President Trump: The NEW one and only politics thread

Just taking the other side of that. ... If you see her as "this poor woman," by default you have to see Kavanaugh as "that poor guy."

Because all any of us have is, "She said, he said" right now. She might be telling the truth. But for all any of us know for certain, she could be lying and he could be having his integrity destroyed in the worst kind of politicized smear job imaginable. None of us know -- either way.

I agree with others that we should take allegations like that seriously (even if the way it was handled by the Democrats was miserably bad), and if she wants to testify, he should be back before the Senate to at least answer questions before they vote -- put him on the record, under oath. At the end of the day, though, what is the likelihood that anything emerges that takes it from the realm of her word versus his word and establishes his guilt?

I will say one thing. ... whenever someone is accused of something very serious, I get really turned off to their cause when they make a mealy denial or they hide. Obviously, an outraged denial doesn't really tell us whether he's guilty or not (he can just be a liar, of course), but what always rings truest to me is that when someone accuses you of something horrible that you didn't do, anyone who is really innocent would respond emphatically. If he is innocent (again, none of us know, at least right now), I can't imagine being anything except pissed off and screaming, "She's an f'in liar." I thought his latest statement did a decent job in that regard.

 

We had that discussion last night. It was the female who started to write it off as, "What if he was drunk?" (in her defense, she has never been drunk in her life, so she doesn't know what it feels like or does to you). My response was something like, "I have been drunk to the point of near alcohol poisining in my life, and as much as it makes me into a stumbling, puking idiot, it has never turned me into a rapist. That is either in your nature or it isn't."

 

I don't want to go point by point to your numbered thing. Honestly, I think at least to a fair degree you are being pretty subjective in how you are interpreting what we do know. For me, there isn't enough there -- either way. I think your biases are painting how you judge each of their relative credibility. Because there isn't a whole lot of definitive evidence one way or the other about what REALLY happened (or didn't happen) 36 years ago. But on this point:

I can think of potential reasons without having to think very hard. What if she just doesn't want Kavanaugh on the Supreme Court because of her politics, and she is so rabid about it that she'd be willing to lie and doesn't care if it puts her in the spotlight? That's the obvious. In the charged, shitty atmosphere of this country, there are a lot of people I can see behaving that way.

For what it is worth, I am not suggesting that is the case. I don't know. But that is kind of the point. I'm not willing to judge the relative credibility of two people I don't know based on what she is alleging. ... or simply on his denial. I don't think it's fair to either of them -- if she is telling the truth, and let's say you were like, "I believe him," you'd be doing her a serious disservice. And if he is being railroaded or set up with a bogus story and facts created around it for politicized reasons, to me, you seem way too OK with him being potentially impugned that way.