I moved this discussion from the US politics thread where it was cluttering up that noble thread and frankly deserves a thread of it’s own.
Background: After a stellar legal career, Judge Brett Kavanaugh was nominated to the US Supreme court, the highest honor anyone in the legal profession could aspire to. He is a conservative (Republican) judge, and was nominated to replace Justice Anthony Kennedy, also a conservative. The normal Senate hearings were held in August and confirmation was expected to go smoothly in September.
At the last moment, an accuser stepped forward claiming that Kavanaugh grabbed her and groped her over her clothing at a drunken teenage house party when they were in high school in 1982. She doesn’t remember anything else, where it happened, whose house it was in, how she got there, how she got home,etc. Nothing except Kavanaugh attacked her, with his drunken friend Mark Judge in attendance. Both Kavanaugh and Judge deny it happened. She didn’t report it to the police (or anyone) in 1982, but now wants the FBI to drop everything they are doing and investigate.
The manner of her disclosure is a bit odd. She wrote a letter to Senator Dianne Feinstein in July, outlining her allegation, before the hearing commenced but asked for anonymity. Feinstein sat on the letter until after the hearing and then disclosed it to the press. Republicans said this was a ridiculous attempt to derail the nomination at the last minute, especially from an anonymous source. The accuser then disclosed her identity to the Washington Times, she is a liberal professor from California called Christine Blasey Ford, a member of and donor to the Democratic party.
What should the Republican controlled Senate have done?
#IBelieveHer and hang him by the balls?
#IBelieveHim and politely tell her to get fucked?
Hold a hearing where she says he did it and he says he didn’t?
How was the young lady dressed at the party? Was she dancing provocatively, had she applied artificial tan and carried out any groundkeeping (1982 though…)
We don’t know any of that, as apparently they were all too drunk to remember anything. Everyone named so far (all men obviously) say they have no recollection of such an event.
Yes, but perhaps best understood in the current political and social climate we now live in. It would seem that the burden of proof is migrating from the alleged victim to the alleged perpetrator. If you are accused of sexual wrongdoing you now have to prove you didn’t do it.
Please don’t bring personal matters relating to posters into this thread or reduce it to token humor.
This is a very serious issue and sets an incredible precedent if Kavanaugh’s nomination is derailed with zero proof an assault actually took place. Essentially anyone, whether male, female, or gender fluid, can be denied a job if they are accused by someone else of wrongdoing.
Liberals of course are claiming that this is not political and simply a case of a manpig who needs to be held accountable for his actions. A whoops moment has happened though as it transpires Blasey Ford is being advised by none other than Democratic operative Ricki Seidman who has spent most of her career opposing conservative judges. The same Ricki Seidman who advised Anita Hill before she came forth to accuse Clarence Thomas in 1992.
For those who don’t remember the Clarence Thomas case, Thomas was also sailing through nomination in 1992, about to become the second black man to sit on the Supreme court. He was conservative though, so had to be stopped. The case brought by Hill was that he had talked dirty to her in the workplace, discussing his large penis and sexual prowess. After a hearing in which Hill could provide no collaborating evidence, Thomas was finally appointed but forever branded as a sexual harasser by liberals.
Seidman’s other claim to fame is she worked for the great campaigner for woman’s rights, Ted Kennedy. yes, that Ted Kennedy. Not content with overtaking his brothers as the greatest serial womanizer in US political history, he is also renowned for the Chappaquiddick incident where he left a young woman to drown in his car that he had drunkenly driven over a pier and went back to his hotel room and slept for the night.
Released it and then released the name of the accuser who had asked not to be named. It’s the same playbook as Anita Hill. Anita Hill was assured by Democrats that Thomas would withdraw (I know!) if she accused him, but then when Thomas told them to go fuck themselves, she was forced to testify. What Democrats put that poor girl through was despicable, and they are about to do it again.
There’s no age of criminal liability in most US states, it’s 11 for federal crimes. You could be tried as an adult in Maryland (where it allegedly) happened at 16. The general legal consensus is that it’s unlikely it would have been prosecuted as reported in 1982, especially as they were all rich white kids.
That’s what I thought. So why isn’t she being challenged on this and her attempts to set the rules before she gives Senate evidence. Fucking ridiculously partisanship here.
Because if you challenge her you are a woman hater, victim blamer and misogynist pig.
It’s the way things have gone I suppose.
The whole concept of a private citizen dictating to the US Senate how they should conduct an inquiry is quite fascinating though. It’s no wonder congress has about 2% approval ratings.
Of course both sides are at it, no one sensible or sane for that matter is saying anything other than US politics is hopelessly broken.
The issue here though is the changing environment driven by so called progressives. It is now regarded as compulsory to believe any and all accusers of sexual assault, regardless of the individual merits of the case, and shift the burden of proof on to the accused to prove their innocence. This has been happening on US campuses for years, and is reaching it’s natural conclusion i.e. weaponizing sex.