Coronavirus - are we all doomed?

The problem with Kavenaugh case was the limits placed on the FBI to investigate by the WH. Many alleged witnesses were never interviewed even though they came forward. The opposition to kavenaugh was not limited to the assault allegations although those recieved the most press.

I'm not arguing about media bias, I'm looking at the facts as they are currently known. Obviously each side wants to spin them their way.
The Times, AP, and many other papers are reporting the same info as the article I posted.

btw, I'm not looking at this from a political view. I've investigated well over 500 S.A. cases over 40 years and IMO the story as it stands today would not hold up.
 
Would anyone be surprised to learn some school districts in California are run on a 80/20 budget? 80% for salaries and pensions and 20% for the little darlings.

Same formula for other state and city agency's like police / fire. Although your experience may vary.
 
Last edited:
AccessBlaster said:
Would kavenaugh?
Click to expand...
To be honest I'd have to review the facts as they're not fresh in my mind. If i recall correctly she did appear to be a credible witness as she told a consistant story including admitting to not recalling many details. From a legal standpoint I dont think it would go forward.
 
Just had the Covid 19 nasal swab ouch!
Having a procedure on Tuesday .
 
Last edited:
moke123 said:
The problem with Kavenaugh case was the limits placed on the FBI to investigate by the WH. Many alleged witnesses were never interviewed even though they came forward. The opposition to kavenaugh was not limited to the assault allegations although those recieved the most press.

I'm not arguing about media bias, I'm looking at the facts as they are currently known. Obviously each side wants to spin them their way.
The Times, AP, and many other papers are reporting the same info as the article I posted.

btw, I'm not looking at this from a political view. I've investigated well over 500 S.A. cases over 40 years and IMO the story as it stands today would not hold up.
Click to expand...
In my view, that was not the problem with the case. The idea from the Democrats was to keep Kavenaugh out, so they would never be happy no matter what happened. Look at Schiff and Russia collusion. The Muller report comes out and they still say they want to continue investigating. Several witnesses came up. The ones the accuser said were at the party, including her friend, said they have zero recollection. There was an accuser who said Kavanaugh was going to parties where there were regular gang rapes and that he tried to drug her or intoxicate her, something like that. After questioning, she admitted he was just standing by the punch bowl! Besides, why would you keep going to a party as a woman if there were gang rapes there?
 
moke123 said:
To be honest I'd have to review the facts as they're not fresh in my mind. If i recall correctly she did appear to be a credible witness as she told a consistant story including admitting to not recalling many details. From a legal standpoint I dont think it would go forward.
Click to expand...
Is a witness credible if they have no evidence? She said she knows nothing about lie detector tests, yet a witness said she coached her on how to pass one. She kept changing the year and approximate time of year of the incident. She cannot recall where it took place. She said there were 4 people in the room when she was assaulted, according to her therapists notes, but later said 2. There are tons of other things wrong with her testimony.

Check out this link for an idea: https://eu.usatoday.com/story/opini...ies-not-credible-kavanaugh-column/1497661002/
 
Last edited:
Jon said:
There was an accuser who said Kavanaugh was going to parties where there were regular gang rapes and that he tried to drug her or intoxicate her, something like that. After questioning, she admitted he was just standing by the punch bowl! Besides, why would you keep going to a party as a woman if there were gang rapes there?
Click to expand...
That wasnt Ford.

Jon said:
She said she knows nothing about lie detector tests, yet a witness said she couched her on how to pass one.
Click to expand...
That was a letter from her ex-boyfriend who said he witnessed ford explain to her friend what to expect in a lie detector test that fords friend was going to take for an FBI job.
Ford passed the polygraph she took about the allegations.

Your link is to an opinion piece by Margo Cleveland, a senior contributor to The Federalist.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-federalist/

As far as the Mueller report I'll reserve comment until Judge Walton makes his findings.

Jon said:
Is a witness credible if they have no evidence?
Click to expand...
yes. If your refering to physical evidence then you have what we refer to as the CSI effect.
 
Jon said:
In my view, that was not the problem with the case. The idea from the Democrats was to keep Kavenaugh out, so they would never be happy no matter what happened. Look at Schiff and Russia collusion. The Muller report comes out and they still say they want to continue investigating. Several witnesses came up. The ones the accuser said were at the party, including her friend, said they have zero recollection. There was an accuser who said Kavanaugh was going to parties where there were regular gang rapes and that he tried to drug her or intoxicate her, something like that. After questioning, she admitted he was just standing by the punch bowl! Besides, why would you keep going to a party as a woman if there were gang rapes there?
Click to expand...
If we are going to be perfectly honest about it Mitch McConnell blocked President Obama's Supreme Court nominee, Merrick Garland. The Democrats were out played by their own rules, and they have been butt hurt ever since!

Kavanaugh was payback, clear and simple...

BTW who wouldn't be butt hurt? But it's your rules.

www.theatlantic.com

How Democrats Paved the Way for the Confirmation of Trump's Cabinet

As the president’s picks run into trouble, Democrats find themselves stymied by a Senate rules change they engineered.
www.theatlantic.com www.theatlantic.com
 
Last edited:
moke123 said:
I may be afraid of roller coasters but have ridden them on many occasions. Does that mean I am not to be believed?
Click to expand...
A lie of convenience. Had she wanted to arrive on time, she could have. She used the roller coaster when it was to her advantage. If you believe her sob story, I have a bridge to sell you.
 
Last edited:
moke123 said:
That wasnt Ford.[


That was a letter from her ex-boyfriend who said he witnessed ford explain to her friend what to expect in a lie detector test that fords friend was going to take for an FBI job.
Ford passed the polygraph she took about the allegations.

Your link is to an opinion piece by Margo Cleveland, a senior contributor to The Federalist.
https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-federalist/

As far as the Mueller report I'll reserve comment until Judge Walton makes his findings.

yes. If your refering to physical evidence then you have what we refer to as the CSI effect.
Click to expand...
Never claimed it was Ford. Read what I said again: "There was an accuser". In fact, there were multiple accusers, and they all failed the credibility test.

Muller himself said there was no collusion, despite spending two years trying to find it. Are you saying Judge Walton is suggesting that Muller might be wrong regarding finding no Russia collusion? I don't know anything about what he is looking into.

Are you saying that the discrepancies pointed out in the article do not shed poor light on her testimony? You can attack the author but you have ignored the words.

Sample quote:

Ford’s retelling of the alleged sexual assault also included several conflicting accounts of the number of individuals at the gathering. The therapist’s notes stated that four boys had attempted to ra** Ford. (Ford claims her therapist confused the total number of boys at the party with the number of boys who had attacked her.)

Later, in her July letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein, Ford again placed the number of individuals at the party at five, stating the gathering included her and four other individuals. But Ford then identified the four by name, and that group included three boys and one girl. And finally, during her Senate testimony, Ford unequivocally stated that “there were four boys I remember specifically being there,” in addition to her friend Leland Keyser.
Click to expand...

Do you think these numerous discrepancies are anything to do with The Federalist? To me, it suggests Ford has been changing her story willy-nilly.

Regarding the polygraph test, let me shed some light on this:
  • Her lawyers refused to hand over notes from her therapy sessions where she discussed it
  • The test consisted of two yes-no questions
  • Lie detector tests are generally inadmissible in court, and for good reason
Edit: I am curious on your opinion of what makes a witness credible. I hear the term often, but have yet to get what someone means by it. For example, if Ford has changed her story multiple times, has no physical evidence and has been found to have lied (e.g. scared of flying, but flew everywhere), how is she credible? Or is that what credible means?
 
Last edited:
All these name probably mean nothing to anyone outside the USA.

Any chance we can get this thread back on track? Or is it now to be retitled "USA politics - how to bore everyone"

Col
 
You make a good point Colin! I hate it when I get dragged into political discussion. There is always that one-more-thing to reply to, yet no one changes their minds anyway, despite what you say. Everybody's position is already entrenched. Yet they are like hooks that I end up gobbling on, despite telling myself not to do any more. But seriously, I have to do it less!

Covid? Well, its still everywhere. I've started to get bored listening to the daily briefing in the UK. It is the same old stuff being said, treating us like children and not telling us what their exit strategy is. They claim they are putting 100% of their focus on what is happening now. Well, if that were true, are they saying they are planless? Most other countries, as I understand it, are telling their citizens what an exit strategy might look like. But no, in the UK we have to listen to teacher and don't get ahead of ourselves. Bunch of idiots!
 
Jon said:
Bunch of idiots!
Click to expand...

The same thing is happening here. Except I don't think they are idiots. I believe they (even in UK) are doing their best but it's a new virus and nobody knows what to do. How can anybody fight with so few data about the enemy?
I don't blame them. What could I do if I was THEM. Only waiting for someone to find a way out. A cure. A vaccine.
 
Last edited:
1587957372634.png


Uh-oh :unsure: Luckily it was last year..
 
The daily briefing at 5pm every day is basically recycling the same things. The only interesting bit is the various graphs that show hospital occupancy, number of deaths etc etc. It's a glimmer of hope when the graph lines drop.

Tera is right, this is a new very steep learning curve for everyone, some countries try this, others try that. Yes, we all want it to end, but and a big but is that isolating and social distancing are working, it would be a huge tragedy to release lockdown and undo all the good work we have all strived to achieve. Yes, it's tough, yes the economy is off the scale, yes shops are short of some items, but, how else can we do it? Those that moan on need to just think a moment.

On the plus side, my garden is looking fab.
Col
 
I agree with everything you say Colin. Tera, my comments are not about governments needing to give a plan they don't have. Rather, it is about them being transparent with the public about what their plans are. I do not believe they are being so, because when they say they are focusing 100% on just now, that is clearly not the case. Everybody is planning ahead, strategising. It is just like they are balking at the question. They think that if they say we will relax some of the lockdown at some stage in the future, we will all just do that now.

How well have the UK done in this crisis? Well, I predict that we 'may' have the second highest death toll in the world, behind the USA. We are closing the gap on France and Spain, although Italy is far enough ahead that it might be a close race with them.

Sweden are taking a herd immunity approach, much against what the rest of the world is doing. Their figures are not as bad as I thought they might be, but then I looked into a rather crucial statistic. They have less than 1/10 the UK population density. Of course that is going to help them big time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

N
Using MS Access with WAR File
Replies
2
Views
257
sonic8
S
Jon
The Secret Service - fit for purpose?
2 3
Replies
43
Views
1,137
Isaac
Isaac
Cotswold
Is there a Plan?
Replies
5
Views
299
The_Doc_Man
The_Doc_Man
Jon
Covid Wuhan Lab Leak or Wet Market - which is the real conspiracy theory?
2 3
Replies
50
Views
2,230
Jon
Jon
Steve R.
The Effect of Trump's Win on Foreign Policy
Replies
1
Views
97
Isaac
Isaac

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top Bottom