[AMV] Amerikaanse politiek #549 - Ongefundeerde aantijgingen

quote:

Op dinsdag 18 september 2018 14:28 schreef Ringo het volgende:

[..]

Woekerende kankercellen kun je ook alleen te vuur en te zwaard bestrijden. Daar helpt geen meditatie, yogatherapie of groentedieet tegen. Trumps tegenstanders zijn echt veel te lief en te netjes. Ze moeten die man net zolang de grond instampen totdat alleen zijn kuif nog overeind steekt.

quote:

Op dinsdag 18 september 2018 14:35 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Ben ik niet mee eens. dan verlaag je je op het niveau waar hij excelleert. Keiharde bewijzen leveren is effectiever. Trump valt alleen maar aan en reageert met deflectie. Hij heeft geen flauw benul hoe hij zich simpelweg kan VERDEDIGEN.

quote:

Op dinsdag 18 september 2018 14:38 schreef Monolith het volgende:

[..]

Bovendien, worden de special elections die de Democraten winnen in rode staten enkel gewonnen door mensen die zich verlagen tot het niveau van Trump of wordt daar op een ander niveau campagne gevoerd?

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 18-09-2018 om 14:42:02 “What will be disclosed is that there was no basis for these FISA Warrants, that the important information was kept from the court, there’s going to be a disproportionate influence of the (Fake) Dossier. Basically you have a counter terrorism tool used to spy on a presidential... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 18-09-2018 om 14:45:09 ....campaign, which is unprecedented in our history.” Congressman Peter King Really bad things were happening, but they are now being exposed. Big stuff! reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 18 september 2018 13:58 schreef Knipoogje het volgende:
Op zich is het wel een geniale bait....kijken of Trump -president of the USA- een tweet over zijn eigen piemelemoos stuurt om Stormy tegen te spreken

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 18-09-2018 om 14:50:29 China has openly stated that they are actively trying to impact and change our election by attacking our farmers, ranchers and industrial workers because of their loyalty to me. What China does not understand is that these people are great patriots and fully understand that..... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 18-09-2018 om 14:55:04 .....China has been taking advantage of the United States on Trade for many years. They also know that I am the one that knows how to stop it. There will be great and fast economic retaliation against China if our farmers, ranchers and/or industrial workers are targeted! reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 18 september 2018 14:53 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 18-09-2018 om 14:50:29 China has openly stated that they are actively trying to impact and change our election by attacking our farmers, ranchers and industrial workers because of their loyalty to me. What China does not understand is that these people are great patriots and fully understand that..... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 18-09-2018 om 14:55:04 .....China has been taking advantage of the United States on Trade for many years. They also know that I am the one that knows how to stop it. There will be great and fast economic retaliation against China if our farmers, ranchers and/or industrial workers are targeted! reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 18 september 2018 14:49 schreef Ulx het volgende:

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 18-09-2018 om 14:42:02 “What will be disclosed is that there was no basis for these FISA Warrants, that the important information was kept from the court, there’s going to be a disproportionate influence of the (Fake) Dossier. Basically you have a counter terrorism tool used to spy on a presidential... reageer retweet

twitter:

realDonaldTrump twitterde op dinsdag 18-09-2018 om 14:45:09 ....campaign, which is unprecedented in our history.” Congressman Peter King Really bad things were happening, but they are now being exposed. Big stuff! reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 18 september 2018 15:09 schreef Begieltie het volgende:
En is Trump al impeached? Of haten jullie nog een paar jaartjes door? Is niet goed voor je karma he. Echoooo!

quote:

Op dinsdag 18 september 2018 15:09 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Tot dusver is het iedere keer dat ze zoiets openbaar maakten gigantisch gebackfired. Dus ik zou me niet druk maken.

twitter:

jjouvenal twitterde op dinsdag 18-09-2018 om 15:29:49 Insightful: A former sex crimes prosecutor analyzed the allegations against Brett Kavanaugh. This is her take: https://t.co/QY12Rdbg8O reageer retweet

quote:

Soon after Christine Blasey Ford was revealed as the author of a letter alleging that Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her decades ago, the responses ran along predictable lines. While some argued that she should be heard, others questioned how much of her memory can be trusted.

Amid a spate of speculation, The Washington Post published an exclusive account of the assault Saturday evening, identifying Ford. Kavanaugh issued a statement Sunday denying the accusations, but after heated pushback from politicians and the public, Kavanaugh agreed to questioning by the Senate panel Monday. A second hearing, where Kavanaugh and Ford will both testify publicly, is scheduled for next week. The results threaten to thwart his confirmation.

Critics of Ford have taken to calling into question whether it’s possible for a 30-year-old memory to be credible.

Sex crimes prosecutors across the country forge ahead on “he-said-she-said” cases regularly.

“I stand to believe there’s no such thing as a ‘he-said-she-said’ case,” Linda Fairstein, former chief of the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office’s Sex Crimes Bureau, told The Post. “As a prosecutor, it’s your job to break down every minute of the encounter so that details on one side pushes the facts over the edge.”

Prosecutors do that regularly, in large part by parsing what’s reasonable and what’s believable through corroboration, details that have the ring of truth and inconvenient facts that are subtle signs of credibility.

Ford’s account is credible, even though she can’t remember several details.
There’s no criminal trial, but Kavanaugh still has the presumption of innocence, said attorney Douglas Wigdor, a former prosecutor who now represents victims in sexual harassment and sexual assault cases against high-profile men.

“The reason we have statutes of limitations is because its difficult to defend yourself when someone makes an accusation against you from years ago. It’s difficult to have witnesses or forensics,” he said.

But, according to Fairstein, it was completely normal that Ford “didn’t remember” several details.

“If she testifies, I would expect her to say ‘I don’t remember’ scores of times,” Fairstein said, for two reasons: the passage of time and trauma. “She found this experience so upsetting that she felt her life was in danger. There might be 220 things she doesn’t know and then a very specific sentence about what happened that was so traumatic."

Ford has alleged that Kavanaugh pinned her down and clumsily groped her during a prep school party when Ford, 15, was a sophomore and Kavanaugh, 17, a junior. Now 51, Ford, a research psychologist, told The Post, “I thought he might inadvertently kill me.”

According to psychologist Anne Meltzer, it may be challenging to recall peripheral details of an assault years later — such as who spread word of the party, who was the designated driver — but that should not detract from a victim’s veracity “if she can clearly and consistently articulate central details of what happened, such as the who, what and where,” she told The Post.

Meltzer, who has not reviewed the details of this case, has testified as an expert witness hundreds of times in child sexual abuse cases, with victims up to 17 years old.

Are the details Ford did mention more telling?
Perhaps more striking are the details Ford did mention.

Fairstein said sexual assault rarely happens with witnesses present. Yet Ford puts two people in the room — Kavanaugh and his prep school classmate, Mark Judge, whom she called “an essential witness.”

The Fix Analysis
A former sex-crimes prosecutor analyzed Ford’s allegations against Kavanaugh. Here’s her take.
Kavanaugh and his accuser to testify as allegation roils Washington
Christine Blasey Ford is willing to testify after her letter leaked alleging Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her in the 1980s. (Video: Jenny Starrs /Photo: Matt McClain/The Washington Post)

By Deanna Paul
September 18 at 6:00 AM
Soon after Christine Blasey Ford was revealed as the author of a letter alleging that Supreme Court nominee Brett M. Kavanaugh had sexually assaulted her decades ago, the responses ran along predictable lines. While some argued that she should be heard, others questioned how much of her memory can be trusted.

Amid a spate of speculation, The Washington Post published an exclusive account of the assault Saturday evening, identifying Ford. Kavanaugh issued a statement Sunday denying the accusations, but after heated pushback from politicians and the public, Kavanaugh agreed to questioning by the Senate panel Monday. A second hearing, where Kavanaugh and Ford will both testify publicly, is scheduled for next week. The results threaten to thwart his confirmation.

Critics of Ford have taken to calling into question whether it’s possible for a 30-year-old memory to be credible.

Sex crimes prosecutors across the country forge ahead on “he-said-she-said” cases regularly.

“I stand to believe there’s no such thing as a ‘he-said-she-said’ case,” Linda Fairstein, former chief of the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office’s Sex Crimes Bureau, told The Post. “As a prosecutor, it’s your job to break down every minute of the encounter so that details on one side pushes the facts over the edge.”

Prosecutors do that regularly, in large part by parsing what’s reasonable and what’s believable through corroboration, details that have the ring of truth and inconvenient facts that are subtle signs of credibility.

Ford’s account is credible, even though she can’t remember several details.
There’s no criminal trial, but Kavanaugh still has the presumption of innocence, said attorney Douglas Wigdor, a former prosecutor who now represents victims in sexual harassment and sexual assault cases against high-profile men.

“The reason we have statutes of limitations is because its difficult to defend yourself when someone makes an accusation against you from years ago. It’s difficult to have witnesses or forensics,” he said.

But, according to Fairstein, it was completely normal that Ford “didn’t remember” several details.

“If she testifies, I would expect her to say ‘I don’t remember’ scores of times,” Fairstein said, for two reasons: the passage of time and trauma. “She found this experience so upsetting that she felt her life was in danger. There might be 220 things she doesn’t know and then a very specific sentence about what happened that was so traumatic."

Ford has alleged that Kavanaugh pinned her down and clumsily groped her during a prep school party when Ford, 15, was a sophomore and Kavanaugh, 17, a junior. Now 51, Ford, a research psychologist, told The Post, “I thought he might inadvertently kill me.”

According to psychologist Anne Meltzer, it may be challenging to recall peripheral details of an assault years later — such as who spread word of the party, who was the designated driver — but that should not detract from a victim’s veracity “if she can clearly and consistently articulate central details of what happened, such as the who, what and where,” she told The Post.

Meltzer, who has not reviewed the details of this case, has testified as an expert witness hundreds of times in child sexual abuse cases, with victims up to 17 years old.

Are the details Ford did mention more telling?
Perhaps more striking are the details Ford did mention.

Fairstein said sexual assault rarely happens with witnesses present. Yet Ford puts two people in the room — Kavanaugh and his prep school classmate, Mark Judge, whom she called “an essential witness.”

“To me, it’s compelling that [Ford] puts someone else there, and that the person who happens to be in the room has a blackout drinking problem," said Fairstein. Judge, now a filmmaker and author, described himself similarly in his book “Wasted: Tales of a Gen-X Drunk.” “That’s sort of the intoxicated behavior she described that night,” she added.

“Ford mentioned details — like the pool party, the narrow staircase, that the house was in Montgomery County. There are enough facts for someone to remember it was their party and their house,” said Fairstein.

Wigdor echoed Fairstein, saying: “She put a third person in the room. If you were making something up, why would you do that?”

Wigdor also mentioned that Ford voluntarily took and passed a lie-detector test. “While not admissible in court, they’re used by various governmental agencies, and many people believe in their abilities,” he said.

It is not alarming that Ford waited this long to talk about the assault.
The vast majority of sexual abuse victims delay disclosing what happened.

“It’s one of the most common features of child sex abuse,” Meltzer said. Most victims of child sexual abuse fear retaliation, that they won’t be believed or that their family may be angry. There are often very intense feelings of shame, guilt and humiliation.

Statistically, teenagers are less likely than younger children to tell authorities about an assault, she said. Particularly concerned with how others view them, teenagers often feel like “damaged goods.”

“Another reason children don’t disclose is because they are sometimes threatened or pressured to keep it a secret,” said Meltzer, adding that although it may not apply to Kavanaugh and Ford, it is nonetheless a common reason.

Then why tell anyone now?
Often, Meltzer said, victims disclose abuse so that they can begin to cope with, and heal from, the trauma.

“Disclosure is a process. It’s possible that at some point a victim is unable to deal with the emotional burden of the abuse,” which frequently has long-lasting effects into adulthood.

Ford had long debated whether to come forward, feeling a civic duty to share her story, according to The Post. In the end, her cost-benefit analysis weighed against speaking on the record. Instead, she wrote a letter to Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), expecting it to be kept confidential.

Although Ford requested anonymity, Fairstein said that most sex abuse victims don’t want anyone to know, let alone put their private lives on display for the nation.

Instead, Fairstein was more focused on the initial disclosure, calling it a “corroborating detail.”

Ford watched the anonymous letter morph, garnering indignation from the right and serving as political fodder for the left. Then, she agreed to go public, she told The Post.

Ford disclosed the assault long before Kavanaugh was nominated to the high court by President Trump, telling her husband and marriage counselor in 2012. The therapist’s notes, which were reviewed by The Post, confirmed this.

“I think it helps [Ford] that there was an outcry to the counselor long before this nomination occurred. We always look for that to support an accusation wasn’t a newly formed complaint,” Fairstein said. Ford didn’t come forward to prosecute Kavanaugh but with a piece of information that, she believed, was relevant to his character before this became a very public issue, Fairstein said.

quote:

Op dinsdag 18 september 2018 14:35 schreef klappernootopreis het volgende:

[..]

Ben ik niet mee eens. dan verlaag je je op het niveau waar hij excelleert. Keiharde bewijzen leveren is effectiever. Trump valt alleen maar aan en reageert met deflectie. Hij heeft geen flauw benul hoe hij zich simpelweg kan VERDEDIGEN.

twitter:

jjouvenal twitterde op dinsdag 18-09-2018 om 15:55:15 Giuliani says he's received assurances from Paul Manafort's legal team that he will not implicate Trump or his family in any crimes https://t.co/Giwwmd1tEY reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op dinsdag 18-09-2018 om 14:30:00 Feinstein: "I'm disappointed the FBI and W.H. are failing to take even the most basic steps to investigate this matter. We must not ... rush the process before we're able to gather more information and the FBI is able to reopen and complete the background investigation." reageer retweet

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op dinsdag 18-09-2018 om 15:30:19 Kamala Harris: "I believe that there—that the FBI ... should be compelled to do its job in terms of doing, in completing their background investigation. And that’s not being done, and the W.H. is not directing it, the Department of Justice is not directing it." (via CBS) https://t.co/nLv2H90jx5 reageer retweet

quote:

Op dinsdag 18 september 2018 08:59 schreef Ulx het volgende:

[..]

De nieuwe senaat wordt toch pas in januari geïnstalleerd?

quote:

Op dinsdag 18 september 2018 01:42 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Eenmaal benoemd is het een hele klus om hem weer van dat Hof af te krijgen, hoor.

twitter:

kylegriffin1 twitterde op dinsdag 18-09-2018 om 17:45:01 Feinstein: "Chairman Grassley today said there would be only two witnesses invited to testify at theKavanaugh hearing next week on sexual assault allegations. Compare that to the 22 witnesses at the 1991 Anita Hill hearing and it’s impossible to take this process seriously." reageer retweet

twitter:

elianayjohnson twitterde op dinsdag 18-09-2018 om 16:21:17 News: Sources tell @eschor @burgessev and me that Ford's lawyer is trying to impose conditions on her testimony. Judiciary Committee staffers right now skeptical Monday hearing will happen - https://t.co/aollyZVEvr reageer retweet

quote:

The woman who has accused Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her decades ago has not yet confirmed her appearance at a public hearing the GOP is planning next week, a top Republican senator said Tuesday.

Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said that his staff has reached out to Christine Blasey Ford's camp several times since the California-based professor came forward with her story of a high-school-era assault by President Donald Trump's high court pick. Although Ford's lawyer said that her client would be open to "a fair proceeding," it remains unclear whether she would agree to a planned hearing on Sept. 24 that Republicans have set up to help save Kavanaugh's nomination.

The lack of response so far "kind of raises the question, do they want to come to the public hearing or not," Grassley told conservative radio host Hugh Hewitt on Tuesday. As of late Tuesday morning, Ford had not agreed to appear, according to a person close to the nomination.

"Our staff reached out to Dr. Ford's lawyer with multiple emails yesterday to schedule a similar call and inform her of the upcoming hearing, where she will have the opportunity to share her story with the Committee. Her lawyer has not yet responded," said Taylor Foy, a spokesman for Grassley on the committee.

SPOILER

Om spoilers te kunnen lezen moet je zijn ingelogd. Je moet je daarvoor eerst gratis Registreren. Ook kun je spoilers niet lezen als je een ban hebt.

quote:

Op dinsdag 18 september 2018 17:52 schreef Wombcat het volgende:

[..]

Waarom duurt dat zo lang? In NL wordt de TK een paar weken na de verkiezingen geïnstalleerd.

quote:

Op dinsdag 18 september 2018 18:13 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:

twitter:

elianayjohnson twitterde op dinsdag 18-09-2018 om 16:21:17 News: Sources tell @eschor @burgessev and me that Ford's lawyer is trying to impose conditions on her testimony. Judiciary Committee staffers right now skeptical Monday hearing will happen - https://t.co/aollyZVEvr reageer retweet

Kavanaugh accuser has not yet agreed to attend hearing

[..]

quote:

Op dinsdag 18 september 2018 18:23 schreef westwoodblvd het volgende:

[..]

Het kan natuurlijk ook zijn dat ze haar advocaat stuurt. Dit is wel een enorme exposure waar ze niet op zat te wachten. Maar dat heeft natuurlijk niet dezelfde impact.

quote:

One Kavanaugh ally suggested that Katz, a well-respected veteran of high-profile sexual misconduct cases, has "tried to impose some serious conditions on" Ford's testimony, though it's unclear what those conditions are.