Message from @Beemann

Discord ID: 496699304518615041


2018-10-02 14:13:18 UTC  

thanks for clarifying

2018-10-02 14:22:54 UTC  

@Timcast so what you're saying is... lobsters?

2018-10-02 14:58:11 UTC  

So what you're saying is... All lobsters are rapists?

2018-10-02 14:58:22 UTC  

#yesalllobsters

2018-10-02 15:00:19 UTC  

I think the issue here is that innocence is violated by the insinuation that there is _any_ validity to accusations which are almost beyond proof by definition.

2018-10-02 15:01:07 UTC  

If you allow Dr. Ford's testimony to in any way affect your perception of Judge Kavanaugh's moral character, something has already been lost.

2018-10-02 15:01:17 UTC  

That's because you're looking it as either
"The accusation is 100% correct"
Or
"The accusation is 100% incorrect"

2018-10-02 15:01:42 UTC  

It could be that Ford was assaulted, but not by Kav

2018-10-02 15:02:07 UTC  

Sure, but that is also the crucial matter determining whether Kavanaugh is even 1% guilty, or whatever you want to call it.

2018-10-02 15:02:57 UTC  

Right but it's not a necessary fact that Kavanaugh is guilty for Ford to have been a victim

2018-10-02 15:03:15 UTC  

Sure, but what we are opining on here is not the guilt of Kavanaugh, not the existence of Ford's abuser.

2018-10-02 15:03:23 UTC  

So you can believe that someone is victimized, and then go "okay, let's see if we can determine the victimizsr"

2018-10-02 15:03:35 UTC  

because Ford's alternative perpetrator is not present, and has not been named.

2018-10-02 15:03:36 UTC  

That's not what Tim's comments have necessarily addressed

2018-10-02 15:03:47 UTC  

I've found he's made clear distinctions in general

2018-10-02 15:04:19 UTC  

And even directly stated that it's possible, perhaps even probable, for Kav to be innocent and Ford to be a victim

2018-10-02 15:04:25 UTC  

Sure, but I think it is hard to draw a clear distinction here between acknowledging accusations, and believing accusations.

2018-10-02 15:04:58 UTC  

I can fully acknowledge Dr. Ford's testimony without believing its contents, which include fingering Judge Kavanaugh as the perpetrator.

2018-10-02 15:05:22 UTC  

but I must be careful not to characterize the acknowledgement as a "partial belief"

2018-10-02 15:05:36 UTC  

because Judge Kavanaugh can't really be _a little bit guilty of sexual assault_.

2018-10-02 15:05:42 UTC  

You can also believe some or nearly all of her testimony without presuming the guilt of Kavanaugh

2018-10-02 15:07:07 UTC  

My point is that belief in the parts of the accuser's testimony which are insufficient to establish the crime alleged should not have any effect on my perception of the accused as guilty of that crime.

2018-10-02 15:07:37 UTC  

Sure

2018-10-02 15:08:35 UTC  

Otherwise that gives the broad public the ability to generally paint anyone as guilty of just about anything.

2018-10-02 15:08:50 UTC  

(if only to the slightest degree)

2018-10-02 15:10:17 UTC  

Here is something that is absolutely accurate

2018-10-02 15:18:51 UTC  

Pence was right

2018-10-02 15:19:03 UTC  

Right about what?

2018-10-02 15:19:20 UTC  

Using principles to avoid the specter of impropriety?

2018-10-02 15:19:42 UTC  

You still need records, to complete that deal.

2018-10-02 15:20:06 UTC  

true

2018-10-02 15:20:25 UTC  

Doesn't protect Mike Pence from the "Mike and his buddy tied me up and spitroast me in a DC alley!" type accusations.

2018-10-02 15:21:47 UTC  

shit

2018-10-02 15:27:06 UTC  

Well, you can always go full NEET and then make sure whenever you go ANYWHERE you have a camera on you AND... I was going to say a woman with you but what if that woman is the one that accuses you?

2018-10-02 15:30:45 UTC  

heheh

2018-10-02 15:34:26 UTC  

my god we're all fucked

2018-10-02 15:34:30 UTC  

Well, I don't record 100% of the time currently, but most of the time yes.

2018-10-02 15:34:34 UTC  

BACK TO THE BUNKER

2018-10-02 15:34:43 UTC  

usually not video

2018-10-02 15:52:09 UTC  

I agree with @xorgy on this matter. Giving Ford the characteristics honest and credible are not appropriate because the one thing she is sure of (100%) is that the attack was done by Kavanaugh. Everything else she was unsure of. Saying you partially believe her when pretty much the entirety of her accusation is "Kavanaugh assaulted me" is not giving Kavanuagh any presumption of innocence. Because you now only arguing over what percent of an assault Kavanaugh executed. Even if you're separating the issue better in your head when you say she's honest all other people hear is Kavanugh is guilty.

2018-10-02 15:53:41 UTC  

Can we start funding the mass immigration of leftists to Europe
that would benefit everyone involved