So here's my question.
One of the many arguments being made as to why the accusations against Kavanaugh should be dismissed is, "what happened thirty years ago shouldn't have any bearing on the man he is today." Or, in other words, even IF these accusations are factual, they shouldn't matter because it was so long ago.
Ahem.
Prepare to watch that argument be demolished.
Mind you, I'm going to restrict myself to THAT ARGUMENT alone. Maybe later I'll address the other ones, but for now, let's keep our eye on the ball, okay? Okay.
The argument assumes that the events DID happen but they are of no consequence now because so much time has passed. And/or that he was not the same man he was back then. And/or you cannot judge someone on their actions from decades ago.
So, then, let us assume that the young Dr. Ford (obviously not a professor then, so let's call her Ms. Ford) was assaulted (I prefer the term "raped," regardless of whether or not that has legal standing, but let that go for now) and that she reported this assault to the local police. Let us further assume that the local police investigated and had some evidence to corroborate her account. At this point, no doubt the young Brett Kavanaugh would have tried to "fix" this and might have pled to a lesser charge, like "sexual battery" or whatever it might have been called.
To those who are arguing it doesn't matter now--are you SERIOUSLY contending that someone with this on his record would have ever been considered for a SCOTUS position, or even a position on the bench at all? If Dr. Ford had indeed reported this and a police report had been filed, is it your contention that Kavanaugh would still have been selected for consideration?
I think not.
This is also ignoring the incredibly compelling moral arguments against Kavanaugh. I am merely pointing out the practical realpolitik of it all.
It damn well DOES matter.
Be seeing you!
One of the many arguments being made as to why the accusations against Kavanaugh should be dismissed is, "what happened thirty years ago shouldn't have any bearing on the man he is today." Or, in other words, even IF these accusations are factual, they shouldn't matter because it was so long ago.
Ahem.
Prepare to watch that argument be demolished.
Mind you, I'm going to restrict myself to THAT ARGUMENT alone. Maybe later I'll address the other ones, but for now, let's keep our eye on the ball, okay? Okay.
The argument assumes that the events DID happen but they are of no consequence now because so much time has passed. And/or that he was not the same man he was back then. And/or you cannot judge someone on their actions from decades ago.
So, then, let us assume that the young Dr. Ford (obviously not a professor then, so let's call her Ms. Ford) was assaulted (I prefer the term "raped," regardless of whether or not that has legal standing, but let that go for now) and that she reported this assault to the local police. Let us further assume that the local police investigated and had some evidence to corroborate her account. At this point, no doubt the young Brett Kavanaugh would have tried to "fix" this and might have pled to a lesser charge, like "sexual battery" or whatever it might have been called.
To those who are arguing it doesn't matter now--are you SERIOUSLY contending that someone with this on his record would have ever been considered for a SCOTUS position, or even a position on the bench at all? If Dr. Ford had indeed reported this and a police report had been filed, is it your contention that Kavanaugh would still have been selected for consideration?
I think not.
This is also ignoring the incredibly compelling moral arguments against Kavanaugh. I am merely pointing out the practical realpolitik of it all.
It damn well DOES matter.
Be seeing you!
RSS Feed