Kavanaugh Hearing

You just said that they better remember those details if "they want to be taken seriously." You earlier said that since Dr. Blasey has become a success, she can't have suffered trauma. There was at least one other really bad take. The irony of your comment is that your opinions here show a true naivete, but that naivete comes in the form of hostility to victims.

 

CNN interviews a group of 5 GOP women. Ooops! This is what happens when you go off the DNC script, CNN. ROTFL.

Oops! CNN Reporter Surprised by GOP Women Staunchly Sticking with Kavanaugh

 

As I read elsewhere...... the Rightie propaganda machine media have exonerated Kavanaugh of sexual assault because ....... he’s a “typical white” male. No evidence, no basis for the exoneration other than his race and gender.

Totalitarianism. Truly sad state of affairs in America.

 

So she has provided no evidence that he did it, other than other people repeating the accusation that she finally told them about 5 years ago, which is also 25+ years after the fact. She has no witnesses from around the time that she alleged the assault occurred to back up her statement. None. But she is believable due to statistics.

However, Kavanugh has provided his statement that he didn’t do it, along with evidence from others that he has never done anything like that in the past, along with the fact that no other accusers have come out of the woodwork. So you are saying that an entitled Kavanugh would drunkenly assault her, and no one else during his teenage years? That is just as likely statistically as her telling the truth about him assaulting her.

So this push that Kavanaugh guilty until proven innocent is garbage. Because the statistics don’t favor either of them as to who is telling the truth. Therefore using statistics is an excuse used to cover up a person’s bias.

 

Why do only Republican judges get Borked? It's not for ideology, as Ginsberg was as fringe as they come.

 

I wonder if Judge Kavanaugh is the first person in history deemed guilty of sexual assault based only on “statistics”?

 

A quote like this shows complete ignorance of history or a willingness to lie: “Totalitarianism. Truly sad state of affairs in America.”

 

Supreme Court Justice Merrick Garland is confused by your comment.

 

I don't think she was that fringe when she was nominated. She drifted further left as the years passed and she opposed the conservative majority.

 

As are the 100+\- federal trial and appeals court nominees who McConnell froze out of a hearing while waiting to see who wouldn win the ‘16 election. At least Bork got one.

 

Already posted. As I noted, CNN got what they wanted. They wanted people to think those responses are typical of the Republican Party.

RBG wasn't even close to fringe.

 

OK, my point is that for neither the "crazed libtards" or the "right wingnuts" should not be claiming "victory" based on the evidence at hand and turning this into an "us vs. them" peter measuring contest. If what the lady is claiming is credible and verifiable within the rules of evidence, her claim could be legit and deserves to be heard. Hear her out, and if it is not credible or reliable, move on with the process. The constant demonizing of both the extreme right and extreme left before it is all out there does not help anyone or anything. Quite the opposite. I won't even begin to go into the victim shaming mentality that so many folks have exhibited in this whole goat rope.

 

#1 I said it was alleged. Just in different t words. Check my post again.

#2 spent my entire life around various survivors of rape/sexual assault/etc. Everything she's done and said lines up with what Ive seen in my life from survivors.

#3 nothing to do with politics. I fully expect a far right conservative to be appointed, I've accepted that; just not this one (hopefully).

 

So, a number of updates tonight:

1: The fourth person Ford identified as being at the party was Leland Keyser (a female classmate of hers, and Bob Beckel’s ex-wife).

Keyser responded to the Judiciary Committee stating that she does not know Kavanaugh and has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, either with or without Dr. Ford.

2: WaPo has apparently had Keyser’s name since at least Sunday, when they identified her as one of the people Ford had named as being at the party in an email to Judge requesting a comment from him.

So why has the Post been publishing stories saying that Ford claims there were four boys at the party, plus her? Do they have a better explanation than publishing an incorrect story because it better matches what Ford told her therapist?

 

A couple things:
1. You forgot to mention that while other woman does not remember the party or know Kavanaugh, she also said that she believes Dr. Blasey.

2. Dr. Blasey's lawyer said on TV five days ago that there were four boys and a girl there not counting Dr. Blasey. My understanding is that she could only name Kavanaugh, Judge, "PJ," and the woman.

In case you want proof:

 

I hadn’t seen 1. I originally read the Politico story, but I do see now where WaPo is trying to keep their narrative alive by publishing a “brief interview” with Keyser and the explanation for why Keyser doesn’t know that Ford gave to them before they ever even asked Keyser.

As for 2, I’m not sure that having three different versions of who was there, two of them within the same week, is exactly helpful.

This is a dead story. This supposedly happened at a party with five attendees, and the only one of those five who thinks the party in question even happened is Ford.

 

This reads like Ed Whelan's "apology." Keyser said that she believes Dr. Blasey, which completely undermines the argument that her not remembering proves it didn't happen. Don't try to dismiss the significance of it while continuing your unfounded attacks on the WaPo.

There was one version of the story. Four boys + her + the other girl. She was able to name three of the boys and the other girl. And no, it's not a dead story (as badly as you want that to be true).

 

You may want to read the text of her letter to Feinstein that CNN published on Friday:

“The assault occurred in a suburban Maryland area home at a gathering that included me and four others.”

Whoops.

So she told her therapist her and four boys, the Senate her and four others, WaPo her three boys and a girl, and her lawyer says all of that actually meant her plus five.

So my apologies, there weren’t three versions of the count. There were at least four.

 

Well, I will apologize. I was wrong. She'll get to clarify it all when she testifies. However, I recommend you check out what Patti Davis had to say on the subject as a sexual assault victim.