Regarding the Kavanaugh confirmation
1 2018-09-30 by AIsuicide
It's going to come down to differentiating between "passing out" and "blacking out" if you ask me. That is what must happen in order to determine possible perjury of any meaningful result. Doesn't really matter to me at this point.
Do I think Senator Feinstein played it dirty by withholding the letter for six weeks? Yes.
Do I think it's questionable that six previous background checks by the FBI failed to turn up any hint whatsoever regarding sexual misconduct? Yes.
Does this outweigh the fact that Kavanaugh's history regarding mass surveillance/rendition is troubling? No.
Do I think a very dangerous precedent is being set regarding an allegation that has so little corroboration? Yes.
Does this outweigh the fact that I think it's very dangerous to have an unbalanced Supreme Court? No.
Do I think Kavanaugh was evasive during his most recent testimony in regards to his drinking? Yes.
Do I think Christine Ford's testimony had questionable aspects to it? Yes.
Do I think Roe vs Wade will ever be overturned? No.
Do I think the Patriot Act will ever be rescinded? No. Maybe re-branded but no significant change.
Do I think it's ironic that people on the left recently praising George W Bush are now using Kavanaugh's role in his administration against him? Yes.
Does that outweigh what Kavanaugh's views on those important issues seems to be? No.
I could go round and round and round on the talking points being supplied by the corporate media, doesn't really change anything.
Do I believe the intelligence agencies are ever going to respect the actual laws in place that protect a US citizen? No.
Did the Democrats question Kavanaugh regarding his views/role during the Bush administration? I don't know, so if someone can answer that, cool.
Are any of the corporate media bringing up his views/role within the Bush administration? Not to my knowledge, but far from certain.
Are we entering a period in the history of the US regarding privacy/technology that is disturbing to many people? Yes.
Is the Supreme Court going to protect us from the agencies capable of abusing their power/authority? Doubtful.
Could the Supreme Court make rulings in the future that further degrade our right to privacy while enhancing the intelligence agencies/law enforcement abilities to collect whatever information they want on any citizen? Yes.
From what we see from both Democrats and Republicans at this time...honestly, do you think either party would condemn the intelligence agencies for mass surveillance of the general public? I don't, not to any extent that would result in prosecution/jail time for anyone.
I don't think I'll be heartbroken if Kavanaugh doesn't get confirmed.
I do think both he and Ford have been treated very badly. I'm guilty myself of going a little overboard.
In the end though, I'm going to have to go with the wisdom of "Be True To Thine Own Self".
I'm a conspiracy theorist...whatever that means these days. I have very little trust in our government and I think the invasion of our privacy and mass surveillance of the general public are reaching extremely dangerous levels.
Kavanaugh has a documented history regarding these topics.
It's impossible for me (personally) to rectify these two things.
Do I think Kavanaugh has led an outstanding life in public service overall and is extremely qualified in interpreting constitutional law? Yes.
Do I believe he committed the act he is accused of? No.
Does that change anything?
26 comments
1 mastigia 2018-09-30
Nice job putting all this in perspective man.
1 AIsuicide 2018-09-30
Thanks mast...wasn't easy.
1 mastigia 2018-09-30
Truth rarely is. And I see by the vote stats that it is extra hard for some people.
1 AIsuicide 2018-09-30
Yep..that's what I had to do
1 mastigia 2018-09-30
Oh ya, you get it haha. I literally still have that written there. Being aware doesn't make me immune.
1 mastigia 2018-09-30
Oh ya, you get it haha. I literally still have that written there. Being aware doesn't make me immune.
1 bmc52 2018-09-30
Really well put together post here. Nicely done
1 bmc52 2018-09-30
Also I think he’s shown a political partisanship that belongs nowhere near the Supreme Court. I doubt he will be capable of getting to the level of impartiality required for a judge. To be fair I’ll admit I found her to be far more credible then him based on the two testimonies.
1 Kino-kun 2018-09-30
I don't think passing out or blacking out fits Fords own testimony. She stated that after the two men did rapey things, they walked down the stairs having a conversation. Unless there is another way you meant for drinking to affect the given story.
1 AIsuicide 2018-09-30
Doesn't matter...both testimonies are un-provable. He said - She said
No corroboration of her story. Once again, He said - She said.
All they can go on now is what Kavanaugh said during his testimony. Believe me, they're going after the drinking and perjury regarding it.
1 Kino-kun 2018-09-30
Doesn't matter? Wtf. You are not clear with what you're saying. What specifically regarding drinking and perjury would they go after based on their testimonies?
1 Kino-kun 2018-09-30
Ah, you're saying that they'll find someone say that he did acrually blackout at some point?
Not sure how they would prove that. Maybe with a group of witnesses. If that's how it goes down, then sucks to be him.
1 Kino-kun 2018-09-30
Ah, you're saying that they'll find someone say that he did acrually blackout at some point?
Not sure how they would prove that. Maybe with a group of witnesses. If that's how it goes down, then sucks to be him.
1 Kino-kun 2018-09-30
Ah, you're saying that they'll find someone say that he did actually blackout at some point?
Not sure how they would prove that. Maybe with a group of witnesses. If that's how it goes down, then sucks to be him.
1 weak_oil 2018-09-30
Passing out and blacking out are two different things. Blacking out isn't being unconscious, its being so drunk your brain cannot make new memories. Meaning you look and act normal (albeit drunk) but will never have a memory of what went on once you're at that level.
1 Kino-kun 2018-09-30
I was thinking of blacking out as losing consciousness suddenly, but now that you mention it, that's a viable interpretation. My personal experience was that i never forgot things or changed personalities while drinking, but I've met plenty of people that have.
In that case, how would you prove that someone was conscious but but was not retaining any memories? I can think of situations hypothetically, but they are not very straight forward.
1 weak_oil 2018-09-30
I think most people, in my experience, don't even change personality when they're in black out mode. I've hung out with friends a lot who can tell me the next day they don't remember anything, but seemed fine at the time. (Of course, I was also drunk during these times, so I guess my account is suspect.)
I don't know if there's anyway to prove if someone is retaining memories. I'm not sure there's really any need to. If someone does something while blacked out, it's still them doing it. They should be held responsible, even if they don't have any memory.
There's definitely a philosophical debate to be had about whether someone is guilty of something they can't remember doing, but I think legally its pretty straight foward.
1 Kino-kun 2018-09-30
The op writes of the distinction of passing out and blacking out as a means to show perjury. That's what i was speaking to. As for the gang rape allegations, the burden of proof is on the accuser, and the accusers witnesses have not confirmed her allegations.
1 Kino-kun 2018-09-30
The op writes of the distinction of passing out and blacking out as a means to show perjury. That's what i was speaking to. As for the gang rape allegations, the burden of proof is on the accuser, and the accusers witnesses have not confirmed her allegations.
1 accountingisboring 2018-09-30
Great post, AI. We have to strip away all of the noise and look at the realities, here and every other topic.
1 Playaguy 2018-09-30
That was a fantastic summary.
I won't be a bit broken-hearted if he's not confirmed but what happened when two 15 year olds drank some beer decades ago doesn't reflect on his judge qualifications.
Selling out the people does. But we don't talk about that.
1 NewAccountVersion3 2018-09-30
Great post.
1 hypermoderns 2018-09-30
They tried to, but only 10% of his documents were given to the senators, and yes, the dems bitched about it (rightfully so). Much of that held back under State Secret Privilege was during his time with the Bush admin. He did all sorts of shady shit in the Bush admin. He was there to make the illegal legal, regarding spying, torturing, 9/11, all the hits.
1 MC-Dubsack 2018-09-30
Dude what the fuck is up with these people in power? Dead Kennedys were talking shit on Dianne Feinstein and Jerry Brown in early 80's.
1 StefanYellowCurry 2018-09-30
I don't care if this man nuked the world with a death star. nobody should have their names ruined with no evidence and a squeeky clean record.
1 AIsuicide 2018-09-30
Doesn't matter...both testimonies are un-provable. He said - She said
No corroboration of her story. Once again, He said - She said.
All they can go on now is what Kavanaugh said during his testimony. Believe me, they're going after the drinking and perjury regarding it.
1 weak_oil 2018-09-30
Passing out and blacking out are two different things. Blacking out isn't being unconscious, its being so drunk your brain cannot make new memories. Meaning you look and act normal (albeit drunk) but will never have a memory of what went on once you're at that level.