rietrot
Honorary Master
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2016
- Messages
- 44,469
- Reaction score
- 22,510
Investigations don't really take 10 days or two weeks. The Dems are stalling for the midterms.
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Worst movie or series plot hole?
US politics general thread
- Thread starter OrbitalDawn
- Start date
- Status
NarrowBandFtw
Honorary Master
Odds are he's anti-Trump given his past, not so much non-partisan as anti-Trump, like McCain without the mass murders to his name. Pity this one has a clear lack of intellect:
"Why not wait 10 days"
He has nothing to base such a wild estimate on, a rape investigation of a 35 year old event will take only 10 days? No way.
"Such an investigation could exonerate"
No it cannot, what could it possibly find that will exonerate?!?
"they should be given the benefit of the doubt.”
No your own justice system, just like most others in the world disagrees, innocent until proven guilty.
Aquila ka Hecate
Executive Member
Do you know how common that is?Quoting from Politico, but you would have known that if you had a brain and could read, here's some more for you:
This shyte show is heading south fast for the dirty lefties
Ask any modertely large metro police station: make some details of a crime known and folks step up to claim responsibility.
OrbitalDawn
Ulysses Everett McGill
"zerohedge"
ZH even fails at the first hurdle and can't even quote Politico's reporting accurately. He didn't take out a restraining order. He applied for one, and the case was chucked after 13 days.
And then it cites the raving lunatic Thomas Wictor, as a "researcher and journalist". Guy who sincerely believes he photographed his dead cat's ghost on his porch.
He was interviewed about a previous hoax he circulated, and it's pretty clear he's not entirely right in the head. Also claims things like the IRA tried to assassinate him in Regent Park in 1982, giving him PTSD, etc. A quick peak at his Twitter feed makes that quite clear, too.
For some amusement:
https://twitter.com/OOCWictor
And notice how easily he believes these random allegations, while immediately dismissing everything else as false?
NarrowBandFtw
Honorary Master
Agreed, just like the fake victims magically came out of the woodwork ...
NarrowBandFtw
Honorary Master
"Take out" can reasonably represent the words "filed for", nobody said it was granted, that's all you.
The fact that 90% of your response is focused on the latter 10% of the article is also telling.
That you believe me posting something means I believe "these random allegations" is also all you. The fact is we now have random allegations from both sides of the coin. One would hope the retards who were so quick to believe the first wave of allegations without a shred of evidence will pause for a second to consider that these new allegations are as credible in that they do not offer hard evidence.
But oh no, they will stick their heads in the sand and discredit one set of baseless accusations while accepting the other. The very essence of the echo chamber.
Unhappy1
Honorary Master
- Joined
- May 25, 2011
- Messages
- 28,881
- Reaction score
- 21,804
Actually, the investigation is essentially just reopening the background check, so that timeline is fair.
He quite clearly doesn't mean it terms of innocent and guilty, he makes that quite clear in the comments before. Merely in terms of politically motivated vs altruistic reasons.
Whatever happened over Beach Week must been one hell of a party for women to keep going back when they witnessed the gang rape of drugged women. Do the men maybe have footage of this and were maybe blackmailing them? I just cannot fathom why go back and not report it.
cerebus
Honorary Master
I loved my cellphone camera from 1982. The resolution was fabulous.
Can't have it both ways. If this woman was traumatized after she was raped, she would have not gone back. I understand that there has been no timeline, but this will come out today or in the next few days when she testifies. If she witnessed women being assaulted and did nothing she is complicit to a very small degree. If Kavanaugh was present to witness such events, she is guilty of the same.
We all have a duty of care. There are a few themes running throughout this entire sordid ordeal. One is that we do need to report these issues to higher authorities (or even our parents for crying out loud) if they are witnessed. If Kavanaugh and Judge are guilty, it seems like this could have been halted somewhat after Ford's incident. Isn't that ironic?
cerebus
Honorary Master
We're not dealing with a culture where you commonly reported such things. The context of the times, and the social expectations on people, were completely different. Read the article I linked. The line between consent and date rape was not delineated, there was no support, and basically whom do you go to? The police?
Once again, this happened to young girls, 36 years ago. Castigating them for how they ought to have handled it is outright disingenuous, and it's victim blaming. Did such things happen at that time? Without question. Look at the popular media of the time - films like Porky's, Revenge of the Nerds, Animal House, are filled with images of frat-boy partying and let's say ambiguously-consensual sexual behavior.
Pitbull
Verboten
Leftist governments? Merkel's government is conservative, centre-right, not leftist.
5 seconds on Google would have stopped you from making your ignorance too obvious.
LMFAO!!!
Out of the whole assembly, you point out Merkel's Government? Her government must have been very vocal to make such a noise... O wait...
You cite culture for a witness not going to the authorities, or someone with authority, yet Kavanaugh is judged under a more critical lens when he was also a witness (as stated by the victim of a gang rape)? We cannot apply our current cultural norms to one, but not the other.
Your attitude is quite condescending as well. Do you think parents did not teach their children right or wrong? When I was young my mother taught me that people forcing me to do something I did not want to do, or touching me in personal places was bad. Obviously, the discussions changed as I grew up. I am sure if you ask your girlfriends or wives if their parents did the same, that they would answer affirmative.
These women were not completely helpless. They went to parties. They were part and parcel of this culture. And we are not talking about young children who are not aware of sexual deviancy. These are young adults who are sexually active. They were also intelligent enough to attend ivy league schools.
I know a person who was sexually molested as a young child. The family just kept quiet about it, but she was adopted into a family where the parents had genetic children, so there is a very weird family dynamic. She ran away at the age of 14 and went back to the orphanage. If a 14 year old child (who was a ward of the state, and did not grow up without any of that motherly nurturing) understands sexual assault, a women in college certainly does, and will not go back to become a victim, or go back after she was a victim. Getting raped is not the victim's fault, but we have a personal responsibility to not put ourselves in the direct path of harm. What about the women that were present and did not get assaulted?
We also have a situation where we have minors and young adults, using spaces for these sordid parties, and those people also did not come forward.
Last edited:
cerebus
Honorary Master
Kavanaugh was also living under a different culture, no doubt about it. Does it exonerate his behavior? As you say:
Even if you want to blame the women who witnessed and didn't do anything about it for some kind of complicity, none of them are up for a Supreme Court seat, and crucially, none of them took part in the activities, and also they were victims of gang-rape so there's that.
Do you think you're gaining anything in this argument by throwing mud back at the women who were at the parties and were victimized? Does it really change anything in this equation?
I am not blaming the victim. I am saying we have a responsibility of care for others. If witnesses came forward, there could have been less victims. This should be our cultural norm and having a discussion about their failings will help our daughters learn from those lessons.
Women are always carrying on about the sisterhood. Maybe that sisterhood should extend to protect each other.
cerebus
Honorary Master
Yes you are.
No that's not what you're doing. You're using the lack of reporting by these women to cast doubt on the whole event.
And when I pointed out that reporting such events was not commonly done at the time, but they still happened, you started talking about how the women are at least partly to blame for not reporting rape.
Having a frank debate about their role in not bringing this to light so other people cannot be victims is creating more victims. By shutting me down under the guise of victim blaming, we are allowing women to be victims and not empowering them to come forward at the time of the incident for their own personal justice, and to protect others.
If you want to break it down into morality, sure. The morals for the actor and witness are completely different. But we cannot dispute the fact that remaining silent is bad judgement.
cerebus
Honorary Master
We're talking about Kavanaugh's innocence or guilt here, not anyone else's. Let's stick to the point shall we?
- Status