The board's server will undergo upgrade maintenance tonight, Nov 5, 2014, beginning approximately around 10 PM ET. Prepare for some possible down time during this process.
Have any of the named witnesses involved in either event corroborated any/all of the details of the respective accusations? Does any evidence for either assault yet exist beyond the specific accounts of Ford and Ramirez?
I realize in these highly politicized times most will be unable to read those questions as anything but an apology for Kavanaugh, but I'm actually just curious about what evidentiary facts actually have and have not been established.
I realize in these highly politicized times most will be unable to read those questions as anything but an apology for Kavanaugh, but I'm actually just curious about what evidentiary facts actually have and have not been established.
I realize in these highly politicized times most will be unable to read those questions as anything but an apology for Kavanaugh, but I'm actually just curious about what evidentiary facts actually have and have not been established.
No. I don't expect there will be either.
And neither has Kavanaugh offered anything beyond a denial, correct?
Basically, there is no compelling evidence at this point, beyond however willing one is to use both accounts to potentially establish a pattern of behavior. Is that about right?
Which is the purpose of an FBI investigation, and why the absolute determination to avoid one at all costs conflicts with all this foot stomping and complaining.
Which is the purpose of an FBI investigation, and why the absolute determination to avoid one at all costs conflicts with all this foot stomping and complaining.
Hmmm, so it's a sufficiently opaque circumstance requiring for clarity the FBI's time, energy, and resources. Is it okay if I - possessing merely an internet connection and set of weak priors on Kavanaugh's relative guilt - simply do not have a strong opinion on the matter? And that I completely disregard anyone expressing any level of certainty on the matter as being motivated by something other than the truth (or as close to it as one can reasonably expect to come)?
Last edited by --- on Mon September 24, 2018 7:33 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I realize in these highly politicized times most will be unable to read those questions as anything but an apology for Kavanaugh, but I'm actually just curious about what evidentiary facts actually have and have not been established.
No. I don't expect there will be either.
And neither has Kavanaugh offered anything beyond a denial, correct?
Basically, there is no compelling evidence at this point, beyond however willing one is to use both accounts to potentially establish a pattern of behavior. Is that about right?
Kavenaugh has calendars that he scribbled his keg parties on. Does that count as evidence?
I realize in these highly politicized times most will be unable to read those questions as anything but an apology for Kavanaugh, but I'm actually just curious about what evidentiary facts actually have and have not been established.
No. I don't expect there will be either.
And neither has Kavanaugh offered anything beyond a denial, correct?
Basically, there is no compelling evidence at this point, beyond however willing one is to use both accounts to potentially establish a pattern of behavior. Is that about right?
Kavenaugh has calendars that he scribbled his keg parties on. Does that count as evidence?
It's evidence, but I'd be hard-pressed to consider it "compelling."
The FBI has already done background checks on Kavenaugh. Anyone who expects them to uncover irrefutable evidence of a mushroom stamp from 35 years ago has been watching too much TV.
Hmmm, so it's a sufficiently opaque circumstance requiring for clarity the FBI's time, energy, and resources.
What percent of sexual assaults would you estimate occur under conditions such that they would meet a bar of “sufficiently opaque to warrant an investigation,” prior to an investigation?
Quote:
Is it okay if I - possessing merely an internet connection and set of weak priors on Kavanaugh's relative guilt - simply do not have a strong on opinion on the matter?
Why wouldn’t it be? “I do not have a strong opinion on the matter” and “there isn’t currently enough evidence on either side” are both different conclusions than “there shouldn’t be an attempt to acquire any evidence.”
The FBI has already done background checks on Kavenaugh. Anyone who expects them to uncover irrefutable evidence of a mushroom stamp from 35 years ago has been watching too much TV.
More precisely, he's been through six FBI background investigations over his 20+ years in public service.
Hmmm, so it's a sufficiently opaque circumstance requiring for clarity the FBI's time, energy, and resources.
What percent of sexual assaults would you estimate occur under conditions such that they would meet a bar of “sufficiently opaque to warrant an investigation,” prior to an investigation?
An enigma of a man shaped hole in the wall between reality and the soul of the devil.
Joined: Tue January 01, 2013 5:13 pm Posts: 39812 Location: 6000 feet beyond man and time.
--- wrote:
McParadigm wrote:
--- wrote:
Hmmm, so it's a sufficiently opaque circumstance requiring for clarity the FBI's time, energy, and resources.
What percent of sexual assaults would you estimate occur under conditions such that they would meet a bar of “sufficiently opaque to warrant an investigation,” prior to an investigation?
The world will probably implode before we get to the point of a SCJ's social media history and dick pic snaps as a teen being kicked around by Senator Barron Trump at a confirmation hearing, but it's sort of fun to sit and think about.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 35 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum
