Red Mosquito

Fucker’s so lazy, he must be a Saggitarius

I'm a Virgo, known for our vast intellect and emotional detachment.

You absolute Capricorn.

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?

Spoiler: show

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.

--- wrote:Does any evidence for either assault yet exist beyond the specific accounts of Ford and Ramirez?

Spoiler: show

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.

verb_to_trust wrote:

--- wrote:Does any evidence for either assault yet exist beyond the specific accounts of Ford and Ramirez?

Spoiler: show

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.

Something tells me this investigation is going to take until sometime in January...

BurtReynolds wrote:Something tells me this investigation is going to take until sometime in January...

This has been another episode of “something feels true to Burt,” brought to you by absolutely nothing.

McParadigm wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:Something tells me this investigation is going to take until sometime in January...

This has been another episode of “something feels true to Burt,” brought to you by absolutely nothing.

This has been brought to you by someone posting a Vanity Fair article claiming sources familiar with Trump's thinking.

McParadigm wrote: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)?

--- wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

--- wrote:Does any evidence for either assault yet exist beyond the specific accounts of Ford and Ramirez?

Spoiler: show

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?

verb_to_trust wrote:

--- wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:

--- wrote:Does any evidence for either assault yet exist beyond the specific accounts of Ford and Ramirez?

Spoiler: show

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.

--- 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?

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.”

verb_to_trust wrote: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.

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?

I do not know.

Though if you're assuming an investigation has occurred, the answer is 100%.

--- 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?

I do not know.

What percent is required? Edit: too slow

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.