Welcome to Trump town

 
  mejhammers1 Chief Commissioner

@DonDunstan it does matter because the Daily Wire is not a credible source. Washington Post or a local journal that is another matter. And that is your opinion based on nothing. Wait until the Investigation or have you made up your mind that Blasey-ford is lying.

Michael

Sponsored advertisement

  mejhammers1 Chief Commissioner

And on the matter of 30 years ago so the people who spoke out against the Catholic Church about abuse many incidents happened 30 years ago were lying? Incidentally his roomate says Kavanagh is lying so who are we to believe? You do know that sexual assault is seldom reported? No wonder. I will wait till the hearing thank you.


Michael
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
What they were reporting on was supposedly the result of the investigation anyway - this is an Aussie internet chat board, I don't think we're going to prejudice the outcome of that case by discussing what's going on here.

Put yourself in Kavanaugh's shoes though, your entire life on hold while this sh*t goes on - and if what I posted was correct (and there's no reason to assume that its not given the detail it goes into) then how could you possibly find that man guilty of that crime when he was a teenager thirty-five years ago? What if the exact same thing happened to you, Michael; your life going along swimmingly with your wife and kids and all the sudden you get a visit from the police asking you to recall a night that happened to you when you went to a party as a teenager however many years ago. How on earth do you defend yourself from that accusation? More importantly, would your personal life collapse under the very weight of the allegation - it's not unheard of.

It's almost impossible for you as the one being charged to defend yourself against an accusation of something that happened so long ago, how do you even go about trying to find witnesses - very many of whom are possibly dead or won't recall at all what happened.
  mejhammers1 Chief Commissioner

@DonDunstan put yourself in Blasey-ford position also. Sorry  I am awaiting the Investigation.

Michael
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
Well the nomination is going ahead now anyway.

Trump's methods of negotiation have been getting results - the EU has promised to drop 10% tariffs on US-made cars in exchange for no-tariffs on their own cars being sold into the USA (UK Express);

DONALD TRUMP may have won his trade battle with the EU, after Germany said they are ready to discuss dropping EU tariffs on US cars, which currently stand at 10 percent. The German Federal Minister for Economic Affairs and Energy, Peter Altmaier, told Austrian public broadcaster ORF on Friday that Germany is willing to come to the table to ease trade tensions with the US.

Mr Altmaier said: “We are ready to talk about low, equal duties on cars.

“This would be the best solution for everyone.”

Threatening the EU with tariffs seems to have worked - Obama tried for eight years and got nowhere with them.
  ParkesHub Chief Commissioner

What they were reporting on was supposedly the result of the investigation anyway - this is an Aussie internet chat board, I don't think we're going to prejudice the outcome of that case by discussing what's going on here.

Put yourself in Kavanaugh's shoes though, your entire life on hold while this sh*t goes on - and if what I posted was correct (and there's no reason to assume that its not given the detail it goes into) then how could you possibly find that man guilty of that crime when he was a teenager thirty-five years ago? What if the exact same thing happened to you, Michael; your life going along swimmingly with your wife and kids and all the sudden you get a visit from the police asking you to recall a night that happened to you when you went to a party as a teenager however many years ago. How on earth do you defend yourself from that accusation? More importantly, would your personal life collapse under the very weight of the allegation - it's not unheard of.

It's almost impossible for you as the one being charged to defend yourself against an accusation of something that happened so long ago, how do you even go about trying to find witnesses - very many of whom are possibly dead or won't recall at all what happened.
don_dunstan
I'm kind of impressed with this post. It's naivete is somewhat disarming. "....What if the exact same thing happened to you, Michael; your life going along swimmingly with your wife and kids..." Really? These plaintiffs come forward all the time and with good reason. What are we supposed to say to the plaintiff? "Sorry, can't we just leave this alone now? After all, look at the fine life he's made for himself."

Plaintiffs in respect of sexual assault in almost all cases only come forward years....decades after the event/s. Additionally, only a tiny minority make this sh1t up. Plaintiffs are almost always reticent to go to the authorities. I know, I speak from experience in giving evidence to the recent Royal Commission.

Going by your theme, it seems that sexual assault survivors should just shut the duck up. After all, look at the 'fine lives' the perpetrators have made for themselves.

In my jaundiced view, this new member of SCOTUS is a lying drunkard...but that's just my view.
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
Picture this; you're a really unhappy divorced clinical psychologist and then all the sudden the face of President Trump's Supreme Court nominee flashes up in the media everywhere and then suddenly - ME TOO! He did something to me, not sure exactly when at a party in my home-town, not sure who drove me or how I got home, not sure whose party it was, not sure what he actually did but I remember crying in the bathroom of this mystery house. None of my friends or family can corroborate the story at all and I never mentioned it in my own therapy sessions until 30 years later when my assailant's career took off.

I'm sorry but you can't expect to come up with a memory like that decades later with no corroboration and put someone else's life on hold because of it. I've seen what vexatious litigation can do to people and it can ruin your life - and look at the timing, right when he's been nominated for the Supreme Court of the United States - wow, coincidence or what.

And please don't compare the charges against Trump's nominee to the cases of Catholic Church et al child abuse in Australia and elsewhere, they are not the same thing. In nearly every instance with institutional abuse there's a ton of corroborating evidence from other witnesses even decades later - the Kavanaugh case is not in the same league evidence-wise.
  Carnot Chief Commissioner

I've been reluctant to comment on the whole Kavanagh saga.  To be honest I'm rather agnostic about it all - how can we really know what did or didn't happen?

Interestingly, the Democrats aggressive fight against Kavanagh may have backfired spectacularly:
https://www.axios.com/2018-midterm-elections-brett-kavanaugh-republicans-0cd3ce73-960f-418d-8cdd-5cb11db2b06a.html

And I still reckon Trump isn't much chop and continues to make stupid decisions, but the way the Democrats have behaved lately won't win them friends in the upcoming midterm elections.
  ParkesHub Chief Commissioner

Picture this; you're a really unhappy divorced clinical psychologist and then all the sudden the face of President Trump's Supreme Court nominee flashes up in the media everywhere and then suddenly - ME TOO! He did something to me, not sure exactly when at a party in my home-town, not sure who drove me or how I got home, not sure whose party it was, not sure what he actually did but I remember crying in the bathroom of this mystery house. None of my friends or family can corroborate the story at all and I never mentioned it in my own therapy sessions until 30 years later when my assailant's career took off.

I'm sorry but you can't expect to come up with a memory like that decades later with no corroboration and put someone else's life on hold because of it. I've seen what vexatious litigation can do to people and it can ruin your life - and look at the timing, right when he's been nominated for the Supreme Court of the United States - wow, coincidence or what.

And please don't compare the charges against Trump's nominee to the cases of Catholic Church et al child abuse in Australia and elsewhere, they are not the same thing. In nearly every instance with institutional abuse there's a ton of corroborating evidence from other witnesses even decades later - the Kavanaugh case is not in the same league evidence-wise.
don_dunstan
Oh please. It's on the record that she raised this with her family years ago. This is how it generally plays out with plaintiffs. Stop victim blaming. She's been married since 2002 with 2 children so she doesn't appear to be "unhappy" or "divorced".

With respect to sex abuse? It's the same across the board. With sex abuse in an institutional sense? Let me tell you that there's not this magical "ton of evidence". I know this better than you ever will (which is probably good for you). Sexual assault is just that right across society.

In respect of Kavanaugh, the FBI were constrained by the Senate as to whom they could interview and produce in evidence. It was a setup by McConnell.
  Radioman Chief Train Controller

Hello All,

criminal investigations into historical crimes is always difficult , and more so when sexual assault is concerned , as the cases against the deceased convicted criminal pedophile that was the subject of a Victorian Parliament's Ombudsman's Report has clearly demonstrated.

From my perspective, whether the crime is ordinary assault, sexual assault or murder , the passage of time makes eventual prosecution and conviction less likely, primarily due to the paucity or even lack of testable evidence.

Perpetrators know this, and rely on the passage of time to allow them to escape prosecution . In the case of sexual offences , it is extremely difficult to prosecute because there are NO witnesses , and therefore vehement denial, accusations of mistaken identity , or the victim having some mental condition ( which , if true, is probably evidence that they actually were the victim ) is the common accusations laid against the complainant.

Add to this , it is well known , even to the Police and Prosecutors , that victims of sexual assault , always have their reputations ( with very rare exceptions ) destroyed, and they are always accused of immoral behaviour and degenerate sexual proclivities ( ie slut shaming ) .

In an adversarial court encounter , not only is the victim ( usually , but not always , female ) subjected to a repeated series of interrogations deliberately designed to humiliate and break down their evidence , and to have to detail the full nature of the assault/s perpetrated on them , and for their breakdown under such interrogation is used to demonstrate that they are "lying" , the victim knows , that at best, there is only a 50% chance of the perpetrator being convicted .

Add to this , in the event that the perpetrator is NOT convicted , the victim becomes the avenging perpetrator whose reputation is destroyed, and the perpetrator now becomes the victim . The end result being that the perpetrator has got away with it, and the victim is  psychologically destroyed.

Also bear in mind that most perpetrators of sexual assault are married with children , usually have a dominant personality , and frequently occupy positions of power or influence.

In the event the perpetrator is prosecuted , usually, but not always the result of multiple testifying victims , the penalty handed down usually amounts to a few months jail per victim , and remember that historically rape was a capital offence.

No wonder victims of sexual assault rarely come forward.

Regards, Radioman
  Carnot Chief Commissioner

What's not in doubt is the tribalism taking hold of American (and dare I say Australian) politics.  You have the Left proclaiming their 'righteousness' going on wild hate-filled rants against those they call 'deplorable', and on the other there's your mild-mannered American (not just 'white men') being driven towards believing much of what the alt-right fringe has concocted, and the war of words escalates.  

It's only going to get worse if each other is described as unreconcilable enemies.
  mejhammers1 Chief Commissioner

@Carnot Trust you to give a balanced appraisal NOT!!! Hate filled rantings of the left and mild mannered by all white men driven to the alt right. Yeah evangelist Christians are amongst the most two faced hypocritical assists on this planet. Preaching the word of God whilst directing bile and hate at any communities they do not agree with.

Yes the left have been guilty of supreme partisanship but intimating that the alt right are filled with disillusioned mild mannered people? I can see through that BS Carnot.

Michael
  Carnot Chief Commissioner

@Carnot Trust you to give a balanced appraisal NOT!!! Hate filled rantings of the left and mild mannered by all white men driven to the alt right. Yeah evangelist Christians are amongst the most two faced hypocritical assists on this planet. Preaching the word of God whilst directing bile and hate at any communities they do not agree with.

Yes the left have been guilty of supreme partisanship but intimating that the alt right are filled with disillusioned mild mannered people? I can see through that BS Carnot.

Michael
mejhammers1
The stereotypical portrait of people of faith again... yawn, not surprised and often justified.

The Alt-Right are mostly wrong - wild conspiracy theories, racial supremacy, fake news and fake science etc etc.  But their ideas are gaining traction when you have nutters in the Left with their identity politics, crushing of free speech, and talk of blood pacts and so on...  And that's a problem as you would agree.

The post-modern left are amongst the most two faced hypocritical assists on this planet. Preaching about imaginary secular utopias, inclusion, diversity, and compassion whilst directing bile and hate at any communities they do not agree with.

Incidentally, I and many others despair at how so many have got on-board the Trump train, including evangelists:
http://www.abc.net.au/religion/franklin-graham-is-coming-to-australia-heres-why-i-wont-be-atten/10214340
  ParkesHub Chief Commissioner

What's not in doubt is the tribalism taking hold of American (and dare I say Australian) politics.  You have the Left proclaiming their 'righteousness' going on wild hate-filled rants against those they call 'deplorable', and on the other there's your mild-mannered American (not just 'white men') being driven towards believing much of what the alt-right fringe has concocted, and the war of words escalates.  

It's only going to get worse if each other is described as unreconcilable enemies.
Carnot
I think the divide within the USA has been diverging for quite some time. It seems the Conservative view of Eisenhower's time (maybe even Nixon and Ford) is now a Neo-con movement that focuses on aggrandisement of wealth and status at the expense of all the rest. So much so that, Dwight Eisenhower would be branded a pinko commie socialist in today's world. I think the change really got started with Reagan and his ridiculous 'trickle down' economics which, of course, was designed to result in tickle-up economics (and it worked spectacularly well in that respect).

What's interesting is the breakaway movement that seems to be taking hold on the US west coast. The US Constitution doesn't actually mention whether States can leave the Union. Maybe Abe Lincoln should have allowed the 7 states to bugger off back in 1861.
  Carnot Chief Commissioner


What's interesting is the breakaway movement that seems to be taking hold on the US west coast. The US Constitution doesn't actually mention whether States can leave the Union. Maybe Abe Lincoln should have allowed the 7 states to bugger off back in 1861.
ParkesHub
There has been some discussion about how a breakup of the United States would look.  Best case scenario if this did happen would be something like the amicable Czech/Slovak split in 1993, worst case more like the former Yugoslavia:
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/05/what_the_united_states_can_learn_from_yugoslavias_breakup.html
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
Oh please. It's on the record that she raised this with her family years ago. This is how it generally plays out with plaintiffs. Stop victim blaming. She's been married since 2002 with 2 children so she doesn't appear to be "unhappy" or "divorced".

With respect to sex abuse? It's the same across the board. With sex abuse in an institutional sense? Let me tell you that there's not this magical "ton of evidence". I know this better than you ever will (which is probably good for you). Sexual assault is just that right across society.

In respect of Kavanaugh, the FBI were constrained by the Senate as to whom they could interview and produce in evidence. It was a setup by McConnell.
ParkesHub
She wasn't a credible witness, end-of-story. She couldn't confirm the basics of her story and what basics she could confirm were refuted by her own witnesses - all four of them. What really sank her case was her fear of flying and claustrophobia which supposedly came about as a result of the sexual assault. Her own lawyers said she was too afraid to fly to Washington D.C. to testify but then it turns out she's actually a rather frequently flyer but had suddenly developed a case of "afraid to fly".

So if she lied about that one issue in order to make her testimony more juicy then what else was she lying about?

If you thought there was sufficient evidence for a trial then you should write to the US Senate and tell them.
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
Stop victim blaming.
ParkesHub

I'm not victim-blaming, I'm saying that not every case of historical sexual abuse is real and we also need to think about the damage that these false allegations have on the lives of the accused.

I know better than you about how a false rape accusation can destroy a life (probably better for you that you haven't ever experienced this) and frankly the impact can ruin you. You're found guilty unless you can prove you're innocent, extremely hard with the passage of time.
  Radioman Chief Train Controller


What's interesting is the breakaway movement that seems to be taking hold on the US west coast. The US Constitution doesn't actually mention whether States can leave the Union. Maybe Abe Lincoln should have allowed the 7 states to bugger off back in 1861.There has been some discussion about how a breakup of the United States would look.  Best case scenario if this did happen would be something like the amicable Czech/Slovak split in 1993, worst case more like the former Yugoslavia:
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/05/what_the_united_states_can_learn_from_yugoslavias_breakup.html
Carnot
Hello All,

Messrs ParkesHub and Carnot are incorrect in this interpretation of the US Constitution , as the US Supreme Court has ruled that the Preamble to the Constitution means that once a State or Territory has acceded to join the Union that there is no option to thereafter leave , which is why Puerto Rico has NOT become a State of the Union , as many past and current Congressmen are of the opinion that Puerto Rico may, at some future point , seek independence.

It should also be pointed out that the 1860 - 1865 Civil War was fought by the Union against the rebel Confederacy on the basis that the Confederate States, by leaving the Union, were in contempt of the Constitution.

( http://constitutionus.com/?t=Preample%20to%20the%20Constitution#preamble  )

Regards, Radioman.
  mejhammers1 Chief Commissioner

@DonDunstan You do not have a Scooby doo whether Biasley Ford is credible or not. If anything there were a few worrying signs with Kavanagh's testimony.

Wait until the FBI investigation of which incidentally many commentators has stated is panted towards Kavanagh because the I invstigation will be restricted.

Kavanagh will be fine. He will be well looked after by the Republican Party machine.

Michael
  ParkesHub Chief Commissioner

Oh please. It's on the record that she raised this with her family years ago. This is how it generally plays out with plaintiffs. Stop victim blaming. She's been married since 2002 with 2 children so she doesn't appear to be "unhappy" or "divorced".

With respect to sex abuse? It's the same across the board. With sex abuse in an institutional sense? Let me tell you that there's not this magical "ton of evidence". I know this better than you ever will (which is probably good for you). Sexual assault is just that right across society.

In respect of Kavanaugh, the FBI were constrained by the Senate as to whom they could interview and produce in evidence. It was a setup by McConnell.
She wasn't a credible witness, end-of-story. She couldn't confirm the basics of her story and what basics she could confirm were refuted by her own witnesses - all four of them. What really sank her case was her fear of flying and claustrophobia which supposedly came about as a result of the sexual assault. Her own lawyers said she was too afraid to fly to Washington D.C. to testify but then it turns out she's actually a rather frequently flyer but had suddenly developed a case of "afraid to fly".

So if she lied about that one issue in order to make her testimony more juicy then what else was she lying about?

If you thought there was sufficient evidence for a trial then you should write to the US Senate and tell them.
don_dunstan
Based on the evidence that the FBI presented, I would also have acquitted the lying drunkard. Problem is, dd, the Senate quite deliberately hamstrung the investigation both in time and in scope to prevent irrefutable evidence from coming out. There is some reasonable evidence that the drunkard lied under oath to the Senate in respect of his alcohol consumption.

I'll look up about the claustrophobia, I hadn't heard that.
  petan Chief Commissioner

Location: Waiting to see a zebra using a zebra crossing!
Time to lob in a 'What If' vague possibility. People seem to assume Kavanaugh will be Trump's stooge. But some might recall past events where an assumed outcome based on someone's personality or political leanings, didn't eventuate. Kerr / Whitlam comes to mind where Kerr's so called labour roots didn't mean too much when the proverbial hit the fan.

The Trump question depends on the matter of Kavanaugh being an ultra conservative who is a judge or instead will Kavanaugh be a judge who is an ultra conservative, or put another way, will he focus on the legal question in his court room in preference to his conservative views or will he focus on his conservative views before he considers the legal question? I have seem similar situations in my local life eg the work boss actually gave a fair judgement instead of favouring a long term drinking buddy. A decision in the local church ended up with a compassionate response instead of the very much expected bureaucratic response from a priest known for his legalistic style.
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
@DonDunstan You do not have a Scooby doo whether Biasley Ford is credible or not. If anything there were a few worrying signs with Kavanagh's testimony.
mejhammers1
Michael, her own witnesses couldn't corroborate her evidence, what more do you want? A guilty finding because he's Trump's pick for the Supreme Court? That seems to be the consistent theme here.

It's been two years now - people who are still carrying anger towards Trump need to let it go, life is frankly too short to be worrying about President Trump. And unlike President Xi Jinping he only has a statutory time in office before he will definitely have to leave.
  don_dunstan Minister for Railways

Location: Adelaide proud
Time to lob in a 'What If' vague possibility. People seem to assume Kavanaugh will be Trump's stooge. But some might recall past events where an assumed outcome based on someone's personality or political leanings, didn't eventuate. Kerr / Whitlam comes to mind where Kerr's so called labour roots didn't mean too much when the proverbial hit the fan.
petan
My point exactly, his past performance is almost meaningless if history is any guide - they do what they want once they're in those appointed jobs as Kerr so rudely proved to Whitlam (excellent example).

Kavanaugh is on the bench now, he can do the exact opposite of what he told Trump he'd do and there's not a damn thing the President can do about it. Despite the hysteria there are in fact checks and balances in the United States government that keep the Executive and the Judiciary somewhat at arm's length from each other.
  mejhammers1 Chief Commissioner

@Carnot please explain to me what Identity politics is and whilst you are at it name an example where freedom of speech has been curtailed in the US or Australia. No because there isn't one. Just because some pushes back on bigoted rhetoric does not mean your freedom of speech is curtailed.
Michael
  Carnot Chief Commissioner

@Carnot please explain to me what Identity politics is and whilst you are at it name an example where freedom of speech has been curtailed in the US or Australia. No because there isn't one. Just because some pushes back on bigoted rhetoric does not mean your freedom of speech is curtailed.
Michael
mejhammers1
A good interview here with Francis Fukayama on Identity Politics and how it is undermining democracy:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/theworldpost/wp/2018/09/18/identity-politics/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7ad63ca08115

Professor Richard Dawkins got de-platformed by a Berkeley Radio station.  All because of a Tweet he wrote:
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/jul/24/richard-dawkins-event-cancelled-over-his-abusive-speech-against-islam

And Germaine Greer gets a hard time in the UK as well:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-27/lehmann-greer-and-the-no-platforming-scourge/6887576

And it's a growing problem in Australia with universities routinely banning or de-platforming those with opinions that differ from the all-powerful "Department of Grievance Studies".

Do you want proof of tribalism and how it's infected American politics?  Here:

Sponsored advertisement

Display from: