mmmmm......it couldn't be that Dr. Ford said he was in the room? That her escape was facilitated by Judge jumping on her/the bed that gave her the opportunity to run out of the room?
Again, she did not provide the therapist’s notes, excerpts or not, to the committee. The exchange concerning the therapist notes occurred at 12:12 pm, and it specifically says that Ford’s attorneys didn’t provide the notes to the committee. She merely confirmed or denied what the notes were alleged to have said in the Washington Post story and her statement. That is not the same as providing the therapist’s notes for independent examination or verification. That would be like me providing a statement that quotes a passage from a book, and refusing to provide the book to verify the accuracy of my quote. And then having you argue that I verified the book’s quote when I provided the statement and answered questions about it, even though I did not provide the book that is the source of the quote to verify the accuracy of my statement. Which isn’t true, as my statement doesn’t verify that I quoted the passage correctly, only that you have my word that I quoted the passage correctly, and am not omitting any relevant information. That does not equal independent verification, it is only my word. She shared “relevant” portions with the reporter, which may have been required for the reporter to write the story, since it was a he said, she said with no corroboration. Without those therapist notes, would the story have been printed? Maybe, maybe not. But it allowed her to get around having to produce the therapist’s notes to the committee. As she could just point to the reporter to verify her story.
Doubt they let those notes out of their sight. The reporter may have seen them, but there is no way they would have let copied be made.
You are right. A great starting point for a witch hunt full of suppositions and generalizations. NONE of those friends were alleged to be present. How wide should the net be? If the friends don’t give the answer you want, ask everyone in the neighborhood? Hey, do you remember a girl walking home alone sometime in July of 1982? Do you see how ridiculous this is? So what can the friends say about the party that is relevant? They weren’t there, so what would they know? You don’t think they would have come forward by now if they remembered the party? You want a fishing expedition, not an investigation based on any proof. Unless you are admitting that Ford’s story is full of holes, and her memory is suspect. Then you are admittedly grasping at straws. So while maybe they can talk about Kavanaugh’s behavior, their testimony is irrelevant to the Ford case.
The pursuit of soundbytes to advance innuendo that is not supported by relevant facts surrounding the actual accusation/event. The whole basis of many of believe BK to be guilty is based on the fact that because society has a real issue in supporting victims of sexual abuse means that BK is guilty. Letting emotion determine conclusions rather than evidence and testimony has opened up the door to dangerous consequences.
He didn't want to give them the soundbyte they were fishing for. He hasn't withdrawn his candidacy in light of the FBI investigation has he?
Which is why the argument has shifted away from relying on facts of the instant case and all about society's issues in assisting victims of sexual abuse. Exploit emotion rather than utilize logic.
What part of any of this whole process and how it has been handled, makes you believe that Democrats are operating in good faith? Democrats no longer get that benefit of the doubt from me. This was a political hit contract they put out on Kavanaugh. They have been actively looking for anyone who can accuse Kavanaugh of anything and passed the story about the party at Yale to the New Yorker. And they are dying to get Judge in front of the committee to call him ever name in the book and try and slime Kavanaugh for being friends with him.
I'm just waiting to here the Left start saying that Kavanaugh is disqualified for the SCOTUS because he is under an FBI investigation.
Both parties are playing politics. That doesn't take away from the fact Dr. Ford said Judge was in the room. The Pubs did everything in their power to avoid Judge appearing as a witness.
That comment is racist, sexist, and bigoted result of profiling and limited to your opinion......and fortunately not factually true or intellectually honest
Not because of what they will try and get him to testify about that night...….about what they can conflate about the man real past to legitimize the accusation. Kind of like the profiling that you're guilty of in your determination of BK
