20
   

Poor Kavanaugh wants to run for SC judge

 
 
mysteryman841
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2018 12:16 pm
Here are some interesting quotes from Fords lawyer...

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/09/17/lawyer-for-kavanaugh-accuser-downplayed-sexual-misconduct-allegations-against-clinton-franken.html

But while her client's claims have raised bipartisan concerns about Kavanaugh, Katz, a longtime Democratic donor known for representing sexual harassment accusers, also has a history of downplaying or dismissing accusations made by women against Democratic politicians -- including former President Bill Clinton and former Minnesota Sen. Al Franken.
“Paula Jones' suit is very, very, very weak,” Katz said on CNN’s “Talkback Live” in March 1998 in a discussion about Jones’ claims against Clinton, according to a show transcript. “She's alleged one incident that took place in a hotel room that, by her own testimony, lasted 10 to 12 minutes. She suffered no repercussions in the workplace.”

Katz, speaking to the newspaper, added, ''If it's one time, it has to be severe, almost a sexual assault, not just a touching of somebody's breast or buttocks or even forceful kissing.”
In more recent years, Katz also downplayed the wave of sexual misconduct allegations against Franken, who denied some of the allegations but eventually resigned from the Senate over them.
"Context is relevant,” Katz said of Franken, who was a comedian before his election to the Senate.“Clearly a one-time incident that took place in 10 to 12 minutes, she was not forced to have sex, she left on her own volition, the courts increasingly are finding that that is not enough to create a sexually hostile work environment claim,” Katz said in April 1998, according to a transcript of CBS Evening News.

Video
Kavanaugh issues new denial of sexual misconduct allegation
''If a woman came to me with a similar fact pattern, that is someone in the company above her propositioned her but only once and she suffered no tangible job detriment,'' Katz told The New York Times in 1998, ''I would probably tell her that I'm sorry, it's unfair, but you don't have a case.''
“Clearly a one-time incident that took place in 10 to 12 minutes, she was not forced to have sex, she left on her own volition, the courts increasingly are finding that that is not enough to create a sexually hostile work environment claim,” Katz said in April 1998, according to a transcript of CBS Evening News.

''If a woman came to me with a similar fact pattern, that is someone in the company above her propositioned her but only once and she suffered no tangible job detriment,'' Katz told The New York Times in 1998, ''I would probably tell her that I'm sorry, it's unfair, but you don't have a case.''
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So, what makes this case any different from the Paula Jones case, or the case against Al Franken?
If the accusations are true “He did not do this as a member of the U.S. Supreme Court. He did this in his capacity of someone who was still functioning as a minor.

So now, it seems that the lawyer has changed her mind now that she is the attacker.
mysteryman841
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2018 12:17 pm
@izzythepush,
She said she wasn't raped.
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2018 12:21 pm
@mysteryman841,
She was sexually assaulted, It's not something people like to talk about.

I get the impression you'd still want him confirmed even if it is proven he did rape her.
mysteryman841
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2018 12:25 pm
@izzythepush,
Your impression is wrong.
IF he assaulted her, it was over 30 years ago.
I just posted her lawyers position on the same charges brought against other people.

Here is 'what her lawyer said about what Miss Ford is claiming...''If it's one time, it has to be severe, almost a sexual assault, not just a touching of somebody's breast or buttocks or even forceful kissing.”

So by her lawyers own statement, it not sexual assault.


I am just questioning the timing of the charge, it doesn't pass the smell test.
Also, why is the left ignoring the charges brought against KeithEllison?
The accusations against him are more credible, and more recent.

camlok
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2018 12:49 pm
@mysteryman841,
Quote:
She said she wasn't raped.


And this is important, how, mm?
0 Replies
 
camlok
 
  0  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2018 12:50 pm
@mysteryman841,
Quote:
I am just questioning the timing of the charge, it doesn't pass the smell test.
Also, why is the left ignoring the charges brought against KeithEllison?
The accusations against him are more credible, and more recent.


I addressed all these issues, mm, and if you were not such a coward, like izzy pretends to be, you could have read them.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2018 02:10 pm
@camlok,
https://www.rainn.org/articles/statutes-limitations-sex-crimes
Quote:
Why do statutes of limitations exist?
Statutes of limitation were put in place in part to discourage convictions based on “unreliable witness testimony,” including memories of events that occurred years in the past.

In recent years, evidence that does not erode over time is often available, such as DNA, audio or video recordings, emails, texts, and other digital communication. These newer forms of evidence play an important role in investigating and prosecuting crimes of sexual violence. Society also has come to understand more about the physical, emotional, and psychological effects of sexual violence and the reasons why a victim may not immediately report the crime. As understanding of these crimes and their effect have evolved, so have states’ laws.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2018 02:33 pm
@mysteryman841,
Fox News. . . ah-hahahahahahahahaha . . .
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2018 02:40 pm
I am not an "ideological liberal," as I have pointed out many times. It is hilarious, though, that Max has repeatedly claimed that he is a liberal.
camlok
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2018 02:46 pm
@cicerone imposter,
You should have addressed this to mm, ci. Remember you have me on ignore/not on ignore/on ignore/off ignore/... .
0 Replies
 
camlok
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2018 02:48 pm
@Setanta,
Quote:
Fox News. . . ah-hahahahahahahahaha . . .


Setanta . . . ah-hahahahahahahahaha . . .
0 Replies
 
camlok
 
  0  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2018 02:50 pm
@Setanta,
Quote:
I am not an "ideological liberal,"


You fancy yourself as something much more esoteric, right, Set?
0 Replies
 
izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2018 02:53 pm
@mysteryman841,
So if you can get away with something for 30 years that makes it fine.

The woman in question has had to have therapy as a result of what happened so it's not as innocuous as you're trying to make out.

I have no idea who Keith Ellison is, but I don't think he's been nominated for supreme court.
camlok
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2018 02:56 pm
@izzythepush,
Quote:
I have no idea who Keith Ellison is, but I don't think he's been nominated for supreme court.


You could do just a tiny wee bit, a smidgen of research to find out, izzy, instead of being your usual rank partisan self.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2018 03:17 pm
@izzythepush,
I wonder what their thinking would be if the victim was their mother, wife, sister, or daughter?
camlok
 
  -1  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2018 03:29 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Quote:
I wonder what their thinking would be if the victim was their mother, wife, sister, or daughter?


Interesting thought, ci. But you have to control your partisan inclinations.

You should also wonder what their thinking would be if the victim was your father, brother, son, nephew, even a total male stranger.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2018 04:36 pm
@Setanta,
What a ridiculous comment
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2018 04:37 pm
@Setanta,
What are you then? An ideological nitwit?
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2018 04:39 pm
@cicerone imposter,
That's hardly the test.

He either did it or didn't and the emotions of people close to the principles are immaterial.
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Tue 18 Sep, 2018 05:09 pm
The liberals here are the ones that are taking this to the extreme without knowing the facts. The truth is that none of us know at all what really happened 30 years ago. There is a truth... we have no way to know it. And yet, people here are speaking with certainty about what happened.

There are very few facts.

- There is a high stakes nomination process that people want to stop "at any cost".

- We have the account of the accuser who none of us know.

- I think she says she talked to a therapist a couple of years ago, and maybe there are notes we haven't seen.

- There are women who have worked with the accused and are standing up for his character (who may have political motives).

For anyone to claim to be certain about what really happened is ridiculous. This is more about ideology than about facts.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
GOP Empire Strikes Back - Discussion by parados
Government School Indoctrination - Discussion by H2O MAN
The Democrats will win again in 2016 - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Romney 2012? - Discussion by snood
Can Obama Lose? Will he be a one-term president? - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Obama care 2014 - Discussion by wts
The 'I voted' thread! - Question by Cycloptichorn
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 04/19/2024 at 09:32:20