And Republicans let them
Has Feinswine made the secret letter from Ford available to the committee yet?
Maybe we should declassify these FISA warrants and look into this other Democrat scheme at another coup. They know the whole thing is a lie.
I posted this on a liberal site. I might as well do it here:
To quote Ratatouille, “let me serve up a fresh batch of perspective”:
I’ve looked at this from both sides. Whenever I try to work out a “he said, she said” I put myself in both people’s shoes. Here is where I have a problem here:
1. She remembered the event in 2012, 30 years after the event, but applied no names to it. This means that that revelation is a completely separate thing from the revelation we are now getting. The new revelation is along the lines of “you know that thing I said happened? Well, I just remembered Kavanaugh did it. I didn’t remember it when he was being confirmed for lower courts but now I remember.”
2. By her own admission she told nobody at the time, so there are not even any witnesses to corroborate via “hearsay”.
3. She cannot remember the day.
4. She cannot remember the place.
5. She cannot remember how she got there.
6. She cannot remember how she got home.
7. This means there is really nothing that can be investigated. All that can happen is to wait for those who were there (assuming it happened) to come forward and corroborate her story. If that shoe drops, so be it. I’ll change my position.
8. All three of the players she claims were there have flatly denied it.
9. Women that actually dated him at that time say her claims are contrary to his personality and actions with them.
10. Women and men that have known him since then and are still his friends today (dozens) have signed a letter and, more importantly, been interviewed to amplify the letter regarding the ridiculousness of the claim against him, based on their lifetime of experience with him.
11. He has passed six BRUTAL FBI background checks and not a peep of any activity like this at any time in his past has come up.
And ignore these if you want, but I think they are icing on the cake:
12. The timing is simply inappropriate. I don’t believe in coincidences.
13. DiFi herself didn’t want to bring this forward but her hand was forced.
14. Polygraph results are not allowed in a courtroom for a reason.
15. She hired an attorney and took a polygraph at a time she was assured she would remain anonymous. Why?
16. She took her polygraph in “friendly territory”. For all we know she tried it ten times before she passed.
17. The high school yearbook pages from 82-84 have been scrubbed. Fortunately, it looks like someone was on this fast enough to get some good screen prints first: https://cultofthe1st.blogspot.com/20...school_19.html
Now, some other important notes:
1. “Why would he/she lie” is never a good reason to believe a person is telling the truth. Tawana Brawley comes to mind. But ask anyone that has ever dealt with human beings on a daily basis and they will tell you that people have all sorts of reasons for lying, most of which only they are aware of.
2. If she is lying, what would it take to convince a reasonable person that she is?
3. We’re talking about repressed memories here. I have some experience in that arena. It is quite possible that this event never happened and yet she is positive, to the core of her being, that it did.
4. What is a man’s reputation and future worth? I had a friend at Microsoft that was accused of sexual harassment. It got very ugly and I figured he needed to polish up his resume. This particular woman was mean, vindictive, and a true control freak in meetings and on projects. I thought he was toast. The company did an investigation (took months) and he was completely exonerated. In a civil society we don’t destroy a man with an impeccable history and loving family on the whim of believing utterly unsupported allegations from a person who can’t even remember when or where the event took place. YMMV
5. I don’t think this point can be ignored: It was 36 years ago and it is an accusation of a drunk teenager feeling up another drunk teenager and laughing at the time. This is not murder. It’s not rape. It’s not even shoplifting. Surely there are one or two people in this thread that remember their teenage years and didn’t spend them at a nunnery.
So, what are we left with? Pretend all other facts are the same but the accuser is someone Barak Obama went to high school with and the accused is Barak Obama. Does that change anyone’s mind? Would you like to see him destroyed over such claims?
The truth of the charges alleged by Ms. Ford against Judge Kavenaugh cannot actually matter. After all, it will never be clear that the charges are true - and it will never be clear that they are false. Indeed it is tempting to suspect that the charges are crafted precisely to be as noxious-sounding as possible without risk of the possibility that Judge Kavenaugh might be fortunate enough to be able to prove an alibi.The fact that there is a political conspiracy in place against constitutional, limited, government - and against judges such as Clarence Thomas and Brett Kavanaugh who stand for it - hales back much further back in time than the “vast right wing conspiracy . . . against my husband since the day he announced for president” claim made by Hillary Clinton in twenty years ago. That has been undeniable for so long that it hales back almost to the time referred to in Mrs. Ford’s complaint against Judge Kavenaugh.
Even by Ms. Ford's own telling, in the putative incident ‘way back in 1982:
So the natural question for Senator Feinstein, is
- nobody was killed.
- the prestige of the US government was not compromised by the brutalizing and murder of a US ambassador.
- nobody spent a night in terror and fighting for their lives without support from their U.S. government employer.
- And the truth of the charges will never be known.
“What difference, at this point, does it make?"
Kavanaugh was born on February 12.
He shares Lincoln’s birthday..
Dems don’t believe in fundamental rights for individual. Some believe the first ten amendments are a “Bill of Negative Rights” since they prevent the government from “helping people” and “providing security”.
1st, 2nd, 4/5/6th, 9/10th amendments - Liberals desperately wish these could be ignored or even removed when they are inconvenient. Destroying some these rights is literally part of their national platform and a key message for many individual candidates. Destroying the right to face an accuser would be worthy of a badge, not condemnation on the left.
Exactly so. Ms. Ford decides if she will participate in the process, nothing more.
I read an article about a friend of Ford, who Ford had called back in June and asked, did I ever tell you about..? Her friend said, no, and if you had, I would have remembered it. So another strike-out for Ford.
After thinking about this for a while, it seems to me, men trying to molest a girl wouldn’t be “maniacally laughing.” I’m thinking what happened was, the girl was drunk, went to the bathroom but only got as far as a bedroom and passed out cold, and the ‘maniacal’ laughing was the other partygoers trying to get her on her feet and off the bed she wasn’t supposed to be on. She stumbled into the toilet, still drunk, maybe puked, and, embarrassed, left the house when the coast was clear. I’m just not buying that a 100lb girl could throw two football players onto the floor.