My point is that this perfectly explains why Dr Ford can be so believable (she obviously believes what she is saying), yet so wrong. But, the questioner didn’t even come close to going there. It seems to me quite relevant as to when her “recall” actually began.
“It seems to me quite relevant as to when her “recall” actually began.”
So true, especially considering he was prominent in the Starr investigation of Clinton in’98 and again when appointed by GW in 2003, to state nothing of the incredible coincidence of his making the news as a possible SCOTUS pick by Romney in 2012.
I’ve been scrolling for an FR summary of the testimony today, myself only hearing about 10 minutes of Ford and about 20 or so of Kavanaugh. You’re telling me that she wasn’t even questioned on WHEN she recalled that it was Kavanaugh and that the so-called prosecutor let the “100% sure” statement stand unchallenged?