Ten oz

How long Feinstein knew about Ford's claims is exaggerated in many reports. Feinstein was sent a letter by Ford weeks after Kavanaugh had been nominated. Assuming you accept there was any vetting done by Feinstein's office and with the knowledge that Ford requested confidentiality I think the matter was referred to the FBI by Feinstein in a perfectly reasonable amount of time. Also no Democrat sought out Ford. It was Ford herself who sent the letter, got lawyers, and took a polygraph prior to any Democratic politician getting involved. It is a characterization of events to say this has all been some strategic move by Democrats. Ford set these events in motion. The Democratic party presently have not control. If was Sen. Flakes (Republican) who forced a delay on Kavanaugh's vote so this matter could be investigated by the FBI. Republicans can and might hold a vote this Friday if they choose. Democrats can't do anything to stop that. The current session of Congress lasts till January 3rd. Republicans can vote Kavanaugh, or another nominee, whenever they'd like between now and then. Also the Supreme Court has been 5-4 Republican appointed Justices for the last couple decades. Justice Kennedy, whom Kavanaugh would replace, was put on the court by Ronald Reagan. It was Scalia's replacement (Garland) who would have swung balance of the the Court 5-4 Democrat appointed Judges. Of course Democrats would prefer to have their pick and of course they will fight much as they can against any Republican nominee but it is an overstatement to imply they have any juice here. Republicans control the Senate and can hold a vote whenever they are ready. The problem Republicans are having at the moment is a self inflicted one. They nominated a loyalist rather than a safe choice.

You beat me to it. I was literally type that same when you posted. A human alone anywhere with a AR-15 wouldn't be absolutely safe. Armed hunters have been killed by bears and large cats. Alone a human isn't the most difficult animal out there to sneak up on. Groups provide humans more protection than a gun.

Decimals notwithstanding half of U.S. voters or even a plurality of U.S. voters did not support Trump. While it may seem like a frivolous side discussion it is relevant to the boarder point being made about Kavanaugh temperament during the hearings. In lashing out against Democrats and claiming sour grapes over the 2016 Kavanaugh basically gave the middle finger to a plurality of the U.S. voting public. That is a rather disturbing thing to see a potential lifetime SCOTUS Justice do. It was also quite brazen considering he was nominated by a guy who lost the popular vote by millions, has historically low approval ratings, and is under criminal investigation. As asked in a post a few pages where is Kavanaugh's humility? If he is innocent of the multiple allegations that still doesn't give him the right to lash out against a plurality of the nation.

2.1% is the difference between Trump and Clinton which is different than Trump vs all U.S. Voters. Johnson and Stein also got 6 million votes between them.

No decimal. Trump got 46% of the vote. 54% voted for someone else. That is an 8 point difference.

The majority of U.S. voters, by 8 points, voted for someone else. 63 million votes for Trump to 72 million votes for other candidates. Half of U.S. did not support Trump. Considering Clinton received 3 million more votes (66 million) it isn't even accurate to say a plurality of U.S. voters supported Trump.

If you reported a crime to law enforcement they word believe you, take your word at face value, and investigate. Believing a report doesn't preclude a proper investigation.

So Ford wait 36yrs, which is not abnormal for a sexual assault victim, comes with consequence but Kavanaugh misleading the Senate and being belligerent does come with any. In the game of he said she said I see no reason t error on the said of the identified liar.

This sort of argument really disturbs me because it blatantly obfuscates what we know about sexual assault. It is documented that the majority of victims never come forward at all and the that false reporting is rare, Here. You are asking what changed as if suddenly seeing your attacker's face everyday on TV, news apps, and etc is nothing. Only a small percentage of Sex Assaults are reported in a timeline manner. It is not the norm.

I buy presents for birthdays, graduates, and anniversaries too. The act isn't specific to religious event. I think an argument could be made that religion has co-opted traditions and events celebrated in societies. I imagine gifting presents far predates religions.

While it is true that virtually all human cultures have or had some form of supernatural myths prevalent in their culture I would argue that there is a meaningful distinction between what people actual believe vs casually entertain. It is not uncommon for my to buy young people in my family Christmas presents despite the fact I am an Atheist and at no point in my life was ever Christian (Jewish mother). The use of totems and and spirit animals while seemingly religious in nature were also a mechanism to pass on useful craft and hunting skills during a time when oral and traditions were all people had. Giving stories flare makes them easier to tell around a camp fire and that is how knowledge was passed down in many cultures. Whether or not the individuals in those cultures honestly believed the stories verbatim is debatable just as not everyone who buys Christmas gifts believes Jesus did for our sins. In my opinion when analyzing religion throughout human history there needs to be a distinction between those who were using myths as idioms to pass along useful information about the environment/world and those who were true believers prepared to kill others or die themselves in the name of the supernatural. If we study the later group I believe we'd find Religion (true fervent belief) to only exist in very large societies and is generally associated with the power structure which dominates those large societies. Egypt, Greeks, Mayans, and etc had established religions they killed and died for. How does or did that impact evolution isn't clear. To my knowledge no formal religion that individuals killed or died for existed during human evolution. What religion existed in Homo Heidelbergensis as they evolved into Homo Sapiens?

Yes, that is the short version of the rest of my post. Step up and do the right thing is something we all should strive to do. Nothing objectionable there in my opinion. Saying Ford needs to be believed doesn't negate due process. If you walk into your local law enforcement office to file a complaint wouldn't you like to be believed? Of course a thorough investigation would follow but upfront shouldn't one be treated with respect? How would you feel if your house were robbed and after calling law enforcement they showed up to take your statement full of suspicion, doubt, and repeatedly challenging whether or not you made the whole thing up. That wouldn't be good service. Rather they would show up and take you complaint at face value and treat you with respect. Then they'd investigate.

I do understand MigL initial point about taking sexual assault claims as gospel without due process but I think MigL chose the wrong case to center the conversation around. Kavanaugh when given time to speak showed himself to be a deeply partisan, belligerent, a liar, and divorced from the concept of service or accountability. Numerous character witness, a book written by a friend, a police report from a bar fight, and Kavanaugh's own words in his yearbook also describe him as an angry to violent drunk. If we add up the circumstantial evidence along side Kavanaugh's lying and aggressive public behavior there is no reason to take Kavanaugh at his word. When provided an opportunity to set the record straight Kavanaugh instead lunched into attacks against the Clintons, challenged the drinking habits of those not under inquiry, and refuse to say whether he thought an investigation was in order. MigL is asking where Kavanaugh's due process is meanwhile Kavanaugh has been provided opportunities to clear his name and squandered it. Ford and the other 2 women accusing Kavanaugh of Sexual Assault could be mstake or lying yet none have done anything to indicate they are. Everyone, even MigL, agree Ford's testimony was credible. So the he said she said game is played played out between she the credible witness vs he the belligerent liar.

They are both disqualifying. Worse doesn't really matter. By an inch or by a mile if Kavanaugh is unfit the Senate should vote him down.

Every SCOTUS nominee gets tough treatment from the opposing party from which they were nominated by. Republicans refused to hold hearings for Merrick Garland, Sonia Sotomayor was labelled racist ", Elena Kegan saw 37 of the 41 Republicans in the Senate at the time of her confirmation vote against her and her Background was clean and her hearing uneventful. None of them got out there and gave prepared statement targeting Republicans by name and complaining about election outcomes. Kavanaugh invoked the Clintons, neither of whom hold elected office, and cried woe is me. It was the most childish and unprofessional behavior I have ever seen from a SCOTUS nominee. A plurality of the country votes Democrat. It is a very troubling thing to see a SCOTUS nominee openly condemning a single party.

90% of African Americans and 70% of Latinos and Asians voted Democrat on average in every election for the last couple decades. There is a stark racial divide between who supports Democrats and who supports Republican. People often play up how well Obama did with African American voter (93% in 2012) but the truth is Al Gore got 90% in 00' and Kerry received 88% in 04' of the African American vote too. The demographics of which groups vote for whom are quite stable regardless of the candidate and it predates Obama. Seems the White House doesn't want the FBI to question either Ford or Kavanaugh.

People do unlikely things all the time in life. I don't need to understand why one would do something to understand could've done something. I can't explain foot fetishes or people who swallow buttons yet each exists. People do weird things for odd reasons. Asking why in no way diminishes from the fact it could've happened. I didn't imply a specific number of people were Jewish. Ultimately Jesus is said to have been the Messiah Judaism references. Jesus's family and community per his mythology were all Jewish. Jewish leaders. Judaism was the religion of the time and is the religion referenced. One would have to be familiar with Jewish prophecy to invent Jesus. How do you know this? Nothing Jewish contemporary to Jesus's time frame referencing Jesus exists. Sort of the point of Jesus's whole existence through. Had Jesus been revered he wouldn't have died for humanities sins and Christianity wouldn't exist. What you are describing is a mandatory plot device which Jesus's story requires. To replace/update Judaism which is what both Islam and Christianity seek to do with Jesus and Mohammed. The traditions from the Torah remain in both Islam and Christianity.

I think you are misrepresenting the facts regarding how events played out. Ford notified Here Rep. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) On July 6th before Kavanaugh was nominated by Trump and requested information on how she could share her account. Then on July 20th a couple weeks after the nomination Ford reached out to Senator Feinstein and offered up time frames in August when she'd be available to discuss the matter. Ford request confidentiality. Ford then lawyered up and took a polygraph on August 7th Here. Senator Feinstein referred the situation to the FBI Sept 12th. Between the time Ford outline her availability to Feinstein and the time Feinstein referred matters to the FBI was only a month and not a couple months. Ford reached out to Congress on her own and was rather persistent about it doing so before and after Kavanaugh was nominated. While Ford did request the matter be kept confidential she also made herself available to both speak with Feinstein and take a polygraph. Lastly Feinstein denies leaking the story. If you follow the timeline by early Sept. Ford already had lawyers and had taken a polygraph test. So by that time more people than just Feinstein knew about the allegations. The leaks could have come from one a few different place.

I had misread the post. I misread it as asking why Dems wanted the report public.

This has nothing to do with the context of my post and what I would do is supercilious to this conversation as I am neither a Senator or a SCOTUS nominee nor do I ever intend to run for the Senate or accept a SCOTUS nomination. How is she a pawn of her claims predate the current political environment and Democrats hold themselves to the same standard? What is the evidence? I assume because they are collecting all the related evidence first to beat organize which questions to ask. That is the fault of Republicans and not the fault of Democrats. Transparency?

I sure hope we'd get more than a text.

Why are you separating the two? I think one drives the other. When Democratic Senator Al Franken, a popular and beloved Democrat at that, was accused of sex misconduct he was out quick without a fight. Whether it is a Republican accused or one of their own Democratic behavior seems fairly consistent on this issue.

The President gets his or her info from Emergency Agencies. The horse's mouth would be theirs. Waiting for an emergency to hit the Presidents desk and get filtered through political optics before being sent out doesn't seem anymore efficient to be than the current systems already in place. Thank you

One who is illiterate by default would do poorly on an IQ test yet illiteracy doesn't automatically mean limited intelligence. Literacy can be more about what one has be educated/trained in than about the mind's capacity. To understand the degree to which an IQ test accurately gauges intelligence we first would need a clear definition for intelligence. Is it ones ability to learn, the accumulation of what one knows, the speed at which one recalls, and does the way emotions (fear, stress, sorrow, and etc) impact decision making matter. A person could be an elite test taker yet have a social disorder which renders them unable to carry on conversation with another person. Would you consider such a disability an intellectual impairment? IQ tests don't measure ones ability to interact with or influence others yet those factors arguably have been bigger drivers in human evolution than intelligence alone. In my opinion IQ tests certainly do not encapsulate all the various factors a person needs to be successful in life and succeeding in life should be a moderate to high priority for any intelligent person. Being able able to read a room, project an idea, project an image, know how others see you, having a sense of humor, understanding the desires of others, and etc are all very useful skills I'd argue are important as a standard educational priority like literacy. *by successful life I just mean not being alone and destitute.

In sworn affidavits Ford and her husband claim she named Kavanaugh as her attacker to her therapist back in 2012. If that can be conformed it proves without a shadow of doubt that her claim existed long before the 2016 election and as such isn't "revenge on behalf of the Clintons" or some Democratic conspiracy. Considering that there are now 3 accuses, a bar fight Kavanaugh was implicated in, and former friends have come out claiming Kavanaugh is lying I don't see how one would state it is "plain to see" this is character assassination by democrats. It seems more likely to me at this point that Kavanaugh is or at least use to be an angry belligerent chauvinist prone to aggression when he drinks. Also Kavanaugh's friend who was named as present during the Ford attack wrote a book title "Wasted" about his own alcoholism leading up to treatment and in in the book his frequent drinking partner was a Bart O' Kavanaugh . The book was released in 1997 which also well pre-dates the 2016 election.