• 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!

What everyone is ignoring in Kavanaugh's accusers letter:

joko104 said:
Dr. Ford, accuser of Justice Kavanaugh, said her letter:

"I have received medical treatment regarding the assault."

That makes this simple in terms of learning the date and what she said back then. Even if she does not remember what hospital, that is easy enough to explore. Just contact every hospital and clinic for their records, with a subpoena, for every medical record concerning her in 1982 to 1984. Then we would know the EXACT date and the injuries she claimed she suffered, plus any notes made about what she said happened at the time.

Am I the ONLY person who noticed that sentence? It is THE most important "fact" in her letter. Who did she receive "medical care" from (not psychological counseling)? That would narrow it down to no more than a day or two plus would confirm her claim she was assaulted.

Why does NO ONE even ask that??? That should be zeroed in on - and should have been from the very start.
Click to expand...

I'm sure she is saying that the medical treatment was in talking with her shrink.
 
Slyfox696 said:
No. Random party cannot subpoena another person's medical records for no reason.
Click to expand...

The Congress could, or better yet Ms. Ford could have them released seeing as she is the patient.
 
Slyfox696 said:
False. Why do you keep posting things which are not true?


https://phpa.health.maryland.gov/mch/Pages/IPV_Reporting.aspx


The treating facility would have only called the police if the victim wanted them to call.
It wouldn't matter. Congress would not be allowed to force a medical facility to violate HIPPA laws to appease a political process which does not involve the patient in any way.
Click to expand...


It would go to court to be adjudicated, and I believe there are exceptions in the HIPPA law.
 
joko104 said:
Dr. Ford, accuser of Justice Kavanaugh, said her letter:

"I have received medical treatment regarding the assault."

That makes this simple in terms of learning the date and what she said back then. Even if she does not remember what hospital, that is easy enough to explore. Just contact every hospital and clinic for their records, with a subpoena, for every medical record concerning her in 1982 to 1984. Then we would know the EXACT date and the injuries she claimed she suffered, plus any notes made about what she said happened at the time.

Am I the ONLY person who noticed that sentence? It is THE most important "fact" in her letter. Who did she receive "medical care" from (not psychological counseling)? That would narrow it down to no more than a day or two plus would confirm her claim she was assaulted.

Why does NO ONE even ask that??? That should be zeroed in on - and should have been from the very start.
Click to expand...
Because her "therapy" for her troubled marriage is what she is referring to, most likely.
 
Wouldn't one of her parents know which hospital she was taken to?
 
joko104 said:
Dr. Ford, accuser of Justice Kavanaugh, said her letter:

"I have received medical treatment regarding the assault."

That makes this simple in terms of learning the date and what she said back then. Even if she does not remember what hospital, that is easy enough to explore. Just contact every hospital and clinic for their records, with a subpoena, for every medical record concerning her in 1982 to 1984. Then we would know the EXACT date and the injuries she claimed she suffered, plus any notes made about what she said happened at the time.

Am I the ONLY person who noticed that sentence? It is THE most important "fact" in her letter. Who did she receive "medical care" from (not psychological counseling)? That would narrow it down to no more than a day or two plus would confirm her claim she was assaulted.

Why does NO ONE even ask that??? That should be zeroed in on - and should have been from the very start.
Click to expand...

What you are suggesting is infeasible. There is too much ambiguity in her statements and the amount of money it would cost to conduct the type and level of investigation you are requesting would be enormous. I, for one, would not want to see my tax dollars wasted in such a futile exercise. However, if you have the money to expend, by all means, send it to Congress and ask them to use it towards the investigation you desire. Meanwhile, let the SCOTUS process proceed; if guilty, Kavanagh can be removed from the bench (wouldn't that make Trump look good!!!).
 
joko104 said:
Dr. Ford, accuser of Justice Kavanaugh, said her letter:

"I have received medical treatment regarding the assault."

That makes this simple in terms of learning the date and what she said back then. Even if she does not remember what hospital, that is easy enough to explore. Just contact every hospital and clinic for their records, with a subpoena, for every medical record concerning her in 1982 to 1984. Then we would know the EXACT date and the injuries she claimed she suffered, plus any notes made about what she said happened at the time.

Am I the ONLY person who noticed that sentence? It is THE most important "fact" in her letter. Who did she receive "medical care" from (not psychological counseling)? That would narrow it down to no more than a day or two plus would confirm her claim she was assaulted.

Why does NO ONE even ask that??? That should be zeroed in on - and should have been from the very start.
Click to expand...

She has to be saying her talking to her therapist about the assault was medical care. She has not said he hurt her in anyway so why would she go to a physician for medical care but she is saying she is emotionally upset so she is talking about her therapist for marriage counseling in 2012.

Just heard on the news she talked to a therapist in 2017 about this incident as well as in 2012.
 
Last edited:
After looking through this thread I understand why she is asking for an FBI investigation before testifying.
 
Grokmaster said:
Because her "therapy" for her troubled marriage is what she is referring to, most likely.
Click to expand...

She, with a lawyer, said "Medical care for the assault." A psychologist is not medical care and she was there for marriage counseling, not the assault. In short, she lied for drama.

That is extremely revealing as she WANTS people to believe she was physically injured by the assault. She is a psychologist herself and knows she nor any other psychologist are "medical personnel." In fact, she and all psychologists are prohibited from any medical practice. She knows that 100%.

This is not some lay person who got it wrong. She knowingly and deliberately told a lie in her short letter as a false dramatic enhancement.
 
ThoughtIsFree said:
She has to be saying her talking to her therapist about the assault was medical care. She has not said he hurt her in anyway so why would she go to a physician for medical care but she is saying she is emotionally upset so she is talking about her therapist for marriage counseling in 2012.

Just heard on the news she talked to a therapist in 2017 about this incident as well as in 2012.
Click to expand...

Oh I'm sure her lawyer and the Democrat's lawyers are coming up with all sorts of new details she now remembers. She's going to suddenly remember him threatening her, probably remember him using racial and sexist slurs, was making a white-power gesture, and remember calling her a bunch of names. Democrats are probably desperately trying to get hold of Kavanaugh's medical records so she can remember a birth mark he has too.
 
joko104 said:
Congress is NOT a random party.
Click to expand...
In this instance, they would be. They have no standing in any issue related to those records. They are not a plaintiff nor a defendant nor a victim or even a perpetrator. They are simply a government body wanting to conduct a political process. They are a random party.

Besides, the committee should ask for her to give consent anyway.
Click to expand...
Why? She is not the one nominated for a government position. She's not the nominee nor is she a defendant.

Seriously, stop saying stupid things.

If she refused, that alone would tell the story.
Click to expand...
False. Congress has REPEATEDLY shown no ability nor desire to keep private things which need to be kept private, if releasing them brings political gain. Her refusal would say she wants to keep her medical treatment private. That's all.

Regardless, Congress could subpoena any medical records and any medical and psychological personnel it wants to.
Click to expand...
Nope. Just like you were wrong before, you're still wrong now. Stop saying stupid things.

That is NOT a protected privilege in LEGAL proceedings.
Click to expand...
I have told you repeatedly, this is not a legal proceeding. Furthermore, Ford is a victim, not a perpetrator. You treating her like a criminal to get Kavanuagh confirmed is beyond ridiculous.
Mycroft said:
I raised doubts that your 12 year old information applied 35 years ago.
Click to expand...
:lamo

That's the stupidest thing I've read in this thread and that's saying a lot. The fact you "raised doubts" does not mitigate actual facts. Fine. I raise doubts with zero evidence to support me that you are not a pedophile. So now it is your responsibility to prove you have never molested a child.

Go. :roll:

You're wrong. You've been proven wrong. Stop saying stupid things.
PirateMk1 said:
It would go to court to be adjudicated, and I believe there are exceptions in the HIPPA law.
Click to expand...
There is ZERO basis for a medical facility to turn over patient's records without her approval, her being involved in a legal issue with/against the hospital or as a matter of law enforcement.

As I keep telling joke104, the confirmation of a SC Justice is a political process. That is not a valid basis for violating a patient's confidentiality.

Mach said:
Holy ****-balls, there is Mycroft in action yet again.

Mycroft "raised doubts" is sufficient to contradict actual evidence that refutes his claim. How do you look at yourself in the mirror when you claim **** like this?
All about the facts...except you know, if Mycroft farts really loud and it gives him doubts, then his doubts are sufficient to contradict actual evidence.

Why don't you just doubt the claim: "Mycroft didn't just get $10M". Maybe it will come true!!!
Click to expand...
Isn't it truly amazing the depths of stupidity some posters will go? Just when I think Trump supporters cannot say anything stupider, they keep proving me wrong.

The idea that "well, I raised doubts so now it is your responsibility to prove my baseless statement false" is one of the stupidest things I've read in a long time.
StuPedaso said:
After looking through this thread I understand why she is asking for an FBI investigation before testifying.
Click to expand...
Isn't that the truth. The stupid in this thread is nearly overwhelming at times.
joko104 said:
She, with a lawyer, said "Medical care for the assault." A psychologist is not medical care and she was there for marriage counseling, not the assault. In short, she lied for drama.
Click to expand...
Wait, let me see if I have this right. Because you THINK she referred to a psychologist as the medical care she received (with zero evidence to support that thought), now she lied about receiving medical care?

My God, how utterly stupid and/or dishonest can the positions in this thread be?
 
Last edited:
Barnacle said:
She's probably referring to the couples therapy in 2012 ... ;)
Click to expand...

So "probably" means "it is"??

noonereal said:
I thought this obvious.
Click to expand...

That seems to be the goal - make a statement and have everyone "assume" it is true. To me, this is the problem with the whole accusation - too much vagueness and assumptions, absolutely no physical evidence, medical evidence (even her therapist's "notes" disagree with her changing statements), witness testimony - nothing! We simply MUST conclude Kavanagh is guilty because a woman waited 36 years to make a vague and unverifiable accusation.
 
Big Ed said:
So "probably" means "it is"??



That seems to be the goal - make a statement and have everyone "assume" it is true. To me, this is the problem with the whole accusation - too much vagueness and assumptions, absolutely no physical evidence, medical evidence (even her therapist's "notes" disagree with her changing statements), witness testimony - nothing! We simply MUST conclude Kavanagh is guilty because a woman waited 36 years to make a vague and unverifiable accusation.
Click to expand...

You sound like a man who has a want and is making a case to support that want rather than being objective.

peace out
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom