Well, that's what some think. She wrote the letter, then went public. In this scenario …… it's even more difficult to believe she, ostensibly an intelligent person, ever wanted to remain anonymous. Had she wanted to remain anonymous, she'd have gone to law enforcement to pursue the matter, not politicians. This entire matter has the stench of a politically motivated contrivance.
Says you. Not sure Miss Manners has a chapter on how to handle this particular situation as an abuse victim if her story is true.
Pretty easy to create an false allegation ….. which can neither be proven or demonstrated to be false. As previously mentioned many times it is a "she said, he replied" scenario with no determination of whose version is correct …. especially after 36 years. Recollections are poor, even if bona fide witnesses could ever be identified and "interviewed". Factually, the key parties have all responded to the allegation and all three say it didn't happen. So it goes ………………….. no need to waste any time on the matter. Feinstein (and Ford) should have disclosed the allegation one month ago … they didn't and is the reason there's no further pursuit of the allegation. Ford should have gone to Maryland authorities ….. but did not. Not very smart on her part.
They've made their own bed here. I don't blame her for not wanting to testify in front of a bunch of Republicans who have shown they're willing to do essentially anything in the name of partisanship, and their president who makes a living out of attempting to destroy people's lives. I'm betting that if this is the Bush administration she testifies. She, like the majority of the rest of the country, doesn't trust them or trump as far as she can throw them. That's entirely on them and their president.
I think it's reasonable for her to ask for more time to prep for being grilled in front of the Senate. And to make it work reasonably within whatever other commitments she has. Maybe another week or two. But nothing too ridiculous. She is clearly not going to get the FBI investigation she requests, so that conversation should be put to bed. If the Senate had any real interest in giving her story a fair hearing, they could have investigators research this and see if they can find any other witnesses to this event, or to this women's behavior after the event (did it change as one might expect it would?). This woman or the Dems could hire PIs to do the same. Doesn't have to be the FBI.
Why the need to prep? She has had 40 years to fill in the story. Is she going to miraculously remember more details? Or does her lawyer need more time to fill in the details. It will be interesting if she does testify how much more detailed her accusation becomes.
Lying to the FBI is still a chargeable offense. No attorney is going to let a client talk to the FBI about this incident until the FBI provides a time and a place. This is a politically charged environment and if somehow, someway information were to come out a later point in time that contradicts someone's statement to the FBI, there will be a lot of pressure to charge them with lying to the FBI (see Flynn Michael circa 2016.) What do you think an FBI investigation is going to turn up if the three other people that Dr. Ford said were at that party lawyer up and all tell the FBI: "We have provided our statement to the Judiciary Committee. We have nothing further to say on the matter." Those are the only people who would have first hand knowledge of the incident that happened 35 years ago. There is no physical evidence left, so these individuals memories is all that investigators are going to be able to go on. What would the FBI be able to find?
Remembering an event, and being prepared to answer attacking questions in a heated political environment are two entirely different things. I don't think anybody on any topic should testify in front of the Senate without being thoroughly prepared by a knowledgeable lawyer on what questions and grandstanding statements are likely to aimed at them and how to respond.
This piece nails it. This board is so predictable. 1,000+ posts on this thread and 10 on the Ellison thread. Brett Kavanaugh Sexual Assault Allegation -- Evaluating Credibility: Signs Point in Kavanaugh’s Favor | National Review
I have an easy remedy: Tell the truth. You're making my point for me. If they're worried about lying to the FBI, they have something to hide. First of all, if they refuse to cooperate, the investigation has worked. Second of all, there's a lot they could find. They could talk to former classmates to see if there was any talk of what happened in school at the time. They can interview the therapist, Dr. Blasey, her husband, and the friends she told. They can interview Dr. Blasey's friends and acquaintances who may have been at the country club. And they can do the same with Judge Kavanaugh and Mark Judge's friends and acquaintances. If those two refuse to cooperate, it gives us a clear inference.
Hey Alabama, at least you know where Doug Jones stands now. His term in the Senate is gonna be a short one.
His term in the Senate was always going to be a short one, unless Alabama runs another dude who creeps on underage girls.
Wrong. She had 36 years to get her investigation ..... and at least the last month to have the feds investigate had she reported this to the appropriate entity. The very fact she didn’t have her lawyer send her allegation to the Senste Judiciary Committee indicates this is nothing more than a political contrivance. Anyway, she’s told her story in the communication and there is no evidence to support her allegation.
She’s had 36 years to prepare .... and at least the last 30 days to decide what she should tell the Senate Judiciary Committee. Oh wait, she’s already done that .... in her letter.
This is a good article. Thanks for posting. As far as Ellison goes, a Supreme Court Justice is far more important than who leads the DNC or RNC, so it will naturally get more attention. There should be a hearing on his actions though, and his accuser should press charges, IMO. The climate is far more favorable to victims of abuse than it was three and a half decades to go.
Actually, she's said multiple times that she is willing to cooperate with the committee. However, she wants an impartial investigation first. She's even said if the committee brings in their own impartial investigator, that she'll cooperate with that investigation. So much for that argument.
This is the mindless liberal moral inconsistency about which I’ve been speaking. They only care about men treating women badly when it is politically advantageous to the left. Bill Clinton is the poster child for leftie hypocrisy as regards this matter. The danged liberals wanted to put a rapist back in the White House ...... as FLOTUS ...... but can only piss and moan about The Donald being a misogynist. Actually, that’s beyond hypocrisy ..... that’s insanity. All of this only ads credence to the theory of substantial links between the progressive dogma and mental illness.
For sure. I just can’t believe he’s hitching his wagon to the Dems’ talking points on the Kavanaugh nomination and taking public shots at Trump’s trade policy regarding China. Not going to win him any friends back home.
Why should she... or anyone else facing a Senate hearing... be denied time to prep for that agenda driven political shit show? As far as political contrivance, this woman would have to be Nostradamus reincarnate to reveal this story in a therapy session four years ago in order to create this political contrivance to take down a USSC nomination today. You're being ridiculous on both counts. What harm is done by giving her a week to prep for this hearing? If she still refuses to testify, this all goes away anyway.
She’s had more than ample time ..... which should not have been wasted. There’s no justification to spend any more time on an allegation that has now been refuted by three parties. To do so would be wasteful and you are being ridiculous with the assertion it is warranted. Your motives to delay are purely politically driven by anti-trumpism.
