Does anyone else remember the ass-kissing letter Gorsuch had to write to Trump in order to keep his nomination from being pulled on the grounds of “insufficient loyalty”?
Methinks thou doth protest too much.
You’re the kind of person who gets to decide when enough time has passed that a sexual assault victim needs to just get on with life and forget the whole event.
Read your own post. It’s right there.
It’s really not.
While I agree with your OP, you don’t have the greatest track record when it comes to over the top over-reactions to even the slightest critiques of minor (or major) elements of your posts or trains of thought.
TL;DR - Even when you have a decent point, you’re an idiot. Or better stated here.
The poster he’s responding to did not offer any sort of critique. He just minimized the issue of rape, by saying it didn’t matter since he didn’t believe it would affect the outcome of the judicial nomination.
He brought up the same argument that is used by Kavinaugh’s supporters to undermine the idea that the rape is at all important, so it’s perfectly reasonable for Cartooniverse to assume he is on the same side as those who make that same “but he was in high school” argument.
And, in his reply, he got snarky instead of refuting Cartooniverse’s interpretation Notice how he avoids saying that he doesn’t support him, and instead tries to redirect it to forcing Cartooniverse to prove that he said it. That’s even more reason to think he is right.
It’s not his fault that posters love to not be direct and not just say what they mean. It’s not his fault that we often have to try and figure out what people actually mean because of this.
Just be fucking clear, people. If you support something, say that. If you don’t support it, say you don’t. If someone misunderstands that you support something, then don’t say “how do you know I feel that way?” Say “No, you’re wrong. That’s not what I meant.”
As for that thread, Cartooniverse was understandably angry due to being triggered by the subject matter of child rape–something he himself experienced–and became irrational. Miller’s understandable overreaction was triggered for the same reasons. They actually both agreed on the actual topic, but kept escalating. It was hardly an example of a good response.
Bullshit. Cartooniverse has a long history of hyperbolic outrage on a number of topics with an equally long record of distorting the words or intent of other posters (to the extent of getting mod notes over it). I get it. He’s got some personal issues that make him less than rational on some things, but that’s often expressed by over the top reactions not warranted by the actual posts.
Bumping the guy off seems a little extreme, unless by that time it’s Thomas.
There’s no statute of limitations in the state of Maryland where the sexual assault occurred, so that carries SOME weight in that Ford can still pursue a criminal case. It also speaks to the idea that some states have deemed sexual assault criminal enough to allow a lifetime of culpability.
I don’t think it’s Ford’s mission, though, to criminally prosecute Kavanaugh. I just think she wants the truth out to prevent him from getting the lifetime appointment.
Maybe, but there’s enough concern over her believability that the Republicans are shopping for a female outside counsel to ask Ford the questions at the Senate Hearing in place of the senators. Repubs fearing the optics of old men grilling the victim. Also keep in mind that she is a teaching professor accustomed to speaking publicly, thinking on her feet, and obviously confident enough to have revealed her identity in spite of the heavy cost.
Re. the senators claiming she is mistaken, have you seen the unfolding story about that? Kavanaugh and his allies (Grassley/Hatch/Whelan) have been privately discussing a defense that would not question whether an incident happened to Ford, but instead would raise doubts that the attacker was Kavanaugh. Now they’re putting the blame on some guy named Chris Garrett who lived in the area. Hilariously, Garrett was friends w/ Kavanaugh in prep school and is one of the signatories on the list of those who attest to Kavanaugh’s character.
I’m not sure that it’s much of a story. The guy trying to drag Garrett into this is one Ed Whelan, a right-wing lawyer who used to clerk for Scalia. He shows old high school pics claiming Kavanaugh and Garrett look alike. He also says, anticipating the possibility of having his ass sued by Garrett, that of course he isn’t really trying to imply anything! Ford states she knew them both and no way in hell would she mistake one for the other. The article also uses Whelan’s logic, complete with pictures, to prove that Charles Manson was actually Kenny Loggins. 
Drudge report claiming Ronan Farrow is going to drop a 2nd-woman bomb on Kavanaugh…
https://twitter.com/MollyJongFast/status/1043999405697880064?s=19
Michael Avenatti:
[INDENT]I represent a woman with credible information regarding Judge Kavanaugh and Mark Judge. We will be demanding the opportunity to present testimony to the committee and will likewise be demanding that Judge and others be subpoenaed to testify. The nomination must be withdrawn.[/INDENT]
It was also pretty fucking amazing, how fast they came up with all those signatures on that letter :dubious:
You’re absolutely right.
That will be great for Avenatti if he’s doing more tv appearances and maybe a book deal. For the rest of us, we’d be better off if the attention seeker would just go away.
And that’s just the thing. Remember, this is the guy who worked with Ken Starr and tried to destroy Clinton,and after a long investigation, a witch hunt if you will, only came up with “Bill had a blowjob”…
But NOW he says a president (Trump of course) should not be distracted by investigations and lawsuits.
Kavanaugh’s position (NOW) that presidents (THIS ONE) should be free of such legal inquiries until after they leave office puts him on the record regarding a topic of intense interest to Trump
But it isn’t Bill’s blowjobs anymore, it’s “collusion” (conspiracy) and obstruction. It’s treason and defrauding the country.
I’d like it better if Kavanaugh went away - for lying under oath.
He can take the rest of the administration with him.
Preach on!
It feels so yucky to live in a country where an alleged rapist president names an alleged rapist judge to the highest court.
I wish I could extract text, but here is the relevant part of the attachment in the above link:
“We are aware of multiple house parties in the Washington DC area during the early 1980s during which Brett Kavanaugh, Mark Judge, and others would engage in the targeting of women with alcohol/drugs in order to allow a “train” of men to subsequently gang-rape them. There are multiple witnesses who will corroborate these facts and they must be called upon to testify.”
… Sent in an email to Mike Davis, Chief Counsel for nominations, US Senate Committee on the Judiciary, on behalf of Chairman Chuck Grassley.