Well, I think my take on it is far more nuanced than that, and I also make it pretty clear that I'm 99% sure that nothing will happen to him whatsoever other than bad press. I'm just as concerned that it has been made pretty damn clear he blatantly lied under oath in previous confirmation hearings. But like I said, this will not make any difference. Again, we are a country that operates under the Cosby rule. Anything less than 30 accusers, and it isn't taken seriously.
I'm really not buying it. It smacks of desperation to me. Even CNN buried their article about this in the politics section. I scanned the front page section from top to bottom and nary a mention. Of course, how could the appointment of one of the most powerful people in America compete with a live hurricane with big waves, blowing wind and potential for reporters who shouldn't even be there getting hit by flying debris?
I could buy a desperation argument if Feinstein had brought it up at the hearings, but she didn't. I could also buy it if there was any chance something like this would lose even a single Republican vote, but I think Trump and Roy Moore kinda put the nail in that coffin. Point being, there is no reason for Democrats to think this would move the needle in any way in this environment. It's pointless to result to desperation tactics when the outcome is already basically predetermined. A desperation tactic should have at least a scintilla of a chance of actually working, and I don't believe a single Democratic Senator actually thinks they can stop this, even if they had a videotape of such an incident. It wouldn't matter. Moreover, other Democrats on the judiciary (and some liberal circles I follow in general) are actually pretty pissed at Feinstein for not throwing it in his face at the hearings. So it seems given the situation that she (as the minority head of Judiciary) WAS operating out of fairness. Ronan Farrow is the same reporter who nailed Harvey Weinstein to the wall. It's hardly a surprise he got this story.
Well, I think my take on it is far more nuanced than that, and I also make it pretty clear that I'm 99% sure that nothing will happen to him whatsoever other than bad press. I'm just as concerned that it has been made pretty damn clear he blatantly lied under oath in previous confirmation hearings. But like I said, this will not make any difference. Again, we are a country that operates under the Cosby rule. Anything less than 30 accusers, and it isn't taken seriously.
I'm really not buying it. It smacks of desperation to me. Even CNN buried their article about this in the politics section. I scanned the front page section from top to bottom and nary a mention. Of course, how could the appointment of one of the most powerful people in America compete with a live hurricane with big waves, blowing wind and potential for reporters who shouldn't even be there getting hit by flying debris?
I could buy a desperation argument if Feinstein had brought it up at the hearings, but she didn't. I could also buy it if there was any chance something like this would lose even a single Republican vote, but I think Trump and Roy Moore kinda put the nail in that coffin. Point being, there is no reason for Democrats to think this would move the needle in any way in this environment. It's pointless to result to desperation tactics when the outcome is already basically predetermined. A desperation tactic should have at least a scintilla of a chance of actually working, and I don't believe a single Democratic Senator actually thinks they can stop this, even if they had a videotape of such an incident. It wouldn't matter. Moreover, other Democrats on the judiciary (and some liberal circles I follow in general) are actually pretty pissed at Feinstein for not throwing it in his face at the hearings. So it seems given the situation that she (as the minority head of Judiciary) WAS operating out of fairness. Ronan Farrow is the same reporter who nailed Harvey Weinstein to the wall. It's hardly a surprise he got this story.
I'm not saying it's a desperate attempt to stop Kavanaugh, it seems more like a desperate attempt to besmirch him. Until I have this woman's name, I'm not buying it.
Well, I think my take on it is far more nuanced than that, and I also make it pretty clear that I'm 99% sure that nothing will happen to him whatsoever other than bad press. I'm just as concerned that it has been made pretty damn clear he blatantly lied under oath in previous confirmation hearings. But like I said, this will not make any difference. Again, we are a country that operates under the Cosby rule. Anything less than 30 accusers, and it isn't taken seriously.
I'm really not buying it. It smacks of desperation to me. Even CNN buried their article about this in the politics section. I scanned the front page section from top to bottom and nary a mention. Of course, how could the appointment of one of the most powerful people in America compete with a live hurricane with big waves, blowing wind and potential for reporters who shouldn't even be there getting hit by flying debris?
I could buy a desperation argument if Feinstein had brought it up at the hearings, but she didn't. I could also buy it if there was any chance something like this would lose even a single Republican vote, but I think Trump and Roy Moore kinda put the nail in that coffin. Point being, there is no reason for Democrats to think this would move the needle in any way in this environment. It's pointless to result to desperation tactics when the outcome is already basically predetermined. A desperation tactic should have at least a scintilla of a chance of actually working, and I don't believe a single Democratic Senator actually thinks they can stop this, even if they had a videotape of such an incident. It wouldn't matter. Moreover, other Democrats on the judiciary (and some liberal circles I follow in general) are actually pretty pissed at Feinstein for not throwing it in his face at the hearings. So it seems given the situation that she (as the minority head of Judiciary) WAS operating out of fairness. Ronan Farrow is the same reporter who nailed Harvey Weinstein to the wall. It's hardly a surprise he got this story.
I'm not saying it's a desperate attempt to stop Kavanaugh, it seems more like a desperate attempt to besmirch him. Until I have this woman's name, I'm not buying it.
When Anita Hill came out and told her story of how Clarence Thomas sexually assaulted her how did that go? Did Republican congressmen and Conservative media listen to her with an open mind? No. No they didn't. They ruthlessly attacked her and dragged her through the mud - instead of doing their job they attacked the accuser and confirmed Thomas anyway.
Watch from 14:50 in this: https://youtu.be/dHiAls8loz4?t=884 Republican playbook against sexual assault accusers: - feign concern about false allegations of their man's "high moral character" or whatever - blame the victim - character assassination
So knowing that what do we think would happen if this private citizen revealed herself? Would Conservative media treat her fairly? What would assholes like Tucker Carlson do? Rush Limbaugh?
Do they believe her? No. They haven't heard her, don't know her, weren't there but it doesn't matter they don't believe her. Because it's to their political advantage to attack her. We all know it's true. Conservative media is nothing if not ruthless propaganda attacking their perceived enemies.
So anyway this private citizen told her story. If there are others I hope they come out too. If there aren't then it's tough to honestly say what happened. The FBI, Democratic organization (eyeroll) isn't going to investigate this they've already said.
Ummmm, how about no way??? I refuse to accept the idea that the President of the United States can send messages to all US cell phone users. There is ZERO chance this won't be abused, and there is absolutely ZERO reason for Trump himself to be sending emergency messages. We have an Emergency Broadcast System. This is a horrible idea. This is probably the most big brother-like situation I have ever heard of. Jesus Christ, if the civil libertarians don't object to this bullshit, they might as well find a new political ideology. Again, the Emergency Broadcast System has existed since the moment I was born and long before that. There is NOTHING wrong with it. There is absolutely no reason we need to hear from Dear Leader directly. This is absurd. It's been on the books since 2006, but this has never actually been done. A coincidence that the wannabe despot is the first one to test it?? Not likely. By the way, we have NO right to opt out of this. None.
I have a sinking feeling that the story about Kavanaugh is true and that the truth will have no impact on him being cemented on the Supreme Court for the sole reason that the GOP can count on him to rule in their favor in the decades to come. I honestly don't think it would matter to GOP politicians if he was guilty.
I don't know if a crime committed in high school should follow someone for so long--certain crimes should be "forgotten" at certain times in certain contexts--but I do know that there are plenty of qualified judges who never assaulted anyone. I can only pray that Kavanaugh is already one of those people, but if he isn't, I think we should have high enough standards to pick someone who is.
Ummmm, how about no way??? I refuse to accept the idea that the President of the United States can send messages to all US cell phone users. There is ZERO chance this won't be abused, and there is absolutely ZERO reason for Trump himself to be sending emergency messages. We have an Emergency Broadcast System. This is a horrible idea. This is probably the most big brother-like situation I have ever heard of. Jesus Christ, if the civil libertarians don't object to this bullshit, they might as well find a new political ideology. Again, the Emergency Broadcast System has existed since the moment I was born and long before that. There is NOTHING wrong with it. There is absolutely no reason we need to hear from Dear Leader directly. This is absurd. It's been on the books since 2006, but this has never actually been done. A coincidence that the wannabe despot is the first one to test it?? Not likely. By the way, we have NO right to opt out of this. None.
Canada rolled something like this out recently.
Basically it is the Emergency Broadcast System, but it is delivered to the one thing that you probably have on you for every waking minute of the day - your cell phone.
Besides the test. I have received an Amber Alert and two tornado warnings.
As of now, I would take this quote into consideration:
"If you separate this from the politics and personality of any individual president then this is a great idea and an amazing use of technology to reach everybody if they’re in harms way," said Karen North, director of the Annenberg Digital Social Media program at the University of Southern California.
I am also hoping FEMA will be in charge of the messaging and "Presidential Alert" is just a working title. To put it in other context, if this was rolled out when Obama was president most people wouldn't bat an eye. Tucker Carlson might have, but the general population would have seen this as an upgraded tool to the Emergency Broadcast System.
Will Trump attempt to abuse it? Yep. The first chance he can to change the news cycle away from something he doesn't want to hear about, he'll do it without caring. But don't let that fear take away a cost effective tool that can save lives.
Ummmm, how about no way??? I refuse to accept the idea that the President of the United States can send messages to all US cell phone users. There is ZERO chance this won't be abused, and there is absolutely ZERO reason for Trump himself to be sending emergency messages. We have an Emergency Broadcast System. This is a horrible idea. This is probably the most big brother-like situation I have ever heard of. Jesus Christ, if the civil libertarians don't object to this bullshit, they might as well find a new political ideology. Again, the Emergency Broadcast System has existed since the moment I was born and long before that. There is NOTHING wrong with it. There is absolutely no reason we need to hear from Dear Leader directly. This is absurd. It's been on the books since 2006, but this has never actually been done. A coincidence that the wannabe despot is the first one to test it?? Not likely. By the way, we have NO right to opt out of this. None.
Canada rolled something like this out recently.
Basically it is the Emergency Broadcast System, but it is delivered to the one thing that you probably have on you for every waking minute of the day - your cell phone.
Besides the test. I have received an Amber Alert and two tornado warnings.
As of now, I would take this quote into consideration:
"If you separate this from the politics and personality of any individual president then this is a great idea and an amazing use of technology to reach everybody if they’re in harms way," said Karen North, director of the Annenberg Digital Social Media program at the University of Southern California.
I am also hoping FEMA will be in charge of the messaging and "Presidential Alert" is just a working title. To put it in other context, if this was rolled out when Obama was president most people wouldn't bat an eye. Tucker Carlson might have, but the general population would have seen this as an upgraded tool to the Emergency Broadcast System.
Will Trump attempt to abuse it? Yep. The first chance he can to change the news cycle away from something he doesn't want to hear about, he'll do it without caring. But don't let that fear take away a cost effective tool that can save lives.
It needs to be separated from the President himself. We have already seen the color-coded terror alerts abused MASSIVELY during the Bush Administration (including during the lead up to the 2004 election against John Kerry). Incidentally, we never heard a thing about the terror alert level during the Obama years, because they weren't selling fear the way Bush and Cheney did through most of their Administration. And you're right, I simply don't trust the current occupant of the White House to have this power in his hand. And I highly suspect that hardcore Trump supporters would have said the same thing about Obama. Which is probably why he never even considered doing something like this even though he technically and legally could have. He knew exactly what would have been said about him. I have no problem with it in the hands professionals at FEMA or the EBS. I don't want Trump to have anything to do with it. There is no reason for this to reach that level.
I have also received Amber Alerts and multiple missing elderly person reports on my phone in the past year, sometimes in the middle of the night. Again, I have no problem with this. I simply do not understand why the message has to come from the President of the United States and why, after 12 years of this being on the books, it is for the first time being tested by, of all people, Donald Trump. I don't like this at all. The man has proven beyond a shadow of doubt he isn't to be trusted about basically ANY subject at any time, and I absolutely don't trust him to use something that can reach EVERY American cell phone responsibly.
It needs to be separated from the President himself. We have already seen the color-coded terror alerts abused MASSIVELY during the Bush Administration (including during the lead up to the 2004 election against John Kerry). Incidentally, we never heard a thing about the terror alert level during the Obama years, because they weren't selling fear the way Bush and Cheney did through most of their Administration.
They just covertly murdered 116 civilians in drone strikes.
Which is impressive for an administration governed by a Nobel Peace Prize winner.
All Governments are corrupt. All Governments kill people. All Governments suppress their citizens. All Governments place their own interests first.
It needs to be separated from the President himself. We have already seen the color-coded terror alerts abused MASSIVELY during the Bush Administration.
True. I'd almost forgotten about that crap.
Conservatives respond to fear. It doesn't motivate non-conservatives as much. Brains are wired differently.
multiple studies, not just that article, confirm that Conservativs tend to be a frightened, cowardly lot by nature. Hillary's emails! OMG just imagine what's in them! Scary, eh? If you got worried there you might be a conservative.
By the way Paul Manafort, Donald Trump's campaign manager, pleaded guilty to conspiracy against the United States and forfeited $46 million dollars. Robert Muellers investigation is now a money making enterprise and it has more than paid for iself. It has made money. And Paul Manafort is cooperating with the Mueller investigation as part of his plea deal.
He has opened himself up to state charges and charges overseas as well - I guess we'll see how that goes. His plea deal included civil forefiture. So it's pretty much pardon-proof. His monetary damages he won't get back with a pardon and he can be charged with state crimes for the stuff he has admitted to.
Knowing that she's real would help yes. Right now she's a phantom with about as much power to sway my opinion as anybody else I can't see, hear or feel.
Let me give my thoughts on the Kavanaugh situation today without going totally overboard (or at least I'll try). Is it "fair" that something he is alleged to have done in high school is being brought up?? I would say yes, given the lifetime position he is about to be confirmed for. And look, I was 17 once, and I can safely say that I'm pretty sure that I went to way more alcohol-fueled parties than the obvious prig that Brett Kavanaugh is, and I never attempted to sexually assault a girl with one of my friends. I never knew any behavior like this to happen even once until I got to college, where a girl I sat next to in anthropology class WAS raped by someone I was vaguely familiar with because he lived in the same dorm as I did. Point being, this kind of thing should never wash off if true.
Additionally, it seems that Dianne Feinstein didn't being this up at the hearings because SHE thought it would be unfair, and simply turned what she had over the the authorities. I disagree with her not bringing it up. But she and the Democrats aren't the ones who released this information. Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer of the New Yorker got the story, and I am familiar with the work of both of them, and they are both A+ reporters. Beyond that, there is this ridiculous letter that 65 women who knew Kavanaugh back in his youth apparently signed vouching for his character. First of all, it is OBVIOUS Republicans knew this skeleton was in his closet for weeks if they have this document, because it would be impossible to get those signatures in 24 hours. Moreover, who the hell is close friends with 65 girls in high school?? I didn't even KNOW 65 girls in high school (and that was between 3 towns that were fairly close together), much less would be close enough to them to have them vouch for my character 30 years later.
Lastly is this issue of potential victims not coming forward until years later, or until the spotlight is on their abusers. This is not all that surprising if you understand the dynamics of abuse. I firmly believe that the idea of people like Trump or Kavanaugh being handed almost limitless power probably causes every fiber of their being to finally stand-up despite all the horrible memories and emotions and say "Enough!". And even then, they are terrified to have their name revealed.
Did this happen?? Of course we have no way of knowing for sure, but given that the vast majority of sexual assault claims ARE real and accurate, chances are this one is too. Not a guarantee, but a high likelihood. Can it be proven?? Probably not. Will it stop his confirmation. Almost certainly that answer is no. But I find it very interesting that the judge who will have THE ultimate say on what women can do with their own bodies is now accused of literally forcing himself upon a woman's body. And that is a narrative that is impossible to ignore. What the New Yorker article describes is not just sexual assault, but attempted rape. The idea that his confirmation should go forward without addressing this is absurd.
Statute of limitations has not run out so if the prosecutor takes the case, he should stand trial. If a prosecutor doesn't take the case, he's innocent, and can't suffer any adverse effects for a crime he didn't do. Alleging publicly that someone is a criminal when guilt has not been established in the only legitimate, societally acceptable forum for such allegations, which is the court of law (or a parallel institution such as a due-process-based title IX proceedings organ), is not ethical by any measure. If you're a victim, naturally, you can state publicly that someone wronged you (it's another question whether you should), but it's not good and fair for you to do that anymore when decades have passed and you haven't had the courage to report the crime during all those years. Victims are people just like us, with rights, but also with duties, and it's everyone's duty to report crimes. The victim should have gone to the police and not write letters to politicians. The politician should not have acted based on that letter.
To halt the confirmation now would mean to prevent kavanaugh from being confirmed, for a potentially long period of time (after which there would be realistically 0% chance of him being convicted because of lack of corroborating evidence), for reasons which are of a purely procedural nature. It would be more fair to proceed with the confirmation proceedings and in parallel, investigate the alleged crime.
So, just for the hell of it, I decided to wade deep into my Android S9 and see if I could find the options to either turn on or turn off alerts. First off, it is buried and you would never find it without Googling it, but this is what I eventually turned up at the end of the tunnel:
As you can see there are options to turn off EVERY other type of alert, but it is literally impossible to turn off the Presidential one. You have the option to turn off alerts about severe or extreme threats to life and property, and about local abductions, but you are absolutely 100% mandated to receive the message from the President. What in the holy hell is going on here?? Why was this law passed?? Why is it being implemented now, two months before an election?? What is to stop Trump from using this system to send out a "go vote" message on election day, or put out a call to his supporters if/when impeachment becomes a realistic scenario?? There is supposedly an amendment to the law about this system that requires it to only be used in certain situations, but since when has Trump been bound by any law or court ruling?? Again, this has been on the books since 2006 and has never once been put into action, yet it IS being put into action in five days. Why?? What possible information can it provide that the "extreme or severe" alert options can't handle on their own??
So, Kavanaugh's accuser has come forward this morning. And the most important part of this article (as to the veracity of her claim) is that there are notes from the couples therapy she and her husband attended about the incident. In 2012. To believe this is all a smear campaign, you would have to come to the conclusion that six years ago, she set this all in motion KNOWING that Kavanaugh would be nominated for the Supreme Court in 2018. No serious person can believe she planted a story in a therapist's office in anticipation of one day using it as a weapon against him. That is absolutely absurd. Her account is highly detailed, and rings with the air of truth (to my mind). She admits she doesn't remember every single thing (like myself with my memory, years can seem hazy, even if actual incidents aren't). I believe he did this, and I also believe he is going to get confirmed anyway. I encourage everyone to read the article and her account. The details are mostly mundane and realistic, which is what makes it seem true. There is nothing fantastical here. This is exactly how an attempted rape at a party with drunk high school students would take place. The accuser also voluntarily took a polygraph administered by a former FBI agent in August:
I will also point again to the letter signed by 65 women in support of Kavanaugh that Grassley claims was put together in less than 24 hours. There is no way that claim was true. They had the letter ready to go because they KNEW this was possibly coming down the pike. We have a nominee whose records we haven't seen, who at the very least has been found to have been untruthful under oath in previous confirmation hearings, and who has now been fairly credibly accused of attempted rape (no matter when it happened). That does not add up to someone who deserves a lifetime spot on what is arguably the powerful branch of government. And the idea that THIS man, accused of THIS act would be the vote to strip away women's reproductive rights is just so textbook modern Republican Party. As a matter of fact, the entire selling of Kavanaugh's character as a carpool dad and coach of a girl's basketball team now seems to have been explicitly designed to head this off at the pass if it came out. And frankly, now just seems creepy as hell.
No offense, but basically because of questions like this, and dozens of other variations of it. Because women not only think they won't be believed, they know it for a fact. My girlfriend was raped in high school by her friend's father. Her own PARENTS didn't believe her initially. She still blames herself to some degree to this day for what happened. It's pretty much impossible for men to understand the societal and power dynamics at work in incidents like this. I'm not trying to make anyone feel guilty but I firmly believe in general we as males need to do a way better job when we talk about these issues.
No offense, but basically because of questions like this, and dozens of other variations of it. Because women not only think they won't be believed, they know it for a fact. My girlfriend was raped in high school by her friend's father. Her own PARENTS didn't believe her initially. She still blames herself to some degree to this day for what happened. It's pretty much impossible for men to understand the societal and power dynamics at work in incidents like this. I'm not trying to make anyone feel guilty but I firmly believe in general we as males need to do a way better job when we talk about these issues.
I'm not offended, but isn't a supreme court candidate a more intimidating defendant than what he was 6 years ago?
No offense, but basically because of questions like this, and dozens of other variations of it. Because women not only think they won't be believed, they know it for a fact. My girlfriend was raped in high school by her friend's father. Her own PARENTS didn't believe her initially. She still blames herself to some degree to this day for what happened. It's pretty much impossible for men to understand the societal and power dynamics at work in incidents like this. I'm not trying to make anyone feel guilty but I firmly believe in general we as males need to do a way better job when we talk about these issues.
I'm not offended, but isn't a supreme court candidate a more intimidating defendant than what he was 6 years ago?
She didn't want to come out. Why would she?? It's going to ruin her life just as much as his. She is probably getting death threats as we speak. There is no upside to her. There is no way she wants this. She is stepping forward because of the circumstances and the idea that this man is about to gain the kind of power that most can never imagine.
Perhaps. I just wish people were more sceptical. Some may call it cynical - just as well.
I don't think there is much to be cynical about given the story in the Washington Post. If a woman tells her therapist about it six years ago, remembers vivid details about the incident 30 years later, and submitted to a polygraph test, I for one am willing to give HER the benefit of the doubt. I mean, what else does she have to do to be taken seriously??
Perhaps. I just wish people were more sceptical. Some may call it cynical - just as well.
Leave Facebook -> Antisocial and Paranoid and employers think you have something to hide. Don't use Google -> Paranoid Luddite Don't buy Apple -> Paranoid Luddite Don't buy into political parties -> Paranoid alarmist anti-nationalist Think the world is run by corporate and financial interests -> Crazy conspiracy theorist Think any form of monopoly is anti-consumer -> Crazy conspiracy theorist Think religion is a business and tool of control -> Have no morality
I grew tired of trying to urge people into action a long time ago. They will only switch on when the noose is around their neck. Until then it's more comfortable to believe the lie than attempt to build a better society.
Perhaps. I just wish people were more sceptical. Some may call it cynical - just as well.
Leave Facebook -> Antisocial and Paranoid and employers think you have something to hide. Don't use Google -> Paranoid Luddite Don't buy Apple -> Paranoid Luddite Don't buy into political parties -> Paranoid alarmist anti-nationalist Think the world is run by corporate and financial interests -> Crazy conspiracy theorist Think any form of monopoly is anti-consumer -> Crazy conspiracy theorist Think religion is a business and tool of control -> Have no morality
I grew tired of trying to urge people into action a long time ago. They will only switch on when the noose is around their neck. Until then it's more comfortable to believe the lie than attempt to build a better society.
I left Facebook long before the privacy issues became front and center because of a ridiculous conversation at the time of the Sandy Hook shooting. Never once regretted it. As for Apple, I simply think itunes is a really shitty application. Monopolies absolutely are anti-consumer. You are also essentially correct about religion. As for political parties, they are just a reality, and if you don't pick one, you are essentially locking yourself out of having any minor say whatsoever.
In regards to the earlier conversation about "why come forward now, why not then??", I present this tweet that was sent out a couple minutes ago by journalist Yashar Ali:
Comments
And speaking of abortion, I just wanted to drop this link here. I didn't write it, but I very much agree with it.
https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1040363431893725184.html
Watch from 14:50 in this:
Republican playbook against sexual assault accusers:
- feign concern about false allegations of their man's "high moral character" or whatever
- blame the victim
- character assassination
So knowing that what do we think would happen if this private citizen revealed herself? Would Conservative media treat her fairly? What would assholes like Tucker Carlson do? Rush Limbaugh?
Do they believe her? No. They haven't heard her, don't know her, weren't there but it doesn't matter they don't believe her. Because it's to their political advantage to attack her. We all know it's true. Conservative media is nothing if not ruthless propaganda attacking their perceived enemies.
So anyway this private citizen told her story. If there are others I hope they come out too. If there aren't then it's tough to honestly say what happened. The FBI, Democratic organization (eyeroll) isn't going to investigate this they've already said.
Women get treated like that by every group with power and authority.
Heck, women have only been allowed to vote in the US for the past 98 years.
Ummmm, how about no way??? I refuse to accept the idea that the President of the United States can send messages to all US cell phone users. There is ZERO chance this won't be abused, and there is absolutely ZERO reason for Trump himself to be sending emergency messages. We have an Emergency Broadcast System. This is a horrible idea. This is probably the most big brother-like situation I have ever heard of. Jesus Christ, if the civil libertarians don't object to this bullshit, they might as well find a new political ideology. Again, the Emergency Broadcast System has existed since the moment I was born and long before that. There is NOTHING wrong with it. There is absolutely no reason we need to hear from Dear Leader directly. This is absurd. It's been on the books since 2006, but this has never actually been done. A coincidence that the wannabe despot is the first one to test it?? Not likely. By the way, we have NO right to opt out of this. None.
I don't know if a crime committed in high school should follow someone for so long--certain crimes should be "forgotten" at certain times in certain contexts--but I do know that there are plenty of qualified judges who never assaulted anyone. I can only pray that Kavanaugh is already one of those people, but if he isn't, I think we should have high enough standards to pick someone who is.
Basically it is the Emergency Broadcast System, but it is delivered to the one thing that you probably have on you for every waking minute of the day - your cell phone.
Besides the test. I have received an Amber Alert and two tornado warnings.
As of now, I would take this quote into consideration:
"If you separate this from the politics and personality of any individual president then this is a great idea and an amazing use of technology to reach everybody if they’re in harms way," said Karen North, director of the Annenberg Digital Social Media program at the University of Southern California.
I am also hoping FEMA will be in charge of the messaging and "Presidential Alert" is just a working title. To put it in other context, if this was rolled out when Obama was president most people wouldn't bat an eye. Tucker Carlson might have, but the general population would have seen this as an upgraded tool to the Emergency Broadcast System.
Will Trump attempt to abuse it? Yep. The first chance he can to change the news cycle away from something he doesn't want to hear about, he'll do it without caring. But don't let that fear take away a cost effective tool that can save lives.
I have also received Amber Alerts and multiple missing elderly person reports on my phone in the past year, sometimes in the middle of the night. Again, I have no problem with this. I simply do not understand why the message has to come from the President of the United States and why, after 12 years of this being on the books, it is for the first time being tested by, of all people, Donald Trump. I don't like this at all. The man has proven beyond a shadow of doubt he isn't to be trusted about basically ANY subject at any time, and I absolutely don't trust him to use something that can reach EVERY American cell phone responsibly.
Which is impressive for an administration governed by a Nobel Peace Prize winner.
All Governments are corrupt.
All Governments kill people.
All Governments suppress their citizens.
All Governments place their own interests first.
The only sides are us and them.
Conservatives respond to fear. It doesn't motivate non-conservatives as much. Brains are wired differently.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/mind-in-the-machine/201612/fear-and-anxiety-drive-conservatives-political-attitudes
multiple studies, not just that article, confirm that Conservativs tend to be a frightened, cowardly lot by nature. Hillary's emails! OMG just imagine what's in them! Scary, eh? If you got worried there you might be a conservative.
He has opened himself up to state charges and charges overseas as well - I guess we'll see how that goes. His plea deal included civil forefiture. So it's pretty much pardon-proof. His monetary damages he won't get back with a pardon and he can be charged with state crimes for the stuff he has admitted to.
Alleging publicly that someone is a criminal when guilt has not been established in the only legitimate, societally acceptable forum for such allegations, which is the court of law (or a parallel institution such as a due-process-based title IX proceedings organ), is not ethical by any measure.
If you're a victim, naturally, you can state publicly that someone wronged you (it's another question whether you should), but it's not good and fair for you to do that anymore when decades have passed and you haven't had the courage to report the crime during all those years. Victims are people just like us, with rights, but also with duties, and it's everyone's duty to report crimes. The victim should have gone to the police and not write letters to politicians. The politician should not have acted based on that letter.
To halt the confirmation now would mean to prevent kavanaugh from being confirmed, for a potentially long period of time (after which there would be realistically 0% chance of him being convicted because of lack of corroborating evidence), for reasons which are of a purely procedural nature. It would be more fair to proceed with the confirmation proceedings and in parallel, investigate the alleged crime.
As you can see there are options to turn off EVERY other type of alert, but it is literally impossible to turn off the Presidential one. You have the option to turn off alerts about severe or extreme threats to life and property, and about local abductions, but you are absolutely 100% mandated to receive the message from the President. What in the holy hell is going on here?? Why was this law passed?? Why is it being implemented now, two months before an election?? What is to stop Trump from using this system to send out a "go vote" message on election day, or put out a call to his supporters if/when impeachment becomes a realistic scenario?? There is supposedly an amendment to the law about this system that requires it to only be used in certain situations, but since when has Trump been bound by any law or court ruling?? Again, this has been on the books since 2006 and has never once been put into action, yet it IS being put into action in five days. Why?? What possible information can it provide that the "extreme or severe" alert options can't handle on their own??
https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/california-professor-writer-of-confidential-brett-kavanaugh-letter-speaks-out-about-her-allegation-of-sexual-assault/2018/09/16/46982194-b846-11e8-94eb-3bd52dfe917b_story.html?utm_term=.7dd717f24472
I will also point again to the letter signed by 65 women in support of Kavanaugh that Grassley claims was put together in less than 24 hours. There is no way that claim was true. They had the letter ready to go because they KNEW this was possibly coming down the pike. We have a nominee whose records we haven't seen, who at the very least has been found to have been untruthful under oath in previous confirmation hearings, and who has now been fairly credibly accused of attempted rape (no matter when it happened). That does not add up to someone who deserves a lifetime spot on what is arguably the powerful branch of government. And the idea that THIS man, accused of THIS act would be the vote to strip away women's reproductive rights is just so textbook modern Republican Party. As a matter of fact, the entire selling of Kavanaugh's character as a carpool dad and coach of a girl's basketball team now seems to have been explicitly designed to head this off at the pass if it came out. And frankly, now just seems creepy as hell.
Don't use Google -> Paranoid Luddite
Don't buy Apple -> Paranoid Luddite
Don't buy into political parties -> Paranoid alarmist anti-nationalist
Think the world is run by corporate and financial interests -> Crazy conspiracy theorist
Think any form of monopoly is anti-consumer -> Crazy conspiracy theorist
Think religion is a business and tool of control -> Have no morality
I grew tired of trying to urge people into action a long time ago. They will only switch on when the noose is around their neck. Until then it's more comfortable to believe the lie than attempt to build a better society.