Celebrating 10 years! 2007-2017

Justin Fairfax vs Brett Kavanaugh

It’s going to come up so we might as well make a space for jorgedeclaro02/04/19
The Washington Post in an article posted on its site Monday backfromthedead02/04/19
This allegation is more credible than the one against Kavena anotherjd02/04/19
"should be roasted by his own if there is any consistency" wutwutwut02/04/19
Alright, which one of you is David French? I don’t appreci jorgedeclaro02/04/19
Maybe. I have no doubt that a lot of these writers and rese persius02/04/19
I was joking. He published 20 minutes after I did. That’s jorgedeclaro02/04/19
Monsieur French has had a busy day. wutwutwut02/04/19
Fairfax indicated he thought Northam was behind the story. A jorgedeclaro02/04/19
The Post came out and said they were approached by the alleg schopenhauerx9902/04/19
straw/grasp/flail/obfuscate wutwutwut02/04/19
jorgedeclaro (Feb 4, 2019 - 2:11 pm)

It’s going to come up so we might as well make a space for the discussion.

My thoughts:

1) WaPo was largely not hypocritical by not running the Fairfax story. WaPo did not run the Blasley-Ford story until the allegations were leaked anonymously and then Ford chose to go public. She contacted the WaPo tip line in July and didn’t go public until September. While Ford’s claims were similarly uncorroborated like Tyson’s (no witnesses, delayed telling anyone), the difference in the allegations already being leaked is pretty significant. At most, WaPo was modestly hypocritical in their treatment of the two reports.

2) The Fairfax allegation is modestly more credible. Fairfax admits there was a sexual encounter but that the encounter was consensual. As opposed to the Kavanaugh allegation where he denied the event occurred and there was little clarity on when or where the alleged assault occurred. Kavanaugh was also a case where a liberal was making a claim against a conservative which would lead to a political motivation to lie or embellish. This is a case where it is a liberal making these accusations against against a fellow liberal.

3) This shouldn’t be enough to call for political or legal action against Fairfax. Consent is much more subjective than current narratives are willing to accept. Sexual activity is constitutionally protected. People should not be punished for sexual activity unless they knew the other person was not providing consent. It is perfectly understandable that two people in the same encounter can have very different views of what occurred. It happens all the time. And yes, a long delay in reporting these allegations hurts credibility and makes it harder to verify.

4) Yes, this is just desserts to some extent and I hope that it will cause the Democrats and public to re-evaluate their stance on sexual assault allegations.

Reply
backfromthedead (Feb 4, 2019 - 2:18 pm)

The Washington Post in an article posted on its site Monday afternoon
acknowledged it had investigated the claims, but denied Fairfax’s assertion
that it had found “significant red flags and inconsistencies within the
allegations.”
Instead, The Post said that when approached by the woman after the
November 2017 election, and Fairfax’s defense, it “could not find anyone who
could corroborate either version.”
Efforts by The Post to reach people with connections to Fairfax through
college, law school and his political network did not turn up similar complaints
of sexual misconduct, according to the article.
“Without that, or the ability to corroborate the woman’s account — in part
because she had not told anyone what happened — The Washington Post
did not run a story,” the article reads. --
https://www.richmond.com/news/virginia/government-politics/lt-gov-justin-fairfax-threatens-legal-action-against-conservative-website/article_40dbcfef-5af6-5f91-9b4f-fa73050594d8.html

Reply
anotherjd (Feb 4, 2019 - 2:38 pm)

This allegation is more credible than the one against Kavenaugh but that's not a high threshold. This guy is entitled to a presumption of innocence even outside a courtroom imo. Having said that, the Democratic party has called for a standard in which pretty much every allegation is considered true so this guy should be roasted by his own if there is any consistency.

Reply
wutwutwut (Feb 4, 2019 - 3:06 pm)

"should be roasted by his own if there is any consistency"


So... who's 3rd in line under the VA constitution, and what skeletons are in her or his closet?


Could be a "night of the long knives" where we get down to dog catcher elevated to the big house?

Reply
jorgedeclaro (Feb 4, 2019 - 3:37 pm)

Alright, which one of you is David French? I don’t appreciate you stealing my post, republicanizing it, and posting to National Review.

Reply
persius (Feb 4, 2019 - 3:45 pm)

Maybe. I have no doubt that a lot of these writers and researchers mine forums like this and blogs to steal material. I knew political operative types that used to post in certain spots and create blogs in order to manipulate the media and control the conversation that way. They counted on it.

Reply
jorgedeclaro (Feb 4, 2019 - 3:54 pm)

I was joking. He published 20 minutes after I did. That’s probably not enough time to get it changed, reviewed by the editor and posted. Plus it’s not exactly a novel concept. GOP people are posting Kavanaugh-related comments on every tweet on this.

Reply
wutwutwut (Feb 4, 2019 - 4:21 pm)

Monsieur French has had a busy day.

Reply
jorgedeclaro (Feb 4, 2019 - 4:31 pm)

Fairfax indicated he thought Northam was behind the story. Absent proof, that’s not an accusation that will play well.

Reply
schopenhauerx99 (Feb 4, 2019 - 5:03 pm)

The Post came out and said they were approached by the alleged victim months before this happened, so it's highly doubtful this is coming from Northam.

Reply
wutwutwut (Feb 4, 2019 - 5:21 pm)

straw/grasp/flail/obfuscate

Reply
Post a message in this thread