| Lisnaholic |
10-06-2018 07:25 AM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anteater
(Post 2002770)
Being able to corroborate evidence is important, and the recent FBI investigation didn't turn up anything that counteracted the statements others have given (which all amounted to "I don't remember being at a party like Ford described").
If people believe Kavanaugh is a rapist (which I don't think he is), then they should prove it. That's all it comes down to.
|
i) The FBI investigation wasn't thorough, and up to 20 people who could've given corroboration weren't interviewed, which surely makes the conclusion that they found no corroborating evidence meaningless.
ii) Kavanaugh isn't being accused of rape. He has been credably accused of a drunken sexual assault and on a seperate occasion of exposing himself.
iii) McCabe and Rosenstein of the FBI are old pals of Kavanaugh, which partly explains the unbalanced treatment that has been given to this report. Just before the 2016 election, the FBI released to the public their interview notes about the Clinton email scandal "in the interests of transparency." Why can't we see the interview notes of the Kavanaugh case? Why is transparency desirable in one case but not the other? Instead of transparency, there is ONE copy of the BK report, kept under lock and key, that even senators can only look at for one hour at a time. In this era of instant electronic copying, isn't that something of a red flag? That the process and report is only giving the appearance of revealing information, while in effect concealing it?
iii) As [MERIT] points out, there are plenty of other reasons, apart from the sex allegations that indicate Kavanaugh's unsuitability.
Quote:
Originally Posted by [MERIT]
(Post 2002783)
|
iv) 600 members of the American Bar Association have signed a letter saying that BK isn't suitable, and a retired Supreme Court judge has made the same point in a tv interview.
v) BK's performance before the commitee:-
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lisnaholic
(Post 2001325)
Those Thursday hearings...are Kavanaugh's job interview. If that's the case, Kavanaugh failed spectacularly by:-
i) raising the irrelevant topic of his daughter's prayers and then weeping about them
ii) claiming to be exhonorated by witnesses who don't remember. It's a glaring failure in a judge if he can't grasp that there is a distinction between "That person doesn't remember" and "That event didn't happen."
iii) evading and ultimately declining to answer certain questions.
iv) ranting about a partisan conspiracy dating back to the Clinton era
v) calling the commitee process "a circus"
In trying to defend his suitability for the Supreme Court he actually exposed just how unsuitable he is. If this was indeed a job interview I wouldn't give the job to someone who was by turns maudline, self-pitying, partisan and belligerent , I'd give the job to a candidate who was polite, cooperative and respectful throughout: Dr. Ford.
|
https://media.boingboing.net/wp-cont...both-sides.jpg |
