the night because, back in the day, it was not quite perceived as a crime (especially if his attempts failed).

It would be like a dumb drunk game for him, the kind you entirely forget about because you're too smashed to remember what you did the next day. I'm not a heavy or regular drinker, and I'm pretty sure I've forgotten many stupid things I did while drunk ten years ago.

[Vol]

Well, two reasons.

One, I would not ask to be investigated for crimes I did not commit, especially if no evidence to exonerate me will ever exist, because what sane person would? You cede power to the government and your accuser in that case, for no gain.

Two, this is all a play to get him in/out before the midterms, because the Dems expect to win big, and if they do, they can refuse to confirm any judge for the next two years. GOP wants to push him through. What he did or did not do is irrelevant to the theatre.

[Raga]

It's not about his innocence. It's about the midterms. The reason the Democrats want an investigation is because it would take 563 days to complete. The reason he doesn't want one is because regardless of what the FBI finds, even if he is exonerated, if the Democrats win back Congress they will not ever bring his nomination to a vote.

Even Ford's lawyer explicitly protested that there wasn't an investigation that will take ten zillion days. He explicitly made an appeal to the length of the Watergate and Iran Contra investigations.

This is 98% political strategy on both sides and only 2% honestly caring about whether assault happened or not.

And yes, I believe at this point more or less that both of them *believe* what they are saying is true.

[TheodoricFriede]

Wait, are you saying this whole thing might be politically motivated?

[Sinekein]

One, I would not ask to be investigated for crimes I did not commit, especially if no evidence to exonerate me will ever exist, because what sane person would? You cede power to the government and your accuser in that case, for no gain.

The gain being that you will be exonerated. As it stands, if he's voted in, he'll always be "the rapist of the Supreme Court", whether he did it or not.

In that case, since he plainly states he believes Christine Ford was assaulted, the FBI studying his "extensive calendars" might at the very least help find who was really responsible, if the meeting did occur, who were the likely witnesses, and so on. It won't give clear proof, but it can bring enough evidence so that the story looks like it's going one way or another.

This is 98% political strategic on both sides and only 2% honestly caring about whether assault happened or not.

Yes, and it's quite insane to see the "greatest democracy in the world" allowing situations like that.

Even in France, where politicians absolutely suck at honesty and transparency and where many condemned officials keep being elected, such an accusation would mean an immediate cancellation of the candidature until it is made clear whether it is true or not. Two men should have been ministers but were left out of the government because there were investigations on their finances. Both were exonerated, and both have now a new situation, because once you're exonerated, it's officially behind you and you can honestly start anew (with a bit of sympathy for what happened that boosts your popularity).

And again, France is far from being good with the personal dealings of its politicians. We were one year away from voting in a sex offender in 2012, if he could have kept it in his pants once at NY's Sofitel.

And at the overall strategy...honestly, how far are the Republicans looking? If they confirm Kavanaugh before the midterms, then yes indeed they might get a SCOTUS bent their way, but after a day like this, they will be more likely to lose the Senate, and the Congress, because it's Democratic voters who are going to be inflamed, not the conservatives who got their way. Even if they barely hold the Senate, they will always have "a rapist in the Supreme Court", which is an easy advertisement for all Democratic candidates in the future, and the next elections are supposed to be far less GOP-friendly than this one.

They're just giving more and more ammunition to the Democrats, and ammunition that isn't even directly Trump-related (because those he can deal with himself, he's good at it - but defending others? He kinda sucks at that).

[Raga]

We are fighting about the cultural future of the republic. Both sides believe the other is evil and will condemn the country into perpetual backwardness. They are not interested in "democracy as process," the means by which people with different cultures and values can live together without violence. The hysteria has mounted to a level on both sides that both sides have started to believe that negotiation with the other side is only slightly removed from negotiating with Nazis.

Somebody has to win. It's the only thing that will stop it. Hopefully the Constitution is strong & flexible enough to not crumple and to be of use to whatever side wins at the end of it.

It's in our top 3 biggest existential crises, the other two being the Civil Rights Movement/Vietnam and the Civil War.

[Mobius_118]

He still lied to Congress. That alone is a disqualifying fact.

[TheodoricFriede]

Trump should have found a hyper conservative female judge.

Then we could have really seen the process implode.

[Sinekein]

He'd have to acknowledge that women are intelligent beings first.

[TheodoricFriede]

He'd have to acknowledge that women are intelligent beings first.

Mostly I'm just curious what the Democrat response would have been?

They couldn't look for evidence of rape. Women cant be rapists after all.

Maybe evidence of murder?

[Sinekein]

They would try for delaying tactics, probably picking a page or three from what Mitch McConnell showed in the last four years. It likely would have failed. Ironically enough the female name I've seen mentioned was probably more conservative than Kavanaugh, which is saying something.

But Trump picked him, so the drama didn't even have to be created from scratch, and now, even if they don't get their way, the Democrats get an easy target for all elections until they get elected into office. It's like Hillary's e-mails for liberals.

[TTTX]

He'd have to acknowledge that women are intelligent beings first.

I have seen a video some time ago where Trump said that if a woman has the skills for a job she should be hired (he was asked about it so that's why he said this apparently), can't remember the exact words he used, but it was somewhere around those lines.

[Mobius_118]

Kavanaugh has lied to Congress.

Multiple times.

Even if this sexual assault accusation process does nothing, which it has, we should never forget that lying to Congress is a crime.

It's like Hillary's e-mails for liberals.

Except this time there's an actual crime. Several, in fact.

[TheodoricFriede]

But Trump picked him, so the drama didn't even have to be created from scratch,.

...Yeah, nothing about this seems like "drama from scratch".

[Sinekein]

I don't consider sexually assaulting women to be negligible for people who are supposed to rule about the laws of a country. But that's a personal stance.

Except this time there's an actual crime. Several, in fact.

I'm not even judging what's true and what's not. Just that it is going to be an easy rally cry for candidates, and that the more the GOP will try and defend him, the more they'll look like the party of the sexual assaulters.

[Raga]

Didn't Bill Clinton lie to Congress?

[TheodoricFriede]

I don't consider sexually assaulting women to be negligible for people who are supposed to rule about the laws of a country. But that's a personal stance.

I think its really quite convenient that this allegations turned up at such a critical moment.

It's almost as if it has nothing to do with alleged rape, and everything to do with ruining someones chances of being a Supreme Court justice.

But surely politics couldn't that ugly, could it?

[TheodoricFriede]

Didn't Bill Clinton lie to Congress?

That all depends on what the meaning of 'is' is.

[Mobius_118]

He's still not behaving like someone who belongs on the Supreme Court.

I don't consider sexually assaulting women to be negligible for people who are supposed to rule about the laws of a country. But that's a personal stance.

That too.

And he lied to Congress, which is a felony.

Didn't Bill Clinton lie to Congress?

Yep, and that's why he was impeached. Although the 5th Amendment states that you have the right to not incriminate yourself.

Here's the gray area: He was still an excellent leader. The 90's were awesome. Then he went and had oral with an intern.

I think its really quite convenient that this allegations turned up at such a critical moment.

It's almost as if it has nothing to do with alleged rape, and everything to do with ruining someones chances of being a Supreme Court justice.

But surely politics couldn't that ugly, could it?

Hey man, you try being raped and having the courage to come out in the open with it.

63% of cases aren't reported. That's pretty shitty in this nation.

[TheodoricFriede]

Oh look at that, a convenient statistic at a convenient time.

This is all very convenient.

[Mobius_118]

Quit being a bitch, Theo.

[TheodoricFriede]

You kiss your hooker with that mouth?

[Mobius_118]

Seriously? I bring up valid points against Kavanaugh, and your response is to be a shithead.

[Sinekein]

I think its really quite convenient that this allegations turned up at such a critical moment.

It's almost as if it has nothing to do with alleged rape, and everything to do with ruining someones chances of being a Supreme Court justice.

But surely politics couldn't that ugly, could it?

Or it has to do with Kavanaugh having been an obscure lawmaker for decades, and suddenly being on the front page of the news, which incites the women he assaulted to finally talk, especially now that #MeToo has occurred.

Or maybe the fact that the man who assaulted them would now be in charge of crafting the law of the land was the trigger they needed to publicly tell their stories. With the first who spoke helping the others to make the step, knowing that it meant being publicly known as victims of abuse and nothing else.

Unlike Harvey Weinstein, Brett Kavanaugh was relatively anonymous until Trump put up his name for the Supreme Court.

[Raga]

Does it really honestly give you 0 pause that woman B spends six days not coming forward because she's not sure about her memory, only now to be 100% sure about her memory? And that woman C went to *the Stormy Daniels Porno lawyer* with a story that amounts to "I heard bad rumors about Kavanaugh and also I was raped in his general vicinity?"

Consider similar cases where women started coming out of the woodwork for other established sexual predators: Wesinstein, Cosby, heck, even Trump. One woman speaking up opened floodgates of other women speaking up with similar stories.

This has opened up 2 exceptionally vague and dubious other people and that's all.

[Mobius_118]

It gives me zero pause when all of this could be cleared up if he'd call an investigation on it all, and choosing not to. That does not scream not-guilty.

[TheodoricFriede]

I dont even know how to respond to that.

Because it doesn't change the fact that this could all be made up. Or couldn't be made up. Or is all some elaborate plan the Red Chinese cooked up. Or isn't.

I just dont think anyone actually cares beyond, "Conservative judge may get the seat. Democracy outlawed!"

[Mobius_118]

It's more about his unqualified work history, the sealed records, the lies to Congress, and his poor behavior after 20 minutes in the hotseat.

If he gets brought down by 30 year old accusations of rape and sexual assault, which even Fox news thinks is credible, then good.

[Sinekein]

Does it really honestly give you 0 pause that woman B spends six days not coming forward because she's not sure about her memory, only now to be 100% sure about her memory? And that woman C went to *the Stormy Daniels Porno lawyer* with a story that amounts to "I heard bad rumors about Kavanaugh and also I was raped in his general vicinity?"

None.

For the first, coming forward means that her claims are going to be put into the highest possible amount of scrutiny bar FBI investigation (aha). So not coming forward immediately because you want to be sure of what happened to you and you need to reminisce a bit sounds extremely safe and sensible to me if you don't want to be crucified at the first sign of an hesitation.

The second had it publicized, and her claims shed a light on BK as a frat boy. Again, he's not auditioning to become the new IT guy at Whatever Ltd, he's supposed to be the one keeping legislation in check, including matters such as women's rights. So it matters. And going to a mediatic lawyer might be for self-promotion, or it might be a way to control communication, so that your story is not bent out of shape as soon as it's released, which happens incredibly often nowadays. Plus instead of picking on her, the media are picking on her lawyer, and he loves that, so I'd say it's a win-win situation.

[Mobius_118]

FBI investigation would clear all of this up. Kavanaugh refuses to do it.

This just raises my curiosity.

[Raga]

So Ford says that she came forward only after reporters started harassing her at her home and at her work in front of her students, and that if not for that fact she was resigned to not coming forward because she was convinced that she would be run over by the train as she put it.

So how did the reporters know? If the letter was confidential, and Feinstein had promised not to go forward until Ford gave her permission, who leaked it?