Given that they limited it so much that people with significant information were turned away by the FBI, it's hard to call it anything other than a farce.
Yes, he has stated that he had to "piece together" the events of a night when he was in law school and stated that he didn't remember some wild drinking night with his friends in an email. At the same time, he is claiming to not black out. His explanation of those things was not really adequate. Translation, you can't do it but want to avoid accountability. "could be." A he said/she said situation always has the possibility that either side could be lying. He could be lying about not assaulting her by the same token. However, we know that he lied about a variety of things during his testimony.
Thank you. And so the obvious implication being here that Ford could very well be lying about the entire ordeal, which would obviously be an extremely egregious perjury offense. Does this not concern you at all? Or are you more worried about what boofing means?
WASHINGTON — Charles Ludington, a classmate of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh at Yale University, will provide information to the FBI on Monday, he confirmed to NBC News. News of Ludington's involvement was first reported by The Washington Post, which said he planned to give a statement to the FBI at its field office in Raleigh, North Carolina, "detailing violent drunken behavior by Kavanaugh in college." In a copy of his statement given to The Post, Ludington, a professor at North Carolina State University, described Kavanaugh as a "belligerent and aggressive" drunk. "On one of the last occasions I purposely socialized with Brett, I witnessed him respond to a semi-hostile remark, not by defusing the situation, but by throwing his beer in the man's face and starting a fight that ended with one of our mutual friends in jail," the statement said.
It concerns me. Of course. And if she made the whole thing up, while exceedingly unlikely (2% of sexual assault allegations), she should be prosecuted for it. But Yes, I am more concerned about who is up for a USSC appointment, and his repeated lies on multiple topics, inappropriate behavior in the hearings, and paranoid partisan ranting. All of that is no way indicative of a USSC Justice.
So there is a statue of limitations on this allegation. So we can indeed stop wondering why the police aren’t investigating this.
I feel bad for Miss Mitchell. But she did allow herself to be pulled into this political steel cage match. One of the lawyers she mentored tore her apart for the memo she wrote: Rachel Mitchell's former colleague says her Kavanaugh memo is "absolutely disingenuous" Here's another prosecutor ripping her conclusions: Analysis | Rachel Mitchell says her Kavanaugh report is what a ‘reasonable prosecutor’ would say. It’s not. I must agree with them. To come to the conclusions she did from a hearing set up that way with no investigation is beneath her.
A misleading statistic as it lumps all sexual assault allegations (ie many of which are made within days of accusation in question) with this one, which was made 36 years after the fact and with a seat on the SCOTUS hanging in the balance. I would wager if you just reduced this to allegations made 36 years or more after the fact, that 2% number gets a whole lot larger. Let alone the fact that it was dropped right as he was about to be confirmed to the most coveted seat in recent memory.
She raised the assault six years ago. The statistic is meaningful. Doesn't mean that she remembers the assault correctly even if she was assaulted, but it's pretty unlikely she just made it up... although certainly possible.
The 2% number comes from a few different studies that show sexual assault allegations that are reported to police are determined to be false. The actual number seems to range from 2-10% depending on the study. Of course,that doesn't mean the other 90-98% are determined to be true. Just like this investigation, there probably won't be a determination that the rape did or did not occur. This particular situation wouldn't seem to apply to any of those studies because she didn't go to the police.
Well, I've always agreed it was very plausible she was assaulted in HS. Even Kavanaugh has acknowledged this distinct possibility several times. But that doesn't mean she's not lying about it being Kavanaugh. And no, you don't lodge a complaint like this unless you're sure. Otherwise, you're lying. Now she even gave two different versions of how she was forced into the bedroom. One said Kav pushed her by himself, the other said two boys (Kav and Judge) pushed her in together. With all the details she's either contradicting herself on or simply can't remember, one has to question how she can be so sure it was Kavanaugh who assaulted her in the first place.
Keep in mind that the 2-10% range is based on what's reported to the police. And the data I've seen has at least 66% of sexual assaults not being reported to police. Basically, the number of false reports is a minuscule number when compared to the incidence of sexual assault.
I agree that the number of false reports is very small compared to the number of real reports. I just don't think we have a meaningful statistic that we can point to and say what percentage that is. The 2% number is thrown around a lot without an understanding of where it comes from.
It all amounts to a bunch of reaching and leap making in order to make the allegations true, instead of relying on normal stuff like actual physical evidence or witnesses who corroborate the allegations.
