Kavanaugh, the Supreme Court nomination, and Kavanaugh & Ford's testimonies

[Blythe]

Regardless, the Supreme Court is a deeply flawed part of the U.S. government that needs heavy reform.

This is certainly a statement that I can agree with, too.

[Iniquitous]

I am trying really hard not to lash out at you QuackKing.   Let me just say this... I reported my rapists and I suffered further insults, indignities, and pain from the police, lawyers, and the court system.  I was blamed for being gang raped.  My integrity was called in to question despite the physical wounds I had from the rape.  I was treated as the culprit, not the victim.

To this day I have times where I wish I hadn't said anything because then I would have only had the trauma from the rape to cope with.  I do not blame anyone who chooses not to report their sexual assault.  I wouldn't wish what I went through on anyone.

[Iniquitous]

https://www.rainn.org/statistics/criminal-justice-system

[Sara Nilsson]

There are tons of studies made why those of us that are victims wait to disclose it or in fact never do if you really are curious.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/the-compassion-chronicles/201711/why-dont-victims-sexual-harassment-come-forward-sooner

https://www.livescience.com/56482-victims-sexual-assault-speak-out.html

https://www.npr.org/2017/11/15/564443807/why-some-survivors-of-sexual-harassment-and-assault-wait-to-tell-their-stories

If you don't want something too technical. Those three are a good..ish starting point. Due to me being a survivor myself it is very difficult for me to really delve into it to find good sources without triggering myself.

But hearing people basically say.. I find it suspicious due to the timing hurts. 15 years on the wound is just as fresh as it was that evening for me. It takes time to be strong and brave enough to say something, and seeing your perpetrator up for election can be the catalyst you need to speak up. To prevent that *bleep* from being elected to.. whatever.

[QuackKing]

I can't criticize you for your experiences.

From my perspective a sexual assault accusation is something that can hold a large amount of sway regardless of whether or not it is true or can be corroborated. I view it as natural to be skeptical, but I can see how that skepticism can be seen as a pressure, especially within an adversarial court system like in the United States (I mean I could also go on and talk about gender dynamics and how that influences reactions to sexual assault allegations and stuff like that but I'd rather not).

I just see it as way too easy for a person to ruin another's life/career/relationships/etc. without having to provide much in the way of evidence, but that's just something based on my experiences and worldview.

[Callie Del Noire]

Try being a guy..I’ve told two folks in real life about the attempted assault that I under went as a kid. Two.. in 45 years. It eats at in many ways, and they vary. I lucked out at the actual event didn’t happened and the guy who tried stayed away from me afterwards..

I’ve had friends in service who were by fellow service members, who made me and others promise not to say or do anything. Others who did lost careers and advancement afterwards. I got Fiends I’ve known for close to ten years who still flinch when I touch them without warning..the apologize to me.

The sheer indifference in my own party about this pisses me off.

[HairyHeretic]

In this case I think it's less about indifference as the pursuit of power. They have a chance to put someone in place who will serve there goals for decades. Do you think they're going to let anything get in the way of that? Particularly with the example from the top?

[Regina Minx]

From my perspective a sexual assault accusation is something that can hold a large amount of sway regardless of whether or not it is true or can be corroborated. I view it as natural to be skeptical...

With all due respect, it is only appropriate to be skeptical if you have good frequency data showing that reports of sexual assault are frequently false or fabricated. The exact opposite is true:

• A multi-site study of eight U.S. communities by Lonsway including 2,059 cases of sexual assault found a 7.1 percent rate of false reports.
• A study of 136 sexual assault cases in Boston from 1998-2007 found a 5.9 percent rate of false reports.
• Heenan studied 812 reports of sexual assault from 2000-2003 and found a 2.1 percent rate of false reports.

The prior probability that a particular report of sexual assault is false, at best, is just over 7% based on this frequency data. I believe it's more appropriate to be skeptical against anyone making an allegation that a particular claim is false than it is appropriate to be skeptical of the claim of sexual assault in the first place.

[CrownedSun]

In this case I think it's less about indifference as the pursuit of power. They have a chance to put someone in place who will serve there goals for decades. Do you think they're going to let anything get in the way of that? Particularly with the example from the top?

If that was ALL this was about, they'd just replace him with another of the nigh-identical people that are waiting in the wings.

This is about pride, to some extent, and Trump wanting specifically Kavanaugh for whatever reason.

[TheGlyphstone]

The 'whatever' is I suspect also pride. I read an article from last week, cited to a white house staffer, that said Trump's defense of Kavanaugh was so vociferous because the sexual misconduct charges against him resonated with the accusations made against Trump in the past. Trump's ego cannot let him take this lying down because his sense of projection makes it himself that is under attack, not Kavanaugh.

[Oniya]

Trump wanting specifically Kavanaugh for whatever reason.

Kavanaugh has some rather interesting ideas about 'whether a President can be investigated', and has refused to answer whether or not a President can pardon himself (which should be a simple answer for a judge.)

[Flower]

I thought people might find this interest.

[CrownedSun]

Kavanaugh has some rather interesting ideas about 'whether a President can be investigated', and has refused to answer whether or not a President can pardon himself (which should be a simple answer for a judge.)

Yeah, I read about that and was thinking that when I wrote what I wrote.

...that said, I gave up trying to understand Trump a while ago, that man is pretty much insane.

<.<

Honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if the sheer fact that the nomination process has been so contentious hasn't played a factor as well, given the fact that Kavanaugh has to know that he wouldn't have ever gotten this seat without Trump in the first place. At least in Trump's mind, I can see him thinking that would inspire loyalty, which is a big thing for him.

[Flower]

I thought people might find this interest.

Oh it's a youtube analysis of the hearing. :)

[QuackKing]

With all due respect, it is only appropriate to be skeptical if you have good frequency data showing that reports of sexual assault are frequently false or fabricated. The exact opposite is true.

The prior probability that a particular report of sexual assault is false, at best, is just over 7% based on this frequency data. I believe it's more appropriate to be skeptical against anyone making an allegation that a particular claim is false than it is appropriate to be skeptical of the claim of sexual assault in the first place.

Statistics themselves aren't enough to guarantee anything. Besides that, skepticism should be the default response to any sort of allegation that doesn't have much definitive evidence.

[TheGlyphstone]

Statistics themselves aren't enough to guarantee anything. Besides that, skepticism should be the default response to any sort of allegation that doesn't have much definitive evidence.

The issue is that we can't say there isn't definitive evidence, because the authorities weren't given the time or permission to look for it. There might be, though after 30 years memories and evidence and proof will have definitely faded to make it extremely hard.

And that, ultimately, is why no one wins here. Dr. Ford exposed herself to massive amounts of public scrutiny, ridicule, and trauma by doing what she believes is right. There is zero reason and zero logic to assume she has anything to gain or benefit from outright lying, unless we slip sideways into the Alex Jones-verse where the malevolent lizardperson Illuminati New World Order Deep State secretly runs everything and she's a paid actress involved in a smear campaign. If there is any doubt, it would be that her attacker was someone else at the party but some neurological glitch leaves her remembering Kavanaugh. I find it a very slim chance, but without that definitive proof I won't rule out that it is impossible. She's getting anonymous death threats mailed to her and her family, and considering the absolute scum of the universe we are dealing with at that point, likely rape threats as well. In the end, all she gets is maybe a sort of dubious 'fame' that any sane person would run screaming to avoid.

Even for the Democrats, I can't see any benefit for them floating knowingly false accusations. Even if they 'win' this round, the Federalist Society list is quite long, and (in that hypothetical Alex Jones-verse) they've already used up their best strategy; even their own people would get suspicious if the next candidate also had a sudden flurry of sexual assault allegations appear.

Brett Kavanaugh's reputation is essentially ruined either way. If he did it, he's been exposed as the scum he is even if he'll never face actual judicial consequences for his actions due to lack of evidence. If he didn't do it, he's still left as the first Supreme Court Justice to be confirmed with an asterisk next to his name, and this cloud of unresolved accusations will hang over him for the rest of his life. Based on what I've seen and read, I'm inclined to believe Ford over him, though I can imagine a scenario extrapolated from his reported drinking habits that he could have attacked her while so drunk he simply didn't ever remember doing it, and thus is telling the truth as he believes it to be with complete honesty.

Ultimately I blame Mitch McConnell for the entire thing. If he hadn't thrown two centuries of precedent and tradition in the garbage, then salted the earth for the sake of a short-term hail mary plan, none of this would be happening. Garland would be sitting in Scalia's seat, and when Kennedy retired, Gorsuch would have been nominated and almost certainly confirmed without incident; the Democrats objected to him largely out of principle of having their seat 'stolen'. Kavanaugh would never have risen to national prominence, and finished out his career uneventfully. Dr. Ford would have never needed to dredge up old traumatic memories.

[lustfulintentions]

[quote author=TheGlyphstone link=topic=293983.msg14434970#msg14434970 date=1538757395

Brett Kavanaugh's reputation is essentially ruined either way. If he did it, he's been exposed as the scum he is even if he'll never face actual judicial consequences for his actions due to lack of evidence. If he didn't do it, he's still left as the first Supreme Court Justice to be confirmed with an asterisk next to his name, and this cloud of unresolved accusations will hang over him for the rest of his life.
[/quote]

I don't know- Clarence Thomas should have a big fat asterisk next to his name for a not dissimilar reason, and yet he gets treated as quite legitimate today.

[TheGlyphstone]

[quote author=TheGlyphstone link=topic=293983.msg14434970#msg14434970 date=1538757395

Brett Kavanaugh's reputation is essentially ruined either way. If he did it, he's been exposed as the scum he is even if he'll never face actual judicial consequences for his actions due to lack of evidence. If he didn't do it, he's still left as the first Supreme Court Justice to be confirmed with an asterisk next to his name, and this cloud of unresolved accusations will hang over him for the rest of his life.


I don't know- Clarence Thomas should have a big fat asterisk next to his name for a not dissimilar reason, and yet he gets treated as quite legitimate today.

Thomas had Anita Hill, yeah, but AFAIK (I was a toddler when he was nominated), it didn't turn into the gigantic media circus that Kavanaugh's confirmation has become. He might deserve that asterisk, but he didn't get it from the relative lack of scrutiny and vitriol.

[TheGlyphstone]

Plus, for what little it's worth (not much), the allegations were of different scope. Hill accused Thomas of harassing her, sometimes graphically, but he never outright - even by her accounts - attempted to rape her. That'll be what gets Kavanaugh his asterisk, allegedly attempting to force the issue instead of just pressuring her.

[Oniya]

Thomas had Anita Hill, yeah, but AFAIK (I was a toddler when he was nominated), it didn't turn into the gigantic media circus that Kavanaugh's confirmation has become. He might deserve that asterisk, but he didn't get it from the relative lack of scrutiny and vitriol.

It was quite a substantial news story at the time.

[lustfulintentions]

It was quite a substantial news story at the time.

Exactly this. Thomas also made a rather impassioned plea that this he was being attacked for being a black man rather than a power-hungry creep. By the standards of the time, it was a big deal. We just didn't have the Internet and 24 hour news cycles back in 1991. Nothing like today's environment, at least.

[lustfulintentions]

Tell me this isn't the playbook Kavanaugh followed to a T.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZURHD5BU1o8

[TheGlyphstone]

Perhaps it's just the relative temperament then. Thomas is apparently very quiet, media-averse, and rarely speaks during arguments; over twenty+ years I can see the focus on his actions becoming muted. Kavanaugh is like his patron - loud and aggressively confrontational, so he'll have more 'shelf life' in the public eye.

Or not. Maybe he will just become another Justice. Not that the title of Supreme Court Justice will have any meaning anymore, at least in the context of demonstrating one's judicial experience/knowledge. It'll just be a prestige post for politically loyal judges, awarded when available by the current party in power.

[blue bunny sparkle]

Understand that I can't make any solid judgements on the truth behind Ford's statements without any real evidence of the situation.

Real evidence... like what the FBI might have found if they had been allowed to speak to the dozens of people that tried to come forward?

Ford's allegations are very serious and it does not do us any good to believe them without scrutiny.

Exactly. So what does it say that serious scrutiny was curtailed in this case? That there were things that needed hiding perhaps?

Also keep in mind that the burden of proof typically rests on the accuser and, if this were a criminal case, Kavanaugh would be considered innocent until proven guilty...

If this were the case, and this was a criminal court of law, given the statistics about how many convictions are handed down in rape cases, I'd say Kavanaugh would be a free fucking man, no matter how many woman he raped.

[Blythe]

I don't think a person has to believe Ford. Though as I've said, personally? I do. Dr. Ford strikes me as a particularly stable person with nothing to gain from coming forward and literally everything to lose.

I do think that anyone of a reasonable frame of mind would come to the conclusion that this type of allegation deserves to be treated with the utmost seriousness. Treating it seriously means fairly and fully investigating it. What is sitting very badly with a lot of people, regardless of whether they believe Ford or not, is that the FBI investigation got effectively hindered and crippled. That's not an investigation. That's a joke. A farce. Frankly, it's shameful and showcases why women like Ford don't like to come forward. Why should they when investigations get crippled and curtailed? It just puts them in the firing zone of public opinion with nothing to gain and not even the remote possibility of justice.

It paints the impression of those in power not giving a damn, with them being willing to hand-waive away anything they view as problematic to their political agenda.