Thanks. I can see at least part of the reason this guy doesn't want to testify. Would not be pretty for him, having to respond to questions about what he's said over the years.
Interesting. I am not sure that makes it clear to what extent he is simply writing about those hard case crime novels and to what extent he believes himself in what he is writing. But agree with your point, that his quotes should be framed in that context... by themselves they are misleading.
I think you're still imputing your own perceived memory skills to others (and overestimating even your own memory). I am quite confident there are people out there who I have been introduced to numerous times, and have run into more recently, where I still wouldn't have a clue who they are. When you expand it to high school and college, I am absolutely positive there are folks out there who I ran into at parties repeatedly and couldn't tell you whether I knew them or not. By way of example, I was in a fraternity at UF. We did homecoming with a different sorority each of my 4 years, and had socials with the same group of 5 or 6 sororities each semester. The average membership of a UF Panhellenic Counsel sorority is right around 250, and there will be year to year turnover in membership. I'm 100% certain that I could not pick out all (or even a particularly sizable fraction) of the probably 1,500-2,000 UF sorority members who I interacted with at social events over the course of my four years at UF to tell you with certainty whether I knew them or not. And that wasn't 3.5 decades ago.
Interesting that the other person that is accused of taking part in this act has a known history of alcoholism, writing provocative things, and as well as writing for conservative outlets. I don't think you could ask for a better person to fill the role of "drunk high school boy #2."
Well in this instance it is clear, he is writing about a publisher of books that harkens back to a time when writers overemphasized male machismo and female fragility. In today's age of neutered men.
And he just happens to be Kavanaugh's friend. This conspiracy, six years in the making, is quite impressive.
Seem Difi is starting to take a lot of heat from both sides of the isle right now. She might have a hard time in her election this fall if her actions end up being blamed for this confirmation turning into a circus.
That's the context it's being given. He's lauding the publisher for their portrayal of macho men who prove themselves to "interested" but not yet consenting women through their "uncontrollable male passion." Hopefully, Kevin de Leon beats her, but that seems unlikely.
Grassley has stated that the FBI is done with their portion of this case and any additional investigation needed will be done by the Judicial Committee staff. We'll see if that satisfies Dr. Baker or not. Been some interesting other info floating around the interwebs today: 1. A woman named Cristina King Miranda tweeted this morning that she went to school with Dr. Baker, knew Kavanuagh, and remembered hearing about the incident. She ended up deleting that tweet and provided a tweet why she deleted the original. She then stated: "To all media, I will not be doing anymore interviews. No more circus. To clarify my post: I do not have first hand knowledge of the incident that Dr. Christine Blasey Ford mentions, and I stand by my support for Christine. That's it. I don't have more to say on the subject." 2. There is an NRO writer who is plugged into DC conservative legal circles, Ed Whelan, who has been tweeting that he is very confident in Kavanaugh being confirmed. Here is one of his tweets: "By one week from today, I expect that Judge Kavanaugh will have been clearly vindicated on this matter. Specifically, I expect that compelling evidence will show his categorical denial to be truthful. There will be no cloud over him." 3. There was a Vanity Fair article about how Ivanka was pushing POTUS to "cut bait" with Kavanaugh as there was concern more info will emerge that backs up Dr. Baker. All of that tells me that no one really knows for sure what is going on behind the scenes right now. It's clear Republicans view Monday's hearing as a must show for Dr. Baker or they are going to move forward with the confirmation vote. There is still one person who was named by Dr. Baker that has no spoken out about this incident. Will that person identify himself and side with one party or another? I would also look at #3 as some faction within conservatives circles trying to get Kavanaugh withdrawn so their preferred SCOTUS nominee gets the nod as his replacement.
Some of the rightwing media reaction: The Wildest Conservative Reactions To Kavanaugh Sexual Assault Allegations
Case in point, people can't remember a name that is being blasted all over the news. So you expect us to believe a 40 year old hazy, unprovable story?
Attended quite a few fraternity parties during my time in school and if someone said they met me at one of those parties, I probably couldn't confirm or deny meeting them, but I could without a doubt, deny sexually assaulting any of them.
You're asking us to assume she's telling the truth without evidence... Just because she didn't file a police report doesn't mean it isn't true... But one vague witness account of sexual assault that is not provable either way... does not warrant any developed opinion on the issue... In other words, it's a wash as it pertains to Kavanaugh being the next Supreme Court Justice... All we can do is have a hearing and discuss this issue... without likely getting anywhere... Apparently all it takes is being alone in a room with one evil woman one time to cost a man his job and his reputation...
Then you're suggesting that people should believe accusations of rape and assume the guy is guilty without any evidence... Such accusations can happen to any man who has been alone in a room with any woman... You're suggesting that society should believe in a lie.... simply because you find it unlikely... But once society believes in that lie... there is literally no way for the hypothetical man to prove his innocence.... If he was there... if he was in the room... if they were alone... there's literally no way to change someone's mind that he didn't do it... because all he has is his word, which they aren't believing, anyways...
