• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Kavanaugh: I was a virgin through high school and college

Casper said:
It might show he lied, and if you lie about some parts you are just as likely to lie about others.
Click to expand...

Oh, for ****'s sake, yesterday was a marathon of lies.

(I'm directing my frustration at him, not you)
 
ThoughtIsFree said:
Thank you for the apology and explanation.

After watching the entire hearing I have reason to doubt both of them.

Like I stated, Dr. Ford has a PhD in psychology and could have been acting, she knows just how a rape victim would act. Because she has said and done things that would not be how an educated woman would act, I have my doubts. Also she is a liberal, supports the MeToo movement and does not support Trump. I'm sure she does not want Kavanugh on the Supreme Court because of Roe vs Wade.

!. Her lying about not wanting to fly in order to testify. She fly's all the time
2. Her thinking her information about the sexual assault would be kept confidential.
3. Her saying the boys laughing at her was the worse thing about the sexual assault.
4. She spoke to Judge five or six weeks later, where he worked, and wondered why he was not friendly? She says Hi and she said he acted guilty. Why would she not ignore him or run away? He was one of the two who tried to sexually assault her. She even said he urged Kavanaugh on, laughed and may have been the one to push her into the room. She also stated they both locked the door. How do they both lock the door and how did she observe them both locking the door if they were pushing her? How does she know he would not have raped her too? She has never said that but you would think she would have thought that.
5. During her testimony she went from looking frightened and stressed to coming across together, knowledgeable and confident. She acted confused over certain wording during the questioning but when answering seemed to know everything quite well, like an educated woman in the field of psychology. Was not consistent. Don't know for sure what was causing this kind of behavior.
6. She's a professor and is use to speaking in front of large groups, she was not raped, she was not unclothed, in fact could you even call this a sexual assault, she did not explain exactly where he touched her, she did not say how long the assault went on and her excuse for him not undressing her was because he was so intoxicated but they manged to push her into a room, lock the door, know to turn up the music and talk with each other, even laugh.

My doubts about Kavanaugh testimony.

1. His drinking and how much was not confirmed.

2. He avoided explaining if he ever forgot things after drinking.

#. He got rattled when talking about Judge.

My conclusion is Kavanaugh and Judge did jump on her and were kidding around. She was frightened and upset. She is suffering from mental issues not related to the assault. If you can call it an assault. Kavanaugh will not admit they did this because he knows he will lose the nomination and he thinks he deserves it even if this did happen when he was 17 yrs old. She is exaggerating and he is not being truthful. Also I think her motivation is also political.

I seriously have no idea if he should be confirmed or not. I go from thinking he should to thinking he should not.
Click to expand...

My impression is that no matter how anyone comes down on who is more believable, the partisan tenor and tone of Judge Kavanaugh's opening statement and his subsequent testimony displayed a temperment that I believe is ill-suited to the Supreme Court. Judge Kavanaugh knows whether he is guilty of the allegations or not. If he knows he is innocent, and Dr. Ford was either mistaken and/or delusional, then she should have been shown a measure of sympathy - his tone should have been like Jesus on the cross... "Forgive them for they know not what they do....". The fact that he was so combative seems indicative to me that he feels himself backed into a corner and has decided to come out fighting. He doesn't acknowledge nor care about the ordeal that Dr. Ford is going through... all that concerns him seems to be his own reputation and ambition. That speaks volumes to me.
 
Cordelier said:
My impression is that no matter how anyone comes down on who is more believable, the partisan tenor and tone of Judge Kavanaugh's opening statement and his subsequent testimony displayed a temperment that I believe is ill-suited to the Supreme Court. Judge Kavanaugh knows whether he is guilty of the allegations or not. If he knows he is innocent, and Dr. Ford was either mistaken and/or delusional, then she should have been shown a measure of sympathy - his tone should have been like Jesus on the cross... "Forgive them for they know not what they do....". The fact that he was so combative seems indicative to me that he feels himself backed into a corner and has decided to come out fighting. He doesn't acknowledge nor care about the ordeal that Dr. Ford is going through... all that concerns him seems to be his own reputation and ambition. That speaks volumes to me.
Click to expand...

All you've said is something to consider. I know much of the hearing is just theater. I believe Kavanaugh was coached to come across as aggressive and that it's doubtful this is a behavior he would actually exhibit no matter the situation. I do see stress having an effect on both Ford and Kavanaugh.

Hopefully the FBI investigation will give us something new that will help with knowing if anyone is lying. I'm questioning Kavanaugh on how he answered questions and not his emotion during his testimony. I do understand why you and others are against Kavanaugh but i was for him being our next Justice on the Supreme Court until this last hearing. If the FBI report can confirm he is telling the truth, I'm all for him being confirmed.
 
ThoughtIsFree said:
All you've said is something to consider. I know much of the hearing is just theater. I believe Kavanaugh was coached to come across as aggressive and that it's doubtful this is a behavior he would actually exhibit no matter the situation. I do see stress having an effect on both Ford and Kavanaugh.

Hopefully the FBI investigation will give us something new that will help with knowing if anyone is lying. I'm questioning Kavanaugh on how he answered questions and not his emotion during his testimony. I do understand why you and others are against Kavanaugh but i was for him being our next Justice on the Supreme Court until this last hearing. If the FBI report can confirm he is telling the truth, I'm all for him being confirmed.
Click to expand...

If you want to see what a person is truly made of, put them under a little stress. I think the Kavanaugh we saw the other day was who he really is - the arrogant, entitled, petulant man-child who never quite grew up and gained the wisdom that comes from self-awareness. All his life he went to the perfect schools, acted the perfect gentleman, got the perfect jobs to advance his ambitions. Everything up until now has been arranged just so.... and now for the first real time in his life, that whole veneer is being challenged and the whole suit of armor is falling apart.

I was originally against Kavanaugh because of the misleading statements he gave during his confirmation hearings in 2006. I think, despite his testimony then and now, he was aware of detainee policy debate in the Bush White House and I think he was involved in formulating those policies. Then he became a Federal Judge and ruled on the detainee cases that came before the DC Circuit when he should have recused himself. To me, that told volumes about his honesty and judgment. These latest allegations are just more fuel on the fire for me.
 
Cordelier said:
If you want to see what a person is truly made of, put them under a little stress. I think the Kavanaugh we saw the other day was who he really is - the arrogant, entitled, petulant man-child who never quite grew up and gained the wisdom that comes from self-awareness. All his life he went to the perfect schools, acted the perfect gentleman, got the perfect jobs to advance his ambitions. Everything up until now has been arranged just so.... and now for the first real time in his life, that whole veneer is being challenged and the whole suit of armor is falling apart.

I was originally against Kavanaugh because of the misleading statements he gave during his confirmation hearings in 2006. I think, despite his testimony then and now, he was aware of detainee policy debate in the Bush White House and I think he was involved in formulating those policies. Then he became a Federal Judge and ruled on the detainee cases that came before the DC Circuit when he should have recused himself. To me, that told volumes about his honesty and judgment. These latest allegations are just more fuel on the fire for me.
Click to expand...

Being accused of attempted rape and the other allegations of sexual assault would get anyone riled up and possibly some would do a better job of hiding their outrage but I'm fine with him being honest and showing us how he really feels about the hearings and the allegations etc. I do feel he was told to let it all out and don't think he would have if he didn't really want to.

Someone in my family, who is against Kavanaugh, brought this up to me as one of the reasons she doesn't want him confirmed. I just took the time to do a little reading about this but seems some say he lied and some say his testimony was accurate. I myself, was for water boarding, I know this brings on quite a debate and I'm not sure what else is involved in what you are saying he lied about as far as detainee policy.. Whether water boarding is torture and whether we, as a country, want to do that to enemy combatants, is something many disagree on. What's torture and what is not torture?

What all did he lie about as far as detainee policy? What are you against in the detainee policy he lied about? I'm asking you question that will be taking this discussion way off topic. Just ignore if you feel that's best for this thread.
 
ThoughtIsFree said:
...What all did he lie about as far as detainee policy? What are you against in the detainee policy he lied about? I'm asking you question that will be taking this discussion way off topic. Just ignore if you feel that's best for this thread.
Click to expand...

There's not a whole lot of daylight between my position on detainee policy and what Senator McCain's was. I'm not comfortable with anything being done to a detainee that I wouldn't be comfortable being done to a US POW. I know there's a legal argument to be made that the Geneva Convention doesn't apply to Al Queda suspects... and maybe it's a valid one. But even if it is, just because something can be done doesn't mean it should be done. Technically, there was a legal argument that the Geneva Convention didn't apply to US pilots shot down over North Vietnam either, because at the time North Vietnam wasn't a party to Geneva Convention.... but even so, I sure as hell wasn't comfortable with the things that were done to Senator McCain and the other POWs in the Hanoi Hilton. Where it comes to the Geneva Convention, you either abide by it or you don't across the board... there's no room for legal distinctions.

As for what Judge Kavanaugh's personal views were or are, that's up to him to decide. He worked in the White House right up until he became a Federal Judge, and so I'm going to assume at the very least he conformed to the policies implemented by the Bush Administration. If he found them objectionable, then he should/could have resigned. As an aside, this is the main reason why I believe working in the White House - regardless of the Administration - disqualifies a person from the Supreme Court. There is too much sublimation of an individual's belief and opinion to the beliefs and opinions of the President he/she serves. You have to be a "true believer" to thrive on the White House staff and the Supreme Court is a place for strong-willed individuals, not "true believers".

But I'm digressing here, so I'll go back to the memo in question... Back in 2002, Jay Bybee was Assistant AG for the Office of Legal Counsel - it was his job to provide a legal assessment of prospective Administration policies. So when he produced a memo for White House Counsel Alberto Gonzales that justified some pretty controversial detainee policies, it caused quite a stir in the White House Counsel's office. Anyway, before the existence of this memo was publicly revealed in 2004, Bybee himself was confirmed to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals... when his authorship of the memo was revealed, a lot of the Democratic Senators who voted for him felt justifiably burned that they had been unaware of the controversial document prior to voting on his confirmation. So it became standard fare that any Judicial nominee who conceivably could have known about the existence of the memo would be asked about it. Enter Brett Kavanaugh. When he appeared before the Senate Judiciary Committee in 2006, he was asked flat-out whether he was aware of the Bybee Memo prior to it's existence being revealed to the public. Knowing that having any involvement would probably prove toxic to his confirmation, Kavanaugh denied any prior knowledge of it's existence.

Senator Durbin: Mr. Kavanaugh, thank you for returning. In 2003, Jay Bybee was confirmed to a seat on the Ninth Circuit. A year and a half later, we learned he had authored the infamous torture memo when he headed the Justice Department's Office of Legal Counsel. In the memo he claimed the President has the right to ignore the law that makes torture a crime and narrowly defined torture as abuse that causes pain equivalent to organ failure or death.

The torture memo was requested by, addressed to the then-White House Counsel, Alberto Gonzales. So clearly the White House Counsel's Office knew that Mr. Bybee had authored the torture memo at the time of his nomination. Did you know that Mr. Bybee authored the torture memo or similar memos at the time of his nomination?

Mr. Kavanaugh: No, Senator, I think you're referring to the August 1, 2002, memo. I was not aware of that memo until there was public disclosure of it in the news media, I think in the summer of 2004.
Click to expand...

(contd.)
 
Subsequently, of course, Judge Kavanaugh was confirmed to the DC Court of Appeals. Then in 2007 - a year later - a Pulitzer-prize winning story appeared in the Washington Post that contained the following passage:

Decision time came in a heated meeting in Gonzales's corner office on the West Wing's second floor, according to four officials with direct knowledge, none of whom agreed to be quoted by name about confidential legal deliberations. Olson was backed by associate White House counsel Bradford A. Berenson , a former law clerk to Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy.

Berenson told colleagues that the court's swing voter would never accept absolute presidential discretion to declare a U.S. citizen an enemy and lock him up without giving him an opportunity to be represented and heard. Another former Kennedy clerk, White House lawyer Brett Kavanaugh, had made the same argument earlier.
Click to expand...

So how could Kavanaugh have registered an opinion of the memo in 2002 if he wasn't aware of it's existence until 2004?

What's more, the DC Circuit Court of Appeals is the venue in which Guantanamo detainee cases are heard. If Justice Kavanaugh had, despite his testimony, actually played a role in formulating the Bush Administration detainee policies, then he should have recused himself from any involvement in any such cases which challenged those policies. He has never seen fit to issue such a recusal, so not only does this question cut to his credibility, but it also gives reason to question his legal judgment. If it turns out that he rendered an improper judgment in a detainee case, then it places the decisions reached in such cases in legal jeopardy.

That's why this is such a big deal for me.
 
Lutherf said:
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/408172-kavanaugh-i-was-a-virgin-through-high-school-and-college



I haven't seen the interview yet but there's a half hour or so long clip at the link.

I mean, he's been accused of attempted rape, attempted homicide, pandering and whatever else so his defense is "Hey! I was a virgin through college!"

Not what I expected but certainly an interesting defense. Beats the hell out of just looking at old calendars.
Click to expand...

And so was Madonna. LMAO.
 
........because he was too loaded to work a bra clasp?

What’s the difference between “falling asleep” and “passing out?”

“Ralph” and “weak stomach”, spicy foods, “what do you like to drink, Senator?”

Get three glasses and we will play “Devil’s Triangle!”
 
Rexedgar said:
........because he was too loaded to work a bra clasp?

What’s the difference between “falling asleep” and “passing out?”

“Ralph” and “weak stomach”, spicy foods, “what do you like to drink, Senator?”

Get three glasses and we will play “Devil’s Triangle!”
Click to expand...

Doubt there was a bra clasp. She had on something over a one piece bathing suit. Nobody asked her just what she was wearing. We know a one piece bathing suit because she said so. I truly believe if he was trying to disrobe her he would have. Nobody asked her how long this assault took place but her testimony made it sound like more than a minute or two. Also she never said he took off any of his clothes, unzipped his pants or exposed his genitals. She doesn't even say he kissed her. She did say he ran his hands over her body but thought he had a hand over her mouth.

Also why wouldn't the other two teens come upstairs to see why a stereo was playing so loudly and where their friends were at? Whose house was this anyway?
 
Lutherf said:
Kavanaugh: I was a virgin through high school and college.
Click to expand...


I am still trying to understand how Trumpets find this acceptable for someone who is gonna sit on the Supreme Court.

Forget the failed rape, THIS is disqualifying and we need not look further.
 
Lutherf said:
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/408172-kavanaugh-i-was-a-virgin-through-high-school-and-college



I haven't seen the interview yet but there's a half hour or so long clip at the link.

I mean, he's been accused of attempted rape, attempted homicide, pandering and whatever else so his defense is "Hey! I was a virgin through college!"

Not what I expected but certainly an interesting defense. Beats the hell out of just looking at old calendars.
Click to expand...

Yet strangely he was a member of a secret society at Yale nicknamed Tits and Clits.
 
noonereal said:
I am still trying to understand how Trumpets find this acceptable for someone who is gonna sit on the Supreme Court.

Forget the failed rape, THIS is disqualifying and we need not look further.
Click to expand...

this is so stupid I am laughing
 
SCrider said:
Yet strangely he was a member of a secret society at Yale nicknamed Tits and Clits.
Click to expand...

what's funny is I asked five friends of mine who were at Yale in the early to mid 80s and none of them heard of this "truth and courage" secret society. We all have heard of Scroll and Key, Skull and Bones, Wolfs Head and one I cannot spell. I also checked with a guy who graduated in 91 and then spent four more years in the medical school. He never heard of it either.
 
noonereal said:
I am still trying to understand how Trumpets find this acceptable for someone who is gonna sit on the Supreme Court.

Forget the failed rape, THIS is disqualifying and we need not look further.
Click to expand...

That is indeed disturbing. Never trust a man without a vice.
 
How does a thread like this get to 28 pages?

A claim to be a virgin is irrelevant. An attempted rape doesn't take away virginity. The motives are crossed: someone committed to remaining a virgin just long enough to marry might be a would-be sexual assaulter who refrains from assault, but someone who is a virgin teenage boy who is very drunk might end up committing a sexual assault, if he is the kind of piece of **** scum who would do such a thing.

(That being to make clear the booze isn't presented as exculpatory)
 
TurtleDude said:
this is so stupid I am laughing
Click to expand...

You would accept a freak on the Supreme Court but not a transgender in a restroom.

Trump has certainly unearthed a cast of rejects to enable him.
 
noonereal said:
You would accept a freak on the Supreme Court but not a transgender in a restroom.

Trump has certainly unearthed a cast of rejects to enable him.
Click to expand...

your concept of "freak" is probably fitting with the part of society that contributes to rampant illegitimate births, STDs and divorces I suspect
 
TurtleDude said:
your concept of "freak" is probably fitting with the part of society that contributes to rampant illegitimate births, STDs and divorces I suspect
Click to expand...

Dude, it is the hillbilly states that vote Trump who have the most STD's, divorces and kids out of wedlock. They also have the highest high school drop out rates, poorest SAT scores and most drug and alcohol use. Let's face it, you are our blight.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom